‘Same-sex’ marriage not justified [Archives:2004/760/Letters to the Editor]
I wish to respond to a recent letter in the Yemen Times. I have enclosed the following letter for publication.
Regarding the letter “Same-sex marriage: It's about tolerance and equality” by Christoph Lombardo, (Thursday July 15th – Issue 754, Volume 13, from July 12th – July 14th, 2004)
Christoph Lombardo is incorrect in claiming that “gay people do not chose to be gay”. Despite several scientific studies the cause of sexual attraction between members of the same sex is unknown. The American Psychiatric Association has, in fact, held varying positions on the subject.
Nonetheless, were it to be proven that some individuals have a genetic determination to homosexuality, in itself this evidence would not serve to invalidate the long tradition of belief that homosexuality, according to the “natural law”, is an unnatural or disordered condition.
“Natural” does not, as some think, refer here simply to what is in accord with the biological processes of man. Nor does it refer to what is innate, nor even to what is “normal”. Rather, the word “natural” has a metaphysical meaning. That is said to be “natural” which accords with what is good for human beings. Homosexual acts are contrary to the natural law because they close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complimentarily. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
Hence, homosexuals should not be entitled to any legal rights as homosexuals under civil law. Just because “we are all creatures of God”, this does not mean that we all have the right to do as we feel or please as Mr. Lombardo believes. This would lead to anarchy.
Christoph Lombardo's letter essentially represents a systematic effort on the part of many today to banish religious principles from public debate; to discount and marginalize persons with religious faith. Typical of gay rights advocates is that they incoherently and prejudicially label those who oppose homosexuality as “homophobic”. They fail to understand the logic that it is possible to “love the sinner but hate the sin”.
In rejecting erroneous opinions that support homosexuality one does not limit but rather defends personal freedom and dignity realistically and authentically understood.