"What Is Wrong With Homosexual Marriage?" A Catholic article


What does it have to do with adoption?

Children need both a father and a mother.


In short, yes.


Sure they need people who have their best interests at heart. But they also need both a father and a mother.


Keep waiting.


Nice gif. But sending children into families without both a father and a mother isn’t an ideal plan either.


That is a diversion. The truth is, adoption does work.


"Furthermore, the marital union of man and woman has been elevated by Christ to the dignity of a sacrament. The Church teaches that Christian marriage is an efficacious sign of the covenant between Christ and the Church (cf. Eph 5:32). This Christian meaning of marriage, far from diminishing the profoundly human value of the marital union between man and woman, confirms and strengthens it (cf. Mt 19:3-12; Mk 10:6-9).

“4. There are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and family. Marriage is holy, while homosexual acts go against the natural moral law. Homosexual acts “close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved”.(4)”


I didn’t call you anything. Why did Catholic adoption agencies close their doors? Because the State was forcing them to add same-sex couples to their list and they would not do that.


Having both a mother and father—who love the child and fulfill their complimentary duties as parents—makes for a much better life and future than NOT having that situation. It’s not a guarantee, but it’s a necessary step in the right direction.


That wasn’t just meant for you. The content was meant for all.



Do you not believe we were created male and female for a reason? Do you not believe that it takes a male and a female to create a child for a reason?

Take the problem of fatherless homes: kids who grow up without a father in the home are more likely to not graduate high school and more likely to have mental health issues as adults.

Read this, for example, which is a study that examined other studies especially for bias, among other issues.



The literature on father absence is frequently criticized for its use of cross-sectional data and methods that fail to take account of possible omitted variable bias and reverse causality. We review studies that have responded to this critique by employing a variety of innovative research designs to identify the causal effect of father absence, including studies using lagged dependent variable models, growth curve models, individual fixed effects models, sibling fixed effects models, natural experiments, and propensity score matching models. Our assessment is that studies using more rigorous designs continue to find negative effects of father absence on offspring well-being, although the magnitude of these effects is smaller than what is found using traditional cross-sectional designs. The evidence is strongest and most consistent for outcomes such as high school graduation, children’s social-emotional adjustment, and adult mental health.


Let’s go up the thread a bit:

But was that what God wanted? The answer is no. Blasphemy is in the Bible too, maybe that means God wants good devout Christians to blaspheme.
Ioannes simply stated the Christian stance on marriage and you twisted it.


If father absence is such a terrible thing for a child, then having two fathers should be a very positive thing.


You’re trolling me, right?


I know gay married men who are great fathers and have happy, well adjusted children. But having a father doesn’t ensure anything. I’m lucky because I have a great father (and mother) who has always accepted and loved me unconditionally. However, a lot of gay men I know were not accepted by their fathers in particular and are not on good terms with their fathers as adults.


The problem of fatherless homes have been going on even before the legalization of same sex marriage. I don’t see why the blame is laid on gay marriage.

Also, if a child deserves to grow up with a mother and a father, should we seize children from single parent homes and then give them to married couples?


Of course—I’m not blaming fatherless homes on gay marriage. We were talking about adoption by same sex couples, or adoptions by single people. And with that, I disagree, as do all Catholic adoption agencies.

As I said above: just because less than ideal family situations exist doesn’t mean they should become the norm, nor does it mean we should pretend that there is no ideal.

As to the second part of your comment, I am not sure how you got to that question.


Less than ideal family situations are already the norm. The number of out of wedlock births are on the rise and I agree with you that children growing up in fatherless homes don’t do as well as children who grow up with good fathers.
The question is, what are we going to do about it?

However, I don’t want to divert the thread as this is another topic.


Maybe it is because this is a Catholic forum. Therefore, respect is given to Catholic teaching. If having parents at all is better than none, would the same apply to parents that are drug addicts? Those that work in sex industries? Those who have other grave sexual disorders?

And for the record, I do believe there might be suitable single parent adoptions, which if suitable, would be better than a same sex couple, in accord with what Pope Francis has said.



OK sorry for the long cut and paste, but things won’t make sense without it I fear. You postulate the existence of something called ‘the good’. I am not sure what this is. I assume you mean ‘what God intends’. You then ask me if it is good to be alive. Well, it is good for me today. Were I to be a caterpillar doomed to be a living host for a wasp larvae life would be bad for me (but good for the wasp). Were I to be paralysed, conscious but unable to communicate and hooked up to machines on which my life depended it would not be good for me to be alive, for m, my family, or the people who needed the health resources I was consuming pointlessly.

You ask about the ‘one way’ human life happens. Well the one way human life happens is that it is passed on generation to generation. It does not occur at the time of conception. Both sperm and ovum are alive. The Church does not teach that this human life is good in the way that mine is. Rather the Church has a concept of ‘individual’ humans, each the creation of God. I do not share that view. Without it all the talk of natural law and ‘ordering’ of human customs and instincts is without meaning. It flows from a premise I do not share. I have no objection to you holding it. But I do not think it reasonable to insist that I should hold it because it is apparent from what we observe. This is a long-stated Christian view, but it is not one I share. To my mind is is almost completely refuted in a positive sense by the absence of atheists who accept ‘natural law’ when it comes to the ‘ordering to the good’ of human sexuality.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.