Today I want to share a letter to the editor that I wrote to the Providence Journal in response to an article entitled, “Really, it’s time to wrap up the nonsense” by Bob Kerr, which promotes enshrining homosexual “marriage” in RI law. Kerr states that there is no legitimate argument based on reason against same-sex “marriage”. I decided to set aside my Bible and dialogue based on reason alone because there are actually several arguments.
The first argument comes from the natural order. Living things preserve their existence and procreate based on a fusion of heterosexual union. If we deviate from the natural order, we manipulate the purpose of created things and stifle life. A thriving flourishing forest is a beautiful place to live, providing animals and vegetation for daily sustenance. If we manipulate the natural order, the forest becomes barren and unsustainable. Reasonably, we should strive to maintain the natural inclination of heterosexual union between a man and woman as well.
Second, the American College of Pediatricians warns against same-sex families as harmful to children stating that “the environment in which children are raised is critical to their development” (see position statement on acpeds.org). Stefanowicz, author of the book Out From Under: the Impact of Homosexual Parenting, was not alone in experiencing damaging psychological and emotional effects being raised in a homosexual household. Before enshrining homosexual unions in law, I urge all to consider the right of every child to a healthy future.
Third, is the reason of maintaining the integrity of our democratic nation. The majority of people in RI are not in favor of homosexual unions. In 2011 at the state house hearing on the civil-unions bill, I witnessed elected state representatives clearly state that they received an overwhelming amount of correspondence in opposition to passing the civil-unions bill, and a minimal amount in favor of it.
The fourth argument derives from our right to protect the common good, respecting the freedom of ALL individuals by not infringing upon the established ethical order. Freedom can abolish itself if not protected by the evidential character of shared moral convictions. True freedom is exercised when EACH individual is free to abide by the internal voice of truth that echoes in their conscience. By forcing the moral convictions of a few gay rights activists on the majority, freedom is annihilated. Freedom cannot be for oneself alone—it serves mankind as a whole. Therefore, a nation that cuts itself off from its foundational ethical convictions commits suicide and abolishes freedom. (see DeTocqueville’s Democracy in America).
Finally, the definition of marriage is the union between one man and woman. A homosexual union is not a marriage. There is no point in changing the definition of a word, just like there is no point in calling a housecat a panther. It is better to define a thing by what it is. A homosexual union is just that. There is no argument based on reason to change the meaning of a word, because a definition pertains to the essence of what a thing is. Marriage is what it is and a homosexual union is what it is.
On Tuesday, January 15, a hearing will be held at the RI State House to present a bill in favor of homosexual “marriage” which means redefining marriage, as well. Currently, RI is the only state in New England that has not legalized homosexual “marriage”. I invite all to pray and sacrifice for a positive outcome.