Letters

Same sex 'marriage'

Richard Congram

Contents - Oct 2011 - Buy a copy now Angelus Message: Our Lady of the Rosary (October 7) - Pope Benedict XVI Episcopacy: Cardinal Pell: the responsibilities of Church leadership - Cardinal George Pell World Youth Day 2011, Madrid: Australia's participation - Br Barry Coldrey News: The Church Around the World Pastoral care: One of the Catholic Church's best kept secrets - Marie Mason Pro-life: Signs of hope from the United States - Babette Francis Planetary spirituality: what next! - Frank Mobbs History: Lepanto, history's most decisive naval battle - Bob Denahy Catholic Schools: Saint Mary MacKillop Colleges, Wagga Wagga: progress report - Sr Mary Augustine OP Letters: Anglican Ordinariate - Bishop Harry Entwhistle Letters: World Youth Day - Arnold Jago Letters: Bishop Morris - Michael Smith Letters: One-sided - Charles M. Shann Letters: Old or young earth? - Fr Brian Harrison OS Letters: Cart before horse - John Young Letters: Genesis debate - Anne Lastman Letters: Pre-Vatican II - Kevin McManus Letters: Same sex 'marriage' - Richard Congram Letters: Invalid concept - Robert Prinzen-Wood Letters: Sermons - Rev. Fr. J. Conway Books: BENEDICT XVI: A Guide for the Perplexed, by Tracey Rowland - Michael Daniel (reviewer) Books: ROME AND THE EASTERN CHURCHES: A Study in Schism (2nd ed), Aidan Nichols OP - Michael Daniel (reviewer) Books: MEDJUGORJE REVISITED: 30 Years of Visions or Religious Fraud? - Michael Gilchrist (reviewer) Donations: 2011 Fighting Fund contributions Books: Order books from www.freedompublishing.com.au Reflection: Benedict XVI's Final Mass homily for World Youth Day - Pope Benedict XVI

Christians, especially Catholics, who think the law should not restrict marriage to one man and one woman, should be careful about what they wish for.

The Commonwealth Constitution forbids the federal government (but not the states) from prohibiting the exercise of any religion. Political considerations and the legal difficulty arising from the uncertainty of the definition of "religion" make it unlikely that the relevant Section 116 will ever be invoked.

However, there are other means by which freedom of religion can be inhibited, notably, any anti-discrimination legislation. If the present definition in the Marriage Act is extended to include unions of same sex couples, it is conceivable that a church might be forced to provide a marriage service for a same sex couple even though its religious teaching would regard this as a mockery of the Sacrament of Marriage.

Further, if same sex unions are recognised as legal marriages, why not polygamous unions also, and even unions of humans and animals? In this age of constant incremental change, redefining marriage to include same sex couples could be the first step on a very slippery slope.

RICHARD CONGRAM
Carindale, Qld

Reprinted from AD2000 Vol 24 No 9 (October 2011), p. 15