« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »
10/05/2009
Video: Mormon eyebrow-raisers are sooooo 2008
This weekend, yours truly was at a bar mitzvah in New Jersey. Not a place that was exactly rife with Catholics from Maine. However, during the four or so hours I was on site at this Jewish rite of passage (mazel tov, Kenny!), I had not one but TWO different people told me, independently from one another, that they have Catholic relatives in the Pine Tree State who are thoroughly fed up with their church's interference in the civil marriage equality fight. And neither of these people did so at my prompting or questioning. In fact, neither of them are themselves particularly politically involved. Both of my unintentional tipsters, based only on the knowledge that I myself am a married gay activist, offered up this fact on their own free will. It was small talk, sandwiched right between chatter about the new fall TV season and requests to pass the macaroni salad.
So why do I tell you this? Well, because I'd imagine the fact that this growing criticism has crossed multiple state lines is a big reason why Bishop Malone, the one who is so forcefully injecting Catholicism into the civil equality conversation, felt the need (the pressure?) to record the following "explanatory" video and paste it prominently on his diocese's website. Unfortunately for the Bishop, it only makes things much, much worse:
*Source: Portland Diocese
It's basically a campaign ad, complete with "Yes on 1" logo. And it's one that is quite taxing on the civil lives of many gay citizens. Perhaps it's time for the Catholic church to experience its own "taxing" burden?
***
**EARLIER: The Vatican and your 'I dos': How Canon Law is putting a cannon to your equality [G-A-Y]
**UPDATE: The awesome Louise at Pam's House Blend has transcribed the entire video:
God created both marriage and the human person, in the same breathe, in the very same moment.
I'd like to speak with you again today about our campaign to preserve traditional marriage. I've heard from many of you on the subject. Most have been very supportive and many volunteered to help with the petition gathering stage. Some have made it clear that they reject the Church's teaching in this regard. Now that over 100,000 signatures have been submitted, we expect the measure to be on the November ballot as "Question 1".
It's my sacred duty, as your Bishop, to inform you of the Church's reasons for taking the strong stance it does on this issue and of why we are so committed to the "Yes On Question 1" campaign. Marriage matters. This, above all things, is the driving force behind supporting the Question 1 campaign.
Cultures, throughout civilization, have recognized the unique value of traditional marriage, and have sought to protect it and promote it in many ways. They have done so, because history has shown that the family that has both a mother and a father is the most nurturing and natural place for the development of children, who will grown into well-adjusted and productive citizens. No other substitute for this arrangement has ever provided or can ever provide the full advantage of traditional marriage.
Same-sex marriage is a dangerous sociological experiment, that many of us believe will have negative consequences for society as a whole. Children need the love of both a mother and a father. While the two adults involved in a same-sex relationship may feel genuine love for each other, there can be no doubt that every such relationship involving children, denies those children either a mother or a father. Children need both. Marriage matters. Such a change for our society cannot be supported if we are serious about promoting the best interests of children in our public policies.
If same-sex marriage were to be legalized due to the failure of Question 1, there will be serious consequences.
First, people of faith, who deeply disagree with homosexual marriage, will simply have to accept this societal position, whether they like it or not. The full force of the law will be used to compel compliance in violation of one's personal conscience.
The areas of conflict this creates are well established. Legal scholars from such prestigious universities as the University of Notre Dame, Washington and Lee University School of Law, and the University of Missouri and others, wrote to Governor Baldacci about these consequences; many of which have occurred elsewhere. These legal experts predict wide-spread litigation that will result in a sea change in American law and reverberate across the legal and religious landscape. They predict a wave of new lawsuits against individuals and small businesses, that are conscientious objectors to legalized same-sex marriage. Legal conflicts will be created.
For example, religious institutions that refuse to offer housing to married same-sex couples would be sued or forced to stop offering housing to all married couples.
A religious organization that refuses to hire or retain an employee in a same-sex relationship could be sued.
A religious individual that owns a business, such as a photographer, florist or innkeeper, and refuses to provide services for a same-sex wedding, could be sued or fined.
A religious-based social service organization could lose government funding for refusing to provide same-sex couples with spousal benefits.
And doctors, psychologists, counselors and other professionals, who conscientiously object to same-sex marriage, could have their licenses revoked.
These examples are illustrative only.
The legal scholars warn that the volume of litigation will be immense.
But the most vulnerable among us to the consequence of legalizing same-sex marriage are the children. If marriage is redefined to ignore or eliminate the necessary differences to gender, then same-sex marriage must be taught as being the same as traditional marriage.
That is exactly what happened in Massachusetts. Children as young as second graders will be taught in schools that same-sex marriage and traditional marriage are just different expressions of the same thing.
Massachusetts schools have used such book as "King and King", to instruct second graders about homosexual marriage. This is the story of how a prince marries another prince and went on to rule the kingdom.
When parents objected to this instruction and sued, the courts ruled that they had neither the right to be informed when this portion of the curriculum would be taught, nor the right to pull their children out of class. These are seven year old children being subjected to such instruction.
"Catholic Daily" reports that in California, the author of a book on same-sex relationships has said, "The whole purpose of the book was to get the subject out into the minds and awareness of children before they are old enough to be convinced that there is another way of looking at life." In California, as in Massachusetts, parents are not permitted to opt out their children from this instruction.
Unless Question 1 is adopted, the logical and consistent understanding that marriage and reproduction are intrinsically linked will be discarded and dismissed.
The proposed law that was passed by our legislature, actually eliminates Maine's societal commitment to monogamous marriage and the focus on children. These are profound changes that will reverberate throughout our state with tragic consequences.
Changing the definition of marriage represents disturbing the nature of one of the primary building blocks of our civilization. It's a very serious matter, because the genuine rights of others, including the right to live our own values and raise our children accordingly, will become blurred and compromised, if same-sex marriage is legalized.
Marriage is an ancient, divinely established institution, which pre-exists both church and government. Marriage is fundamental to stable, flourishing and hospitable societies. Although cultural differences have occurred, what has never changed, is that marriage is the ideal relationship between a man and a woman, for the purpose of procreation, the care of children and the continuation of the human race.
A same-sex union can never realize the unique and full potential that the marital relationship expresses. For this reason, our opposition to same-sex marriage is not an institution of discrimination or animosity towards homosexual persons. In fact, the Catholic Church teaches emphatically that individuals and Society must respect the human dignity of all persons, including those with a homosexual orientation.
Homosexual persons have a right to and deserve our respect, compassion, understanding and defense against prejudice and abuse.
Some supporters of same-sex marriage would have people believe that opposition to it is an intolerant attack on gays and lesbians. It is not. For me, the issue here is changing the bedrock of our civilization. We should not alter the fundamental building blocks of Society, simply because a small percentage of the population demands it.
Contrary to what supporters of same-sex marriage would like to have you believe, this also isn't a matter of human or civil rights. If it were, our faith, including the social justice and teachings of the Church, require us to defend those rights.
In fact, the Catholic Church in Maine has a long history of defending human rights for all. As one example. we have supported legislation that allows domestic partnerships, regardless of their sexual orientation, to attain health benefits. Our history of defending human rights in the public square is well documented.
As a result, these and many other rights already exist for same-sex couples, just as they do for other people. And other legitimate rights can be extended and protected by other laws that do not change the definition of marriage. Because the marital relationship offers benefits unlike any other to persons, to Society and to the Church. I wish to make it clear, that the institution of marriage, as one man and one woman, must be preserved, protected and promoted in both public and private realms.
At a time when family life is under significant stress, the principles in defense of marriage are an urgent necessity for the well being of children and families, and for the common good of Society.
Please allow me to reiterate and make very clear that the Church is not taking a stance against the gay community, but rather a stand for marriage.
It is my belief that the rights of our homosexual brothers and sisters can be protected in other ways than by redefining marriage. If we can distinguish between these separate yet important issues, there will be a greater understanding of these matters for the benefit of all.
It is my hope, that in November Mainers, led by our Catholic faithful, will choose to restore traditional marriage by voting yes on Question 1.
It is my prayer that the fundamental nature of marriage will be restored to its rightful place, as a building block to the natural order of creation, culture, and civilization. Maine people are deeply invested in the traditional values that this state has embraced for centuries.
Our state has been blessed. It faces many challenges, but our core values can help us keep this a wonderful place to live and raise children. When the people in Maine realize the impact to our values that same-sex marriage represents, I believe they will agree that it's not the right thing to do.
I strongly encourage Catholics to provide the prayer, the financial support, and the volunteer efforts needed for a successful campaign, to restore traditional marriage in law and in practice. I encourage you to vote your faith with a yes vote on Question 1 on November 3rd.
In closing, please realize that it is the doctrine of the Catholic Church, not my personal opinion, that all Catholics are obliged to oppose the legal recognition of homosexual unions. Let me quote Pope Benedict XVI:
"In those situations where homosexual unions have been legally recognized or have been given the legal status and rights belonging to marriage, clear and emphatic opposition is a duty."
May God bless you, your family and the wonderful state of Maine, as we contemplate this important issue. Marriage matters.
Your thoughts
"God created both marriage, and the human being in the very same breath, and at the very same time..."
Posted by: Dick Mills | Oct 5, 2009 3:12:57 PM
(0ops! I hate mice!)
"God created both marriage, and the human being in the same breath, and at the very same moment..."
That is such a lie! If he believes his own lunacy, then knows that he is lying. Either that, or he hasn't read Genesis! If he had, then he would know that Eve was an afterthought, and made to be a subordinate (slave) for Adam. But, that the lying liars are even lying about their own stupid beliefs, should come as no surprise. They know nothing that cannot be twisted into some perversion of the obvious, and into a lie that benefits their political agenda... which is to attempt to deflect their child molestation guilt off onto others.
Posted by: Dick Mills | Oct 5, 2009 3:18:42 PM
Damned dog collared vampire is at it again.
Despite what pscyhologists and sociologists have figure out, doesn't matter if you have a man/woman, man/man, or woman/woman set of parents, the church says you need a man AND a woman.
And fuck you Bishop Malone!
Posted by: Tony P | Oct 5, 2009 3:37:48 PM
Ohmygod - watching the bullshit drool from his mouth brings me back to my 45+ years of sitting in the catholic church (and 12 years of catholic school) listening to this drivel and believing it! malone is such a hypocrite - Children! - they f#cked the children for years and years - perhaps still are - and they're trying to throw this up in our face. Why doesn't the catholic church ask their parishoners to contribute so they can repay these people whose life they ruined. Here in Vermont the bastards have put diocese property into trusts so they can, a second time, fuck the Children. They are acting politically in their churches - again I say Tax the Bastards! The catholic church is playing GOD themselves - they can threaten their members with MORTAL SIN - gasp! yes MORTAL SIN - if you don't vote the way they want you to vote you'll go to HELL - unfortunately there are still TOO many people who believe that. And they "love" their homosexual brethren - yeah, the catholic church has NO KNOWLEDGE of what love is - God is love - not the roman catholic church or pope benedict (the nazi youth member)!
What about the millions of catholics who divorced (or paid their way into the good graces of catholicism with an annulment - yeah, right!) and, of course, catholics are certainly not immune from having children out of wedlock - these all only have single parent households - they don't even listen to the crap they are spewing!
If I sound a little more than disgruntled its because of the many, many years I've wasted thinking this organization was going to save my soul!
Posted by: tom | Oct 5, 2009 4:27:02 PM
Gee ... I hadn't realized how important it was to preserve traditional marriage. They had really better get working on that right away. And none of these half measures, either. They should amend their hateful petition to outlaw divorce and allow annulments only in the case of non-consummation.
Posted by: jeff | Oct 5, 2009 5:19:11 PM
Torn: I never believed any of it. I knew it was all bovine effluvia from pretty much the beginning.
I credit my mother and my great grandfather. I suspect both were atheists but never came out and said so.
But I did do the twelve years of Catholic schools and yes, I heard them drone on and on.
Posted by: Tony P | Oct 5, 2009 9:22:43 PM
I was simply enraged at this a**hole's tirade. I never yelled so loud into my computer screen! What a liar.
But it's a big problem. So many people take the lies at face value and we play catch-up.
You know.
I think you're no fan of him, Jeremy, but Mark Morford had a spot-on column last week about this:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2009/09/25/notes092509.DTL
db
Posted by: dave b | Oct 5, 2009 9:36:10 PM
My post seems to have been deleted. Please tell me if I've violated protocol in some way.
It was unintentional
db
Posted by: dave b | Oct 5, 2009 10:03:57 PM
Sorry. I just got so cranked after listening to that guy.
db
Posted by: dave b | Oct 5, 2009 11:15:34 PM
dave b, I think that your protocol "violation" was that "a**hole's" is no way to spell "asshole's". REMEMBER THAT THE NEXT TIME!!! ;)
Posted by: Dick Mills | Oct 6, 2009 12:17:21 AM
If Bishop Malone is worried about losing this battle, maybe he could do like other bishops and sell his $1.1 million dollar home and move into a seminary.
http://pressherald.mainetoday.com/story.php?id=279577&ac=PHnws
$1.1 million would buy a lot of Yes on 1 ads.
Ever see The Simpsons episode where Bart sells his soul to Milhouse? The two are being punished and have to clean the church organ. Bart claims that religion is silly, and Milhouse says "why would the church lie? What would they have to gain?" Meanwhile, Reverend Lovejoy is dumping the collection plate into a noisy coin-sorting machine and calls out, "I don't hear scrubbing!"
Posted by: DN | Oct 6, 2009 9:01:10 AM
I feel ya, dave b - I watched it at 6am and couldn't scream at my monitor, but by the end of the video, I think I'd bruised my chest from the zealous sieg heil salutes I was throwing at him.
Posted by: DN | Oct 6, 2009 9:08:32 AM
Someone should send the video to the IRS and ask for an investigation to take away his diocese's tax exempt status.
Posted by: Mykelb | Oct 6, 2009 11:41:26 AM
I look forward to the day I hear bishop Malone too his last breath
Posted by: Disgusted American | Nov 8, 2009 12:13:37 AM
comments powered by Disqus
