Unlimited Access. Try it Today! Your First 10 Days Always $0.99

Readers Respond

News Opinion Readers Respond

Scripture supports marriage equality

As a retired Roman Catholic priest, I can see many religious reasons to support the civil marriage equality law ("Scare tactics on Question 6," Oct. 18). Both Scripture and Christian theology are supportive and persuasive.

In the gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke, Jesus tells his followers to give back to Caesar (civil government) what belongs to Caesar. In the letters of Paul and Peter there are instructions to respect civil society. Don't mix the laws of the state with those of the church: Jesus' kingdom is not of this world.

St. Augustine, in his great work "City of God," reminds the Christian community that it is part of a political society where Christians must be open to the whole of humanity. Christians must learn to exercise their decision-making in civil society by promoting what is good for the human race overall. In civil society it's not about church institutions having control but about the way in which human beings live together.

I have always favored St. Thomas Aquinas over St. Augustine, especially in his opposition to legislating morality, which he summarized in the axiom "he who bloweth his nose too strongly maketh it bleed."

Vatican II's Declaration on Religious Liberty urged members to exercise freedom responsibly in their judgments about social actions. Conscience and a sense of duty to contemporary need, not coercion, should lead one to seek truth.

Supporting civil marriage is not to oppose religious institutions but rather to seek a place in civil society for all God's children. By law, the government must strive to protect stable human relationships. Civil marriage is one step in that direction.

Andrew Joseph O'Brien

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Religious freedom and the Constitution
    Religious freedom and the Constitution

    What many people forget is that the framers of our Constitution, through the First Amendment, sought to guarantee both freedom of religion and freedom from religion ("Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof").

  • 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...

  • 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...

  • Indiana learns discrimination is bad business
    Indiana learns discrimination is bad business

    The leaders of large corporations have not generally been at the vanguard of civil rights movements in this country. The average CEO is usually more concerned about stock valuations and quarterly dividends than about fighting discrimination. And when was the last time you saw the money-hungry NCAA...

  • 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.

  • 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...

  • The struggle for gay rights isn't over
    The struggle for gay rights isn't over

    The reasoning behind the "righteous outrage" that commentator Jonah Goldberg uses to describe "know-nothings of every stripe" who are serious about protecting civil rights is twisted at best ("How do 'religious freedom' acts encourage discrimination?" April 3.)

Comments
Loading

79°