Pope Denounces Gay Marriage in Canada

VATICAN CITY (AP) - Pope John Paul II kept up his campaign against gay marriage Saturday, telling the ambassador from Canada - where some provinces allow same-sex couples to wed - that such unions create a "false understanding" of marriage.

In past months, the pope urged authorities to stop approving gay marriages, saying that they degrade the true sense of marriage.

The pope spoke Saturday to the new Canadian Ambassador to the Holy See, Donald Smith.

"The institution of marriage necessarily entails the complementarity of husbands and wives who participate in God's creative activity through the raising of children," said the pontiff, according to the text of the speech released by the Vatican.

"Spouses thereby ensure the survival of society and culture, and rightly deserve specific and categorical legal recognition by the State.

"Any attempts to change the meaning of the word 'spouse' contradict right reason: legal guarantees, analogous to those granted to marriage, cannot be applied to unions between persons of the same sex without creating a false understanding of the nature of marriage."

Three Canadian provinces, accounting for about 70 percent of the country's 31 million people, allow same-sex marriage: Quebec, Ontario and British Columbia. The ruling Liberal Party has promised legislation legalizing gay marriage, perhaps next year after Canada's Supreme Court gives a nonbinding opinion on a tentative bill.

Speaking to another newly appointed ambassador to the Holy See, Philip McDonagh of Ireland, the pope called on the European Union to keep a policy of openness and acceptance of immigrants. Ireland held the EU rotating presidency until the end of June.

"The plight of refugees and those displaced by poverty, war or persecution is particularly dramatic and calls for special consideration and generosity," John Paul said.

"The Holy See hopes that the steps taken during the Irish presidency of the European Union in favor of policies of openness to other peoples will continue to inspire the community's attitude to immigrants from other continents and cultures."

Well, take a look at the Western nations that have been trying same-sex unions for some time

A lot of people (of every persuasion) are more promiscuous when they're young, but settle down when they get more mature. One of my gay friends back home told me he stopped being promiscuous because he's gotten much closer to his partner, and the companionship and caring part of the relationship is much more important to him now. I met his partner, and it was clear there was a lot more to that relationship than the sexual part. (They've been together for three years.) I don't entirely understand it, and have trouble reconciling it with my Christian faith, but I am reluctant to condemn this relationship and ones like it.

Well, there is nothing to condemn about a close, personal friendship.

But is it not also possible for a brother and a sister to have a deep sexual relationship? What about a married man and his mistress? Yet the fact that the relationship is "deep" and has a "caring" aspect to it would not change the sinfulness of having a sexual relationship that violates the bonds of matrimony. And while may be anecdotal exceptions to every rule (like the one you demonstrate), hard facts show that, on the whole, homosexuality is not a healthy lifestyle for individuals or, more importantly as far as law is concerned, for society.

For one thing, the 1-2 percent of the population that is homosexual is estimated to be responsible for 20-30 percent of all incidents of child molestation. For another, homosexuals (especially men) are often on average far more promiscuous than their heterosexual counterparts. Third, even in places where homosexuality are more tolerated than in America, homosexuals have higher-than-average rates of depression and suicide. To give legal recognition to homosexual unions or marriages would essentially be to give a sign of approval toward such relationships.

Now, for your particular case. It is easy to blow the whistle on our friends when we see them actively destroying their lives, but in your case, there aren't any apparent consequences that you can discern. I know from experience that that makes it harder to condemn their behavior. I'm not, of course, suggesting that we gossip about them or attempt to pass judgment on the fate of their souls; that is the jurisdiction of God alone. But I also know from experience is that not taking a stand on moral issues because a close friend is engaging in illicit behavior leads one to think subconsciously that such behavior is harmless. Eventually, their behavior might pose a temptation to you. I learned that the hard way.

Jesus ate with prostitutes and tax collectors, yet he extolled the virtues of traditional sexual relationships and firmly condemned dishonesty. The best advice I can give to you is to follow Christ's example. Be kind to your friends, but don't pretend to give approval to their illicit sex. Pray for them and live your faith before them. Make them hunger and thirst for what you have.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.