This is an op-ed piece that Archbishop Nienstedt (of St.Paul and Minneapolis, MN) wrote on April 28th that appeared in the Star Tribune. I thought he did a great job writing this article. Check it out below.
last night i heard Sandra Bullock in ellen dejeners show saying something like: that a child doesnt have to come out of one’s belly to belong to a mother. a child belongs to all of us.
i was a bit astonished by her statement. it pretty much anihilated the idea that a child must belong to those who can procriate, in another words it is a product of a man and a woman when they come together. it is not about having a child and give it away to whomever.
It is so refreshing to see our archbishop stepping up to the plate. Thank you, and may God bless you.
I’m a little disappointed with the editorial or commentary. It is a non sequitur to compare no fault divorce with a same sex marriage relationship. In the divorce situation the parents of the child are separated so that the child does not have the full support of both parents; however, it does not follow that in a same sex relationship the child would not have the support of both partners.
I agree that no fault did not prove to be a panacea but I don’t know that if no fault laws had not been adopted the divorces would not have occurred anyway. This was a social upheaval that included the Church (at least where I was practicing) granting annulments in great numbers and as a matter of course.
I’m not convinced that a child in a same sex relationship with two involved parents would be worse off than a child of divorced parents where one parent was burdened with most of the care because the other chooses not to be involved.
I also question the observation that marriage has always been seen as consisting of one man and one woman. Patriarchs of the old testament had multiple wives, (Solomon had over 600 I think) in much of Africa men can have multiple wives, as is true in places in the East and Middle East. I do know that in the west the law favored marriage between one man and one woman because of issues concerning property rights.