Vatican's Opposition to Punishment of Gays is Surprising
Leaders of the US’s largest group of gay Catholics expressed surprise and satisfaction at the release of a Vatican statement that opposed the use of the death penalty and other severe violations of the human rights of gay people. They noted that the statement was particularly welcome in light of an effort by the government of Uganda to pass a law imposing the death penalty for being gay, and the reported impending execution of twelve gay men in Iran.
At the UN last week, the Vatican’s Permanent Observer issued a statement that said, in part:
The Holy See continues to oppose all grave violations of human rights against homosexual persons, such as the use of the death penalty, torture and other cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. The Holy See also opposes all forms of violence and unjust discrimination against homosexual persons, including discriminatory penal legislation which undermines the inherent dignity of the human person.
As raised by some of the panelists today, the murder and abuse of homosexual persons are to be confronted on all levels, especially when such violence is perpetrated by the State. While the Holy See’s position on the concepts of sexual orientation and gender identity remains well known, we continue to call on all States and individuals to respect the rights of all persons and to work to promote their inherent dignity and worth.
Marianne Duddy-Burke, Executive Director of DignityUSA, said, “We commend the Vatican for stepping forward to condemn the harsh criminal penalties – including the death penalty – imposed on gay people by some governments. Based on the most fundamental Catholic principles of respect for human life and fundamental human rights, we have long urged the Vatican to accept its responsibility to help safeguard the lives and human dignity of gay people in countries around the world. This statement is an important step in gaining universal protection for an often oppressed population.
“We urge the Vatican to continue to recognize the fundamental human rights of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people, and to do so consistently and forcefully, as it did last week at the UN.”
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
To any person who understands the Catholic Church's beliefs, this is not surprising at all. They always always always defend the dignity of every human person, from conception unto natural death. No one deserves to be killed for any reason, ever.
I think that those people who have strong emotional ties to people of the same gender would be surprised because they see the Catholic Church's opposition to what the Church calls a "redefinition of marriage " as an encroachment on their "fundamental human rights".
The Church has always defended the definition of marriage as an institution created by God between one man and one woman, through which real grace flows and couple can help each other on the path to salvation. The Church doesn't have the authority to change the definition made by God. Even if one believes that they are married to someone of their same sex, they are not married in God's eyes.
The act of sexual intercourse always has been properly reserved for people who are married. The Bible strongly outlines all types of unlawful sexual acts, such as fornication, adultery , unchastity, and relations with someone of the same sex. All of these things are sin. It would be an _injustice_ toward gay people to call them married, since doing so would cause them to believe that they are when they are not (in God's eyes). This could cause them to believe that the intercourse they are having is not a grave sin. But the act itself _is_ a grave sin, and believing that the sin is 'not a sin' endangers their salvation, and most likely would prevent them from going to heaven. The Catholic Church wants nothing more than to carry out Jesus' mission, and that is to guide each person down the path to their eternal salvation, regardless of their sexual 'orientation': that is the ultimate good, that is the most loving thing they can do.
Standing up against gay 'marriage' is just one way that the Catholic Church _loves_ those people who consider themselves 'gay'. Its just a little hard to understand when one has strong emotional ties in their lives. Ultimately the Church wants what is best for them; it just sucks by human standards because it seems like the Church is just prohibiting real people with real love feelings from having what they desire. But there are a lot of things people desire which are bad for them, and the Church has to be a beacon to help people know what is bad and what is good. They have no choice but to uphold God's moral standard. Their doing so is not an act of hate, but an act of love, though not by the worldly human understanding of love, but rather of He who is love incarnate, Jesus Christ.
God Bless,
Andre
If the Catholic church 'always, always, always defend(s) the dignity of every human person', then why did it torture tens or possibly hundreds of thousands to death during the years of the Inquisition?
And what gives the Catholic church the right to define marriage for everyone - Catholics and non-Catholics? Why should people who want to get married in a civil setting be beholden to a Catholic definition of marriage?
Whilst I am not gay, if I were, I would find your rationalisation that standing up against gay marriage is a demonstration of Catholic 'love' towards gay people disingenuous, rather arrogant and profoundly insulting.
With respect Andre, you imply here that the Catholic church's values trump everybody else's, and I don't buy it...
I've never heard of such a thing and took a few minutes to look it up. Without killing myself to do exhaustive research, I found this:
http://www.care2.com/causes/human-rights/blog/uganda-gay-death-penalty-law-why-isnt-the-church-denouncing-this-bill /
From the above:
"With the introduction of a Ugandan bill giving the death penalty for a charge of "aggravated homosexuality " - gay sex with anyone under the age of 18, sex between same-sex partners if one is HIV positive, and gay sex with a disabled person, regardless of whether they gave their consent - international condemnation has followed, but not from everyone."
Other than the part about sex with a consenting disabled person, which doesn't make much sense to me, I'm not convinced a death sentence for the other two are completely out of line. Of course, if Uganda started executing molesters of little boys, the Catholic church might find itself short handed on priests in the country.
I don't see how this could be interpreted as a big shift in the church's policy on gay rights. It's just a continuation of the church's policy to protect pedophile priests from anything resembling accountability.
The passage you quote specifying death penalty for anyone having homosexual sex with a person under 18 also applies, I believe, if BOTH parties are under 18. There were some young men executed in Iran a couple of years ago in exactly that situation, if I recall correctly. So in effect, this new Ugandan law would put to death 17-year-old young gay men for having sex with one another.
Fact is, it is already, in Uganda, a crime punishable by a hefty prison sentence, to even knowingly be in the same room with a gay person. This law is intended to prevent gays from organizing groups and giving support to one another. It is also a means of witch- hunting gays, since this way if a known gay person is seen in the company of ANYONE else, the other people can automatically be presumed guilty of criminal acts, just by being with the gay person.
Uganda has some pretty draconian anti-gay laws, and this death-penalty-life-imprisonment-for-gay-sex law is just one more.
As I mentioned, I did the minimum amount of research to get some idea of what was being discussed, as the article was vague.
My main point is that coming off Catholic lips, it looks more like double standards and hypocrisy. I'm afraid the Donahoe mutt that regularly does write ups for OV has turned my view of the Catholic religion , which was never especially high, into a view that is decidedly negative.
My view on most things is people should be left alone, to do as they please, to the extent they do not harm or burden anyone else.
As far as I know, intentionally spreading HIV is a crime most places. IMO, the penalties are generally no where near what they ought to be. I see it as murder of a variety that used to be called "most foul".
Setting the age of consent at 18 has always struck me as arbitrary, even as far as our own laws are concerned. At the same time, I think our courts generally recognize the limit is arbitrary and a certain amount of discretion is applied. High school sweethearts could be dating for years, then one becomes an "adult" by turning 18, which suddenly makes it a crime. That doesn't make much sense if the law is literally applied.
I had a friend in high school whose parents married when her dad was 16 and her mom was 15. Her mom was 16 when her older sister was born. At the time I knew her, her parents had been married for close to 20 years, and had what I think most people would view as an ideal relationship.
With parental consent, a kid can enlist in the military at 17. I used to work for a retired Major who lied about his age and enlisted when he was 16.
On the other hand, I've known people who were little more than children well into their 20s.
Where do you draw the line? I don't know the answer to that one and recognize the shades of gray. I don't, however, think there's any gray area when it comes to men in their 20s or 30s or older, trolling high schools for young boys. That's black and white in my book , and applies to any sexual predator, not just to homosexuals . The same goes for spreading HIV.
In any case, I'd agree that to the degree laws in other places are unequally applied, that would be wrong, without changing my mind that some acts are of a nature as to justify the harshest of penalties because of the clear and present danger those acts represent to society as a whole.
As Robert Heinlein put it, the only true sin is causing harm to someone who did nothing to deserve harm. If there's any deed that can't be measured by that yardstick, I've yet to identify what it might be.
I agree that adults who have sex with children or teenagers deserve harsh punishment, regardless of their respective genders. What I do NOT agree with is that those who engage in such behaviors with their own gender should be punished more harshly than those who do so with the opposite gender, and most especially that two young persons who engage in sex with one another where both are underage should be punished, particularly by the death penalty .
If you double check what I wrote, I think you'll find that's pretty much what I said. If a thing is wrong, it's wrong for everyone.
Isn't opposition to gay marriage promoting 'unjust discrimination against homosexual persons'?
Or do they think that discrimination to be just?
"The Holy See also opposes all forms of violence and unjust discrimination against homosexual persons"
A lot of religious organizations are spreading fear and anti-gay/trans propaganda. It would really be nice if the Catholic Church can urge for the passage of ENDA to end the legal discrimination against the GLBTQ community.