Twitter icon


Facebook icon

About this site
About us
Our beliefs
Is this your first visit?
Contact us
External links

Recommended books

Visitors' essays
Our forum
New essays
Other features
Buy a CD of this site
Vital notes

World religions
BUDDHISM
CHRISTIANITY
-Christian definition
 -Shared beliefs
 -Handling change
 -Bible topics
 -Bible inerrancy
 -Bible harmony
 -Interpret the Bible
 -Persons
 -Beliefs & creeds
 -Da Vinci code
 -Revelation, 666
 -Denominations
HINDUISM
ISLAM
JUDAISM
WICCA / WITCHCRAFT
Other religions
Cults and NRMs
Comparing Religions

Non-theistic beliefs
Atheism
Agnosticism
Humanism
Other

About all religions
Main topics
Basic information
Gods & Goddesses
Handling change
Doubt & security
Quotes
Movies
Confusing terms
Glossary
End of the World?
True religion?
Seasonal events
Science vs. Religion
More information

Spiritual/ethics
Spirituality
Morality & ethics
Absolute truth

Peace/conflict
Attaining peace
Religious tolerance
Religious freedom
Religious hatred
Religious conflict
Religious violence

"Hot" topics
Very hot topics
Ten Commandments
Abortion access
Assisted suicide
Cloning
Death penalty
Environment

Same-sex marriage

Homosexuality
Human rights
Gays in the military
Nudism
Origins
Sex & gender
Sin
Spanking
Stem cells
Transexuality
Women-rights
Other topics

Laws and news
Religious laws
Religious news

 

 

Religious Tolerance logo

The U.S. Supreme Court's consideration of appeals of 4 SSM cases:
one each from Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, & Tennessee.

Part 13: 2015-APR:
A brief by the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic
Church in
the case Obergefell v. Hodges opposing
marriage equality throughout the U.S.:

horizontal line

We use the acronym "SSM" to represent "same-sex marriage."
"LGBT" refers to lesbians, gays, bisexuals, transgender persons
and transsexuals. "LGB" refers to lesbians, gays, and bisexuals.

horizontal rule

This topic is continued from the previous essay

horizontal rule

same-sex marriage symbol 2015-APR-02: The Hierarchy of the Catholic Church submitted an amicus curiae to the U.S. Supreme Court that opposes marriage equality:

Various national surveys show that a majority of the Roman Catholic laity supports marriage for same-sex couples. Their support typically exceeds that of non-Catholics. However, the hierarchy of the Church is unanimously opposed to marriage equality.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) filed their brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in the case Obergefell v. Hodges. 1 The Conference is composed of all of the active bishops of the Roman Catholic Church in the U.S. The Catholic Church forms the largest faith group in the country. They presented only their own beliefs, and ignored the beliefs of their membership.

Because of space limitations, we will analyze here only the "Summary of Argument" presented in the Amicus Curiae:

  • The summary states that one reason why the government recognizes marriage is that:

    "... as a matter of simple biology, the sexual union of one man and one woman is the only union capable of creating new life. A home with a mother and a father is the optimal environment for raising children, an ideal that State law encourages and promotes. Given both the unique capacity for reproduction and the unique value of homes with a mother and father, it is reasonable and just for a State to treat the union of one man and one woman as having a public value that is absent from other intimate, interpersonal relationships." 1

    Analysis: Actually, a woman in a same-sex relationship with another woman can create new human life by going through an artificial insemination or in-vitro fertilization process. Also, a man in a same-sex relationship with another man can create new life with the help of artificial insemination of a cooperative surrogate mother using his sperm. These were probably not considered by the USCCB because the Church considers both medical procedures to be profoundly immoral.

    There have been many studies of the quality of parenting in families led by same-sex adults. Their general consensus is that parenting by a same-sex couple is equal or perhaps slightly better than that provided by opposite-sex couples. Unfortunately, almost all of the studies have had serious design problems. Most have based their results on a sample size that is too small to provide meaningful results. The famous Regnerus study at the University of Texas by an evangelical Christian team was supposed to overcome the deficiencies of previous studies. The study was funded by the Witherspoon Institute which has been advocating against same-sex marriage for years. 2 The researchers concluded that children's outcome is worse in families led by same-sex couples. However, their results are essentially meaningless because their study included only two people who were parented by a same-sex couple from birth to adulthood.

    Fortunately, there has been one accurate and meaningful study performed in Australia. It is the ACHESS study "The Australian study of Child HEalth in Same Sex families." They found that children raised by same-sex parents:

    • Thrive equally well when compared to the rest of the population in self-esteem, emotional behavior, and the amount of time spent with parents.

    • Scored higher than the national average for overall health and family cohesion -- a measure of how well family members get along.

    • Had no statistically significant differences for all other health measures.

Same-sex couples are currently not allowed to marry in Australia, mainly because their Prime Minister will not allow a free vote on a Parliamentary bill which would attain marriage equality. If they were able to marry, they would receive the status, benefits and protections of marriage just like opposite-sex couples have always enjoyed. The children's' outcomes would then probably increase further and become very significantly superior to that of children in families led by opposite-sex couples.

horizontal rule

Sponsored link.

horizontal rule

  • The USCCB brief continues:

    "No other institution joins together persons with the natural ability to have children, to assure that any such children are properly cared for by their own parents. No other institution ensures that children will at least have the opportunity of being raised by their mother and father together." 1

    Their statement could be interpreted as an attack on infertile opposite-sex couples as well as on all same-sex couples. This is a common point raised by many conservative religious faith groups and parachurch organizations. Surprisingly, there has been few objections by adopting parents or adoption agencies.

    Full disclosure: The author of this essay and his former wife adopted a daughter, Pamela, at the age of 5 weeks, in whom we are both very proud. Dr. Pamela Robinson MCIP RPP is now a faculty member at a Canadian university.

  • The USCCB cites a second reason why the government recognizes marriage:

    "... encouraging and supporting a permanent bond of marriage between a father and mother promotes their interests. More than a quarter of the Nation’s children currently live with only one birth parent. Government support for a marital bond between mothers and fathers serves the interest of reducing, or preventing further increases in, the incidence of single parenthood and the consequent burdens it places upon the custodial parent (usually the mother) and the public fisc.

    This, of course, is true. However, it is equally true for families led by either opposite-sex or same-sex parents.

  • They state that restricting marriage to one woman and one man is not based on hatred, bigotry, or animus against others. They write:

    "Because sexual conduct between persons of the same sex never results in children, legal reinforcement of a permanent bond between them does not serve the same interests. In this context, like any other, the government is not required to treat things that are different in relation to its asserted interests as if they were the same. There is no bigotry in treating genuinely different things differently."

    If one were to consider a couple's sexual activity, to the exclusion of the what they do during the remaining 165 or more hours of the week, then this statement would make some sense. However, same-sex couples can engage on other activities that result in children. One could write:

    "Because medical procedures involving same-sex couples using artificial insemination or in-vitro fertilization (and perhaps the cooperation of surrogate women) result in children, legal reinforcement of a permanent bond between the couple serves the same interests as for an opposite-sex couple. In this context, like any other, the government is required to treat things that are the same in relation to its asserted interests as being the same. There is actual bigotry in treating genuinely similar things differently."

horizontal rule

Sponsored link:

horizontal rule

  • The Catholic Church's final point is that chaos would result if the U.S. Supreme Court were to issue a ruling in mid-2016 that legalizes same-sex marriage in the final 13 states as has already been achieved in 37 states and the District of Columbia. The USCCB brief states that:

    "... redefining marriage as a matter of constitutional law would needlessly create church-state conflict for generations to come. Because marriage so pervades civil and social life, these conflicts will similarly pervade, extending much farther than other categories of conflict that might be considered analogous. In States that have redefined marriage, disputes have already arisen that provide a glimpse of what is to come if this Court were to declare that such redefinition is mandated nationwide by the U.S. Constitution. Reversal of the judgment below would embroil this Court (and lower courts) in a series of otherwise avoidable disputes — pitting claims of constitutional right squarely against one another — for decades to come, until one or the other is diminished."

horizontal line

This topic continues in the next essay with the conclusion of the
Roman Catholic Church's brief and descriptions of a personal
brief opposing marriage equality during 2015-APR.

horizontal line

References used:

The following information sources were used to prepare and update the above essay. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today.

  1. "Brief Amicus Curiae of United States Conference of Catholic Bishops ...", U.S. Supreme Court, 2015-APR-02, at: http://www.supremecourt.gov/
  2. "The Regnerus Fallout," 2013-OCT-23, at: http://www.regnerusfallout.org/

horizontal line

How you may have arrived here:

Home > Religious info. > Basic > Marriage > Same-sex marriage> same-sex marriage sub-menu > Kentucky > Supreme Court > here

Home > "Hot" topics > Homosexuality > Same-sex marriage > same-sex marriage sub-menu > Kentucky > Supreme Court > here

Home > Religious info. > Basic > Marriage > Same-sex marriage > same-sex marriage sub-menu > Michigan > Supreme Court > here

Home > "Hot" topics > Homosexuality > Same-sex marriage > same-sex marriage sub-menu > Michigan > Supreme Court > here

Home > Religious info. > Basic > Marriage > Same-sex marriage > same-sex marriage sub-menu > Ohio > Supreme Court > here

Home > "Hot" topics > Homosexuality> Same-sex marriage > same-sex marriage sub-menu > Ohio > Supreme Court > here

Home > Religious info. > Basic > Marriage > Same-sex marriage > same-sex marriage sub-menu > Tennessee > Supreme Court > here

Home > "Hot" topics > Homosexuality > Same-sex marriage >same-sex marriage sub-menu > Tennessee > Supreme Court >here

Home > Religious info. > Basic > Marriage > Same-sex marriage > SSM menu > > Supreme Court > here

Home > "Hot" topics > Homosexuality > Same-sex marriage > SSM menu > > Supreme Court > here

Copyright © 2015 by Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance.
First posted: 2015-APR-21
Latest update: 2015-APR-21
Author: B.A. Robinson
line.gif (538 bytes)
Sponsored link

horizontal rule

Go to the previous page, or to the "Supreme Court accepts appeals from 4 states" menu, or choose:

    horizontal rule

    Custom Search

    Go to home page  We would really appreciate your help

    E-mail us about errors, etc.  Hot, controversial topics

    FreeFind search, lists of new essays...  Having problems printing our essays?

    Twitter link

    Facebook icon

    Google Page Translator:

    This page translator works on Firefox,
    Opera, Chrome, and Safari browsers only

    After translating, click on the "show
    original" button at the top of this
    page to restore page to English.

 
Sponsored links