[quote="eamonnroma, post:1, topic:329813"]
I read with interest a letter from the Knights of St Columba in UK to the House of Lords, opposing the change of definition of marriage to include same sex couples.
Interestingly they do however say that same sex couples should have the same legal rights as a male/female couple:
Sanctity of Marriage.
The Knights of St Columba, Britain’s leading Order for Roman Catholic laymen, is strongly opposed to the Government’s attempts to change the very meaning of the word marriage, and to impose a new definition on religious groups. It is, of course, right and proper that a same sex couple should be given the same legal rights under civil law as a male/female couple. If they wish to form a partnership to protect their civil or fiscal affairs then the right to do so is already covered in law. However it is not acceptable that any
religious group should be asked, perhaps forced, to legitimise such a union with a Church service.
The full text of the letter can be found here: ksc.org.uk/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=64&Itemid=72
So they are upholding the sanctity of Christian marriage and at the same time acknowledging that same sex couples should have the same legal rights as other couples.
I prefer the USCCB's answer...it allows for homosexual partnerships under current civil laws as a civil right...but is much more precise and more forceful about NOT accepting homosexual unions characterized as ..."domestic partnerships" or "civil unions"...to become a quasi "equivalent to Marriage"... i.e., the same as a man & woman. Also, USCCB is much clearer that only traditional Marriage between a Man and a Woman results in children and a family...which is a critical common good for society and thus, should be specifically promoted and protected by the State.
If Homosexual Marriage (UK,USA,etc.) is defeated...accepting the "Civil Unions" and "Domestic Partnerships" status for homosexual partnerships...will be the "camel's nose under the tent"...and very soon, another oblique attempt will be made on Marriage as only between a Man and a Woman.
Frequently Asked Questions About The Defense Of Marriage
The Common Good & Human Dignity
What about civil rights?
Respecting everyone’s civil rights is unmistakably important, and the right to marry is unmistakably a civil right.** But the “right to marry” is the right to enter into a very particular kind of relationship having distinct characteristics that serve important social purposes; the “right to marry” is not the right to enter a relationship that is not a marriage, and then force others by law to treat that relationship as if it were a marriage. **Advocates for same-sex “marriage” ignore this distinction. Far from serving the cause of civil rights, redefining marriage would threaten the civil right of religious freedom: it would compel everyone—even those opposed in conscience to same-sex sexual conduct—to treat same-sex relationships as if they represented the same moral good as marital relationships.
What about "civil unions" or "domestic partnerships" between two persons of the same sex?
Marriage is a unique good in itself. Nothing compares to the unique partnership of husband and wife, who through their sexual difference form a life-giving communion.** No relationship between persons of the same sex can be the same as that between a man and a woman, nor should they ever be treated as analogous to marriage in any way. Thus, **legal categories such as "civil unions" or "domestic partnerships" that claim equivalent or analogous status to marriage are wrong and unjust, harmful both to the person and to society. Legal categories such as "civil unions" or "domestic partnerships" should never be treated as analogous to marriage. Such legal approval of "civil unions" contributes to the erosion of the authentic meaning of marriage. As such, they are never acceptable. Basic human rights are not protected but violated by the erosion and redefinition of marriage.