Cardinal Pietro Parolin, the Vatican secretary of state and the Pope’s top lieutenant, said that Ireland’s vote to allow homosexual marriage was a “defeat for humanity.”
“I am very sad because of this result — the Church needs to strengthen its efforts to spread its message,” Parolin said in Rome on Tuesday. “I really think we should not just speak of this as a defeat for Christian principles but also a defeat for humanity.”
What the cardinal means is that “gay marriage” represents not just turning one’s back on a particular faith or denomination; it represents a refutation of thousands of years of human tradition across cultures.
Although there are other benefits, marriage is a tradition that has always centered around one main idea: procreation.
Homosexual pairings are incapable of procreating, so the proponents of “gay marriage” have to deny the essential feature of the marriage institution against all historical evidence and all common sense.
Homosexual “marriages” basically represent a flagrant lie about human nature and a disdain for the essence of marriage.
Liberals arguing in favor of these mock marriages — because that’s what they are — have to blur reality and bend facts to justify their views. A variety of false arguments are used to divert attention from the central fact that the marriage institution is about producing children.
What about infertile couples? What about women being treated like property, traded for status? What about King Solomon, who had 700 wives? Why hasn’t there ever been a fertility test required for marriage? The field of straw men is densely populated.
It would be difficult to find a requirement for fertility historically since there were no actual fertility tests per se until recent decades. But in fact, widows who had proven fertile by bearing children previously were often sought after in Europe, Asia and the Middle East.
The notion that women were “mere property” throughout history is painting with an overly broad brush. The degree to which women had a say in marriage historically varied highly from culture to culture.
That women historically have stayed home and cared for children while men went to work is a natural outcome of biology and innate personality differences between the sexes — near-universal traits that the “gay marriage” movement disdains.
But even while there have been societies like ancient Greece (birthplace of democracy, we’re told) where women had no legal rights, there were also societies such as ancient Egypt where a woman could own property, engage in contracts on her own and participate in legal matters with the same freedom as men.
Women under Salic (Frankish) law had some rights, but were largely dependent on the males of their families for justice. However, under late Roman law, women had many of the same legal rights as men, including the right to contract and sue their own families.
The vague argument that women were “mere property,” in societies where that actually was true, in reality underscores that marriage was indeed all about producing the next generation.
A good match could advance a family and ensure that its bloodline continued. Even in an extreme case such as Solomon, who was by no means the norm of his day, all the marriages were certainly contracted with the hope that they would produce an heir who might one day receive, if not the throne, at least a share of wealth and power.
As for infertility “tests,” modern science has made that a possibility, and young couples may consider them.
While they don’t seem to be a requirement in any religion, a simple online search finds discussions about pre-wedding physical exams in Islam, Christianity and several other faiths.
In the Catholic Church, known infertility can be an obstacle to marriage, depending on the circumstances. For example, if one person deliberately had himself sterilized, or if he were found to have hidden knowledge of his infertility from his fiancee, then a marriage might be prohibited.
In a standard Catholic wedding ceremony, the couple is asked by the priest if they will accept children should God grant them. It’s this fundamental willingness to have children — not necessarily the actual ability to have children — that is essential in the marriage.
And that’s why homosexual unions are not real marriages, no matter what government says. There is a fundamental deception and refusal on the part of the couple to accept the greatest duty of marriage.
Ireland’s recent vote is a tragedy.