Summer Sale Extended! Get unlimited digital access for 13 weeks for $13.
Readers Respond
News Opinion Readers Respond

O'Malley's support of gay marriage represents a rejection of Catholic teaching

Regarding Governor O'Malley's recent remarks crediting his Catholic upbringing for his effort to redefine marriage, the church does indeed teach that every human being is made in the likeness of God and therefore should be treated with love and respect. However, that does require that people's every action be affirmed.

The Catholic church teaches that God made humans male and female, each with a gift of sexuality tailored to gender. In God's beautiful design, that gift is exchanged in the marital act between a married man and a woman, an act that expresses a complete giving of self and can bring forth new life. The church acknowledges that people of the same sex can have caring and abiding friendships and commitments to each other, but it teaches that those relationships are not the proper context for sexual relations and cannot be the basis for a marriage.

As a lawyer, the governor is surely aware that the Maryland Appeals Court and theU.S. Supreme Courthave found that the only reason the state has an interest in providing legal status and benefits for married couples is that the marriage of a man and a woman is the procreative unit for society and the optimum environment for rearing children. If biology is removed from the definition of marriage, there is no reason for the state to even be involved in marriages.

Governor O'Malley says he supports gay marriage for the benefit of children. Traditional marriage attaches biological fathers and mothers to children and provides the most stable environment in which to rear them. It is written on the human heart to want to know, love and be known and loved by one's natural father and mother.

Unfortunately, that cannot always be the case. However, why would the state want to promote a situation in which children are intentionally deprived of one of their natural parents? Is that an optimum environment for children? How is that in the state's interest?

If the governor's intention is to validate the irregular family situations these children find themselves in, then what about the children of polygamous groups? Should their situations be legally recognized by the state as well? Will the governor also support the "triple-parenting" movement growing in jurisdictions that have redefined marriage to accommodate same-sex unions?

Here the sperm donor for a lesbian couple would also like to be involved as a parent for the child, so the child can have one father and two mother parents. Things can get complicated for the child rather quickly. The meaning of "marriage" can become increasingly muddled once biology and the exclusivity of one man and one woman is removed.

The governor certainly has a right to his opinion. But he should have the courage to stand up and say it is an opinion based on rejection of Catholic teaching and Maryland jurisprudence.

Lynda Kouroupis, Ellicott City

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Marriage equality can't wait

    Marriage equality can't wait

    In 1967 when the U.S. Supreme Court struck down laws banning interracial marriage in Loving v. Virginia, there was not a single dissent. Never mind that Virginia's anti-miscegenation statute had been in the books since 1924. The justices unanimously found discrimination in the institution of marriage...

  • How will Kennedy vote on same-sex marriage?

    How will Kennedy vote on same-sex marriage?

    As a long-time civics teacher I follow the Supreme Court's decisions very carefully. I have long admired Justice Anthony Kennedy because he is the swing vote on the court and his decisions are often unpredictable.

  • Court's silence on marriage speaks volumes [Editorial]

    Court's silence on marriage speaks volumes [Editorial]

    Our view: Same-sex marriage is set to be legal in a majority of states, making eventual Supreme Court victory appear inevitable

  • Religious beliefs can't excuse discrimination

    Religious beliefs can't excuse discrimination

    A recent suggestion that some people should be exempt from serving gays because of their religious beliefs is nonsense. If you are licensed to provide a service or employed by the government to do so, you are required to perform that service without unlawful discrimination. Neither government employment...

  • Equality in Alabama

    Equality in Alabama

    These are heady days for advocates of marriage equality. The Supreme Court is due to hear arguments this spring in a group of cases that could settle the question of a national Constitutional right to same-sex marriage, and this week, a decision not to enter a stay on the enforcement of a federal...

  • Yes, some people do follow the Bible to the letter

    Yes, some people do follow the Bible to the letter

    In his recent column ("The conservative case for same-sex marriage," March 29), Eddie Zipperer gives three reasons why conservatives should favor same sex marriage. I find his second, poking fun at the Bible, to be both offensive and ignorant.

  • Get states out of the marriage business

    Get states out of the marriage business

    In light of the recent Supreme Court on same sex marriage being protected under the Constitution ("Freedom to marry," June 27), there is now a movement afoot in Montana by a Mormon, Nathan Collier, who is legally married to Vicki, to be allowed to marry his second wife, Christine. Many have predicted...

  • Selective reading of Leviticus won't justify bigotry

    Selective reading of Leviticus won't justify bigotry

    Letter writer Adam Goldfinger objected to Eddie Zipperer's references to Leviticus and states that he does indeed try to follow the laws in this book ("Yes, some people do follow the bible to the letter," April 3). I find myself wondering how many people Mr. Goldfinger has personally stoned to...