All the recent headlines have been mildly distressing. I'm thinking about the lady who stopped an late-term abortion ban and the Supreme Court's decision in favor of same-sex "marriage". I just saw World War Z today and the way the zombies multiply and spread brought to mind how rapidly false opinion about marriage and sexuality are spreading in the world today.
Where does one begin? One could just look at oneself. Where did I come from? Ultimately this question leads back to God, but even before that it leads to one's parents: a man and a woman. Yes, every single person alive in the world today came to be from the union of a man and a woman. Unfortunately, with the efforts throughout the world today to isolate personal union and the sexual union required for offspring, there are probably a number of individuals throughout the world who have parents that have never met. (That's kind of crazy.) More commonly, one finds children who have never known their parents. This is not bizarre, but it is tragic.
Every child is the result of a sexual union of a man and a woman. Two men cannot unite in such a way that a child will come about--there cannot be a sexual union. If marriage is somehow related to sexual union, then same-sex marriage is really a puzzle. Sex has nothing to do with it. What should it have to do with anything? Two persons of the same sex can certainly be friends, even the greatest of friends, but marriage has no place here. That doesn't make any sense.
Does sex need to enter the conversation? The phrase "same-sex" is thrown around all the time, but no one ever says what is so special about such friendships that they should be given the name marriage. It is sex, isn't it? If not, then why wouldn't a whole monastery declare that they are all married to each other? Perhaps they would say something like that in metaphor, but it would not be literal. Marriage is somehow related to the sexual. So is it through having (or wanting to have) a "sexual partner" that one is now eligible for marriage? Something doesn't make any sense.
Perhaps there are some homosexuals who hold that fornication is a sin and therefore want to be wed so as not to break this precept of natural law. That would be an interesting case, perhaps one that is not so far gone as others. But most of the homosexuals I know do not see fornication as a sin, and, consequently, even the idea of calling it "marriage" is really just a formality or a way to get government benefits.
Is sex required for civil marriages anyway? Consummation certain plays a role in the Church's law concerning marriage, but if it is no way involved, then what exactly is a civil marriage? [Goes and researches definition of marriage in law...] Well, as far as I can tell, there is just a list of a rights and responsibilities that go with it. In the one list I found, no mention was made of sex. Looking at adultery laws, it looks like only 23 states treat it as a crime, with penalties varying from a life sentence (Michigan) to a $10 fine (Maryland). Regardless, the trends seem to be in favor of a sexual license that extends beyond anything by the name of marriage.
It's children. It is often said in favor of same-sex marriages, "What about children two moms or two dads?" That is probably the best question to be asking. I want to defend natural marriage on the basis that it is ordered to the bringing forth and upbringing of children, so they must enter the conversation. My objection to same-sex marriage on this point: Homosexual acts are sinful. Those who publicly admit to engaging in such acts are likely to teach that they are morally acceptable. They are likely to teach this to their children. This is bad. There are plenty of other sins that parents teach their children, but this is one more. I'll have to think about this more. And pray.