Our human civilization in crisis

24

Last week, Friday, June 26, 2015, the US Supreme Court, voting five to four in Obergefell v. Hodges, redefined the nature and meaning of marriage, by declaring that two persons of the same sex have a right to contract it. A few weeks earlier, in previously Catholic Ireland, 62 percent of 60 percent of the voters who turned out in a referendum on “same-sex marriage” voted in favor of the proposition: “Marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex.” This, in the view of many, has no basis in moral law, religion, science or reason. I share this position.

Advertisements

Neither the US judicial ruling nor the Irish vote is a reflection of an American or Irish national consensus. Although the distinguished American ethicist and papal biographer George Weigel points out that “the marriage battle was lost in the culture long before foundations of our culture have eroded,” the pro-life and pro-family movement in the US had been continuously reporting victory after victory in the United Nations and in many US states before the Supreme Court cataclysm came. This means that the majority of the American and the Irish peoples may not be entirely supportive of same-sex “marriage,” except that a small legal majority is empowered to give it legal effect.

Throughout human history, marriage has always been understood as the permanent and exclusive union between one man and one woman for the propagation of the species. It is a natural institution, as old as humanity, not a mere legal construct that courts and Congresses can amend or reconstruct. Polygamy, polyandry, divorce, adultery may corrupt the dignity of marriage, but nothing and no one can ever redefine it in the way “same-sex marriage” tries to do, or does.

The US court ruling is an act of judicial activism, by far the most audacious act of judicial activism in US legal history. It puts the US court in charge of the moral and spiritual life of the nation and every individual therein, contrary to the self-evident truths and values upon which the American nation is founded. And contrary to what the Church Magisterium teaches. In an important lecture, Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI says the state is not the source of truth and morality; it cannot produce truth from its own self by means of an ideology based on people or race or class or some other entity; it cannot produce truth via the majority; it is not absolute.

In the tradition that defines law as an ordinance of reason promulgated by those in authority for the common good, the court ruling does not create law but violence. Where Roe v. Wade (1973) makes abortion, the destruction of the unborn inside the mother’s womb, a constitutional right of women, and makes the “empty cradle” a most appropriate symbol of marriage, the same-sex ruling removes the empty cradle altogether, and replaces it with a question mark, as it makes every same-sex “marriage” fatherless, motherless and childless. This is the worst form of population control. Contraception is population control, abortion is population control, but “same-sex marriage” is the ultimate.

Our own Supreme Court may have much to learn from this. In ruling on the constitutionality of the Philippine Reproductive Health Law, which President B. S. Aquino 3rd railroaded through Congress by paying off its members, the SC justice who wrote the ponencia declared that the law was a “population control measure,” but that “population control” is not unconstitutional, although it is not permitted by the Constitution, which makes the State the equal protector of the mother and the unborn from the moment of conception. Through the US ruling, our justices could revisit and relearn the meaning of “population control.”

Many Americans are obviously dismayed, but even in their dismay they have reason to be grateful to Justice Anthony Kennedy and his four other colleagues for not having made same-sex marriage compulsory on all. Otherwise American men would have been compelled to marry men only, and women; women only. This would have ensured deaths without births to every given population, and helped fulfill the dream of those who would like to see the global population reduced from seven billion plus to only one billion or less old people.

For US President Barack Obama, same-sex marriage helps to make the United States a “more perfect union.” No explanation was given. But Obama, like Hillary Clinton and notable members of the British royalty, are foremost exponents of population control. Ironically, the ruling came within weeks after The New York Times, America’s newspaper of record and voice of the American liberal establishment, formally threw in the towel on the long-drawn controversy over “population control.”

After trumpeting the doomsday doctrine of the Malthusians and the eugenicists and population controllers for decades, The Times conceded that they were on the wrong side of science, economics and history, and that population growth, as demonstrated by China, India and others, is mankind’s ultimate resource, as the economist Julian Simon argued in opposition to the doomsday prophet Paul Ehrlich, author of the completely discredited The Population Bomb.

America will now have to find out who is the wiser, The Times editorial board or the five justices on the US Supreme Court.

The folly is obvious, but there is no lack of crazy people in the world who will follow anything that moves, if it bears the US signature. We have no lack of psychopaths and copycats in the Philippines. The gay movement has already infiltrated Congress, but in addition to its gay members, there are any number of brainless congressmen, and even senators, who having nothing to contribute to the political conversation going on, will not hesitate to propose same-sex legislation, even though it has absolutely no foundation in the culture or the Constitution. We suggest that instead of following blindly the counter-cultural emanations from the US, they study the human person and the family better, much better.

In his opening address at Humanum, the international colloquium on the complementarity of man and woman, where I sat with some 400 other representatives of all religions at the Vatican last November, Pope Francis said, “In our day, marriage and the family are in crisis. The culture of the temporary has led many people to give up on marriage as a public commitment. The revolution in manners and morals has often flown the flag of freedom, but in fact it has brought spiritual and material devastation to countless human beings, especially the poorest and most vulnerable.”

In the same colloquium, Rev. Jonathan Sacks, chief rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the British Commonwealth, reminded us that the family is the “single most humanizing institution in history. The family–man, woman and child–is not one lifestyle choice among many. It is the best means we have yet discovered for nurturing future generations and enabling children to grow in a matrix of stability and love. It is where we learn the delicate choreography of relationship and how to handle the inevitable conflicts within any human group. It is where we first take the risk of giving and receiving love.”

Those who would like to redefine marriage may be guilty of what Frederick Hayek called ‘fatal conceit,’ to believe that somehow they know better than the wisdom of the ages and can defy the lessons of biology and history, Sacks said.

In their widely acclaimed small book, “What is Marriage?” Sherif Girgis, Ryan Anderson and Robert T. George, who were also present at Humanum, point out that the gay marriage debate is not directly about homosexuality, but about marriage. It is not about whom to marry, but about what marriage is.

Is marriage a human institution, touched by God, which permanently and exclusively unites one man and one woman for life for the begetting and educating of children? If the partners are of same sex and therefore incapable of procreation, no matter how much they may “love” each other, their union can never be called a marriage. The same-sex ruling therefore cannot be called a law, it cannot bind; it is nothing but violence, as Aquinas would put it, even if it bears the mighty imprint of the highest magistrates of the United States.

fstatad@gmail.com

Share.
loading...
Loading...

Please follow our commenting guidelines.

24 Comments

  1. Mukhang nagbabangaan ang turo ng mga pope! Ang sabi ni pope, sino siya para husgahan ang mga ito! Hindi ba ninyo napapansin ang mga nagtuturo ng religion ay nag-aalala sa ginagawa ng gobyerno sa pakikialam tungkol sa bagay na akala nila na makakasira sa religion at paniniwala nila!
    Isang bagay na dapat malaman ng lahat! Ang isang religion at nagtuturo ng pananampalataya,hindi dapat natatakot kahit ano pang-batas ang ipatupad ng gobyerno,kung totoon sa dios ang religion mo at may banal na takot ang mga kaanib sa itinuturo sa kanila at sumasampalataya sila na totoong tama ang sinusunod nila,ano mang batas na ginawa ng tao o gobyerno hindi sila maaapektuhan,,ang batas na yan ay para lang sa hindi naniniwala sa ano mang nagtuturo ng religion-! Kaya hindi masama kung ipatupad ito ng gobyerno!dahil ang tao rin ang mamimili kung ano ang gusto nila,hindi kung ano man ang gusto natin! Kaya kung totoong. Sa dios ang religion na kinaaaniban mo hindi,dapat mag-alala dahil ito ay naisulat na bago pa lang nangyayari ngayon!-!totoo ba o hindi ang pinaniniwalaan mo!??isipin mo!!

  2. Teddy Sevilla on

    “Our human civilization in crisis.” Isn’t this a little overboard for one issue?

    The much-loved Senator Juan Flavier, may his soul rest in peace, once told us the bible is not an instruction manual. Jesus commanded us to love and to love others as much as we love ourselves. Jesus did not tell us HOW to love. The New Testament would be hundreds, nay thousands, of volumes long if He did so. In His infinite wisdom, He left the manner of expressing, of commiting to love up to us mortals. He trusted us that much.

    I would not even attempt to second-guess what Jesus would have said about gay marriage. But I am sure Jesus would not use words that invoke prejudice, intolerance and hatred.

  3. The U.S. Supreme Court and Ireland’s decision to uphold the gay/lesbian same sex marriage will not put human civilization in crisis for the simple reason that they consist only as a sector of society, not the majority who still believes that the union of men and women in marriage is a basic choice. It’s all about a freedom of choice regardless of your religious affinity or beliefs.

  4. Daniel B. Laurente on

    Animal kingdom is full of surprises but most noticed by people around the globe from the very beginning when as a little child opened their eyes they see a woman and a man’s face in a blurry vision. It was a man and a woman fondling her nose then the man and woman noticed a shy smile coming from little being, a product of man and woman’s marriage.
    This modern times the natural union of opposite sex to procreate is no longer the sole natural phenomenon but rather mixed by the open sprouting of a new union they called ” Same Sex Marriage” being supported by intellectuals they called ” Men of Law ” the highest form of animals in the ” Animal Kingdom “. No one knows if in the lowest form of animals in the Animal Kingdom such dogs, pigs, cats and others is having the same like those recently on the news union of same sex, if humans can only understand them very well then most probably in the Animal Kingdom both highest and lowest are naturally equal in life form. if this the case then i would probably personally agree and joined others to condone these new ruling by US Highest Court of the Land. Consider my personal view as a tiny obscured flickers among the billions of glittering stars we see in the black background of the galactic horizon of the huge universe above us.

  5. We will accept gay and tbird from our society, but same sex marriage will not be tolerable. Are these people our of their mind?? are they not reading Bible in their life? or they are the one anti christ coming in this century. Wala na bang takot ang mga tao sa ngayon sa diyos?? di ba nasa bibliya ng ginunaw ng diyos ang gomorrah dahil nanduon sa bayan na iyon ang lahat ng kalaswaan , kasama na itong mga gay, homosexuals, etc..Kaya hindi ako magtataka kung ang AMERICA, EUROPE , ang unang gunawin ng diyos sa pagdating ng panahon…thru Asteroid na tatama sa kanilang bansa…if this trend will not stop, sure GOD CURSE will be the first with them..

  6. Vic Penetrante on

    How many ‘righteous people’ do you think we can bargain with to spare humanity?

  7. Amnata Pundit on

    If you believe in God then you must believe the devil exists because God says he does and that the war between them started even before the days of Adam and Eve.The devil never sleeps in his efforts to undermine God not only by religious deception but among others by imposing this unnatural abomination on mankind. This is just the latest battle between good and evil and as is often the case throughout history the devil has won again. The bible teaches us very clearly what is the first step one must take to to fight in this spiritual warfare which sadly is a war 99.9% of Christians are not even aware of. Ephesians 6:10-13 tells us to “Put on the the full Armor of God, that you may be able to stand firm against the schemes of the devil. For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers (like BS ?), against the powers( like SCOTUS? ). against the world forces of this darkness (like imperialist world powers? ). against the spiritual forces of wickedness in heavenly places( like dominion-seeking religious forces?).” The Armor of God refers to that weakest but most important of our inborn faculties, the power of critical thinking. If we surrender or abdicate this power to some authority who will then do our thinking for us (like religious or financial authorities) without question, that is when our defenses against the devil’s machinations start to crumble, and it becomes easier for him to “manufacture consent” just like this latest SCOTUS ruling condoning what so enraged God that he nuked Sodom and Gomorah because of it, namely the sick practice of sodomy. The only way we can win against injustice, poverty, wars and numerous other afflictions of mankind is to think for ourselves -put on the armor of God- as He gave us the inborn ability to know right from wrong . This is why real spiritual practice involves looking inwards into ourselves and not outside of ourselves towards some institution which has succeeded (with help from the devil?) to “usurp the role of God in this world.” Nothing in this world exists in a vacuum. Everything is interconnected and related, from the economy to politics to religion to the traffic in the cities to world financial crises to wars and all the way to what is now legally sanctioned gay marriages, and the underlying connection is just simply the fight between good and evil, or God and His nemesis Satan. Look more closely at the world today and at world history with the armor of God on your head and what you will see will make you shiver in fear, because very clearly, Satan is winning.

  8. An ignorant and obviously homophobic article written by an otherwise brilliant man.

    Your main defense about why marriage should be exclusively between one man and a woman hinges on the idea that that tradition has already been exercised since time in memorial and that any deviation from that tradition is treated as a savage act. Well, you know what else has been practiced since the dawn of humanity? Slavery, prostitution, war and murder – these things have been deemed acceptable in the past because tradition dictates that they’re rightfully so. Why are we so selective when it comes to which traditions we should follow and not make assessments for all of them?

    The reason why the U.S. Supreme Court legalized gay marriage is because they realized that the teachings of the Church shouldn’t influence the laws of men. If the laws are going to actively side with the teachings of one religion, then that’s obviously a violation of the principle on separation of Church and State.

    People who don’t subscribe to the teachings of the Catholic Church shouldn’t be forced to follow them, simply because the Church steps out of its line and dictates the laws for every man (Catholic or not).

    If you think that the Catholic Church is still effective with its teachings, then you have nothing to worry about if same-sex marriage will be legalized here. Catholics will still not opt for the option of same-sex marriage anyway (assuming they still subscribe to the teachings of the Church). Non-catholics should be given this liberty.

    The CBCP is just afraid that several people will partition from the religion if same-sex marriage would be legalized, which is why they’re trying as hard as they can to delay its legalization here.

    The fact is that majority of the members of the youth have already recognized the flawed ways of the Church and are slowly departing from them. When the death of the older, close-minded and corrupt generation comes to pass, then surely this nation will finally change for the better.

    • I beg to disagree with your logic. Yes, war, murder, slavery and prostitution already exist since time immemorial, but they have never been accepted as norm (to the exception of prostitution is some instances). There is no country who would agree that war is acceptable, and 200+ countries signed the UN charter denouncing war. In any country murder is still considered a heinous crime. slavery has long been abolished-but let us be clear slavery was an invention of the West as if other races where simply commodities taken by simply hunting them. The slaves of the olden days were made so as a consequence of their defeat in a preceding war.

      But then what could have been violated there is much far different from that of same sex marriage, which violates both natural and physical.

      Marriage between a man and a woman is not simply tradition but a natural law. its is the dictate of nature that only man and woman have the power to work together for the perpetuation of human specie.
      Marriage is much deeper than mere sexuality. It has a different purpose, which even animals understand as basic nature.

      And let me remind your apparent prejudice on the Catholic Church on this matter. There are other faiths which speaks and maintain even harder position than the Catholic Church. Your hatred for the religion has boxed your mind to thinking of the Catholic Church only, which in your own terms is so selective.

    • Teddy Sevilla on

      Ah….natural law! When every other argument fails, we invoke the “natural”…the “divine”. How can one argue against the notion that there are things built into our DNA, things pre-ordained by a higher power, things we should not try to explain because it is “true?” Bringing up “natural law” is meant to be a debate ender, uttered immediately before the argumentor turns his back and walks away.

      One problem, among many, with this, though …. copulation among the same sex in animals – something we humans assign as a feature of homosexuality – is not uncommon or as “unnatural” as invoked by “natural law.” Non-religious research has observed this truism. I won’t argue this point in the little space that we have here though.

      I know, I know …. natural law has been invoked by popes, by kings – even Tatad – for hundreds of years. Who am I then to debate – at the risk of being labeled a hater of religion and the Catholic church – that this is a human, not a heavenly, construct? Well, one undeniably holy and wise man said, not very long ago, when confronted with a question on homosexuality remarked, “Who am I to judge?” I take my cue from that.

      I have to admit – the issue of same-sex marriage is not something I am passionate about. I was brought up in a homophobic environment; lip-kissing, let alone having sex, with another man is unthinkable for me. But as I grow older, the many “sure” things I knew then about life somehow feels hollow in my older age.

      I would be more interested when the next big debate comes about – divorce. Personally it would be a bummer if Tatad invokes natural law. Of course I wouldn’t say amen, but, knowing this is an undebatable point to many, I would be at a loss as to what to write about.

    • If you watched fiddler on the roof, TRADiTION…..doesn’t change. It’s your way of life. Now if the lgbts want same sex marriage, they can go to the USA, live there, stay there and don’t come back anymore. The USA is going too far with democracy…too much rights, be it animal or human. What’s next? The right to marry a dog, cat or a horse??

    • Just imagine a future without a new child born of a mother and a father in a family designed to nurture the child into a useful and important member of society designed to promote common good. CBCP is not afraid of anything it is just explaining that the law of nature and of God cannot be changed by law of men. Who do you think will take the place of justices who made the decision when they leave this world if generations of men will cease to exist because two men or two women cannot produce new child conceived out of love. Marriage is for procreation and expression of love with natural consequence of producing a new life.

    • Writer Tatad fudges the details, though.
      Even before the SCOTUS decision, same-sex marriage is valid/recognized in 37 states (plus Washington DC), while same-sex marriage is not recognized in 14 states. (Just for world-geography, same-sex marriage is recognized in Canada, Spain, Portugal.)
      ——–
      And now, because of the decision of the Supreme Court USA, all USA states will recognize same-sex marriage. (Catholic churches, though, remains allowed to refuse marriage-ceremonies for people of same sex, or for folks of different religions, or for folks who don’t want the word “God” mentioned in the ceremony. [principle of separation of church and state]

  9. Making anything in form permanent including a fixated concept about marriage is man’s delusion, for nothing in form is ever permanent except its essence of love. its life and animating spirit which is God. Thus, being fixated and stuck in any form makes one lose its true essence and that inordinate clinging brings about the crisis. . . not the letting go. If the one true God of love is allowed to reign, growth and expansion is inevitable. Then, a new form that is more rooted in love may emerge. The death (shattering of old concepts) and the resurrection (of what is true and has always been present) is the divine law of nature.

  10. genesisbughaw on

    A State without morals?
    Where do we go from there?
    The paganism belief and self love erudites with due respect to lesbians and gays without soul and spiritual life makes them an animal species as if everything in the realm of rationalizing ,they have all the freedom of doing even if it looses or they rather failed to recognized the majestic beauty of our Creator most love creatures-created in the image and likeness of God ,Man and Woman.
    “E yung mga aso nga po e sa kalsada dahil may freedom sila wala silang pakialam basta sarap ayus!”
    Freedom is the happiness of doing what is morally right , what is just , what is good and reject evils!

    Note: Yung mga tao pong may pychological and behavioral deficiency na nasa mundo nila ay mayroon din naman po na gusto rin mamuhay ng mayroon Diyos.
    Yung iba nga po e nakikita ko sa Simbahan e.
    Kaya ipag pray natin sila

  11. Whether gay people are married or not has nothing to do with reproduction or population. They’re gay! They aren’t going to reproduce just because small-minded people ban them from entering a legal union.

    And if reproduction is so important, why are priests celibate?

    • Amnata Pundit on

      You are right, they are gay and they cannot help themselves (or can they? But thats another topic altogether). And yes it is not about reproduction or population, its about right and wrong, unless you are one of those “deep-thinking” people who believe that right and wrong are relative and not absolute. Do you think gay marriages would have been legitimized without a powerful lobby pushing for it? Fifty (50) years ago homosexuality especially legalized gay marriages was as abhorrent an idea as a sight of a pile of yellow feces on your dinner plate. But after decades of powerful lobbying and clever propaganda ( books, hollywood movies etc) today in America it is now as normal and desirable as apple pie, although Thank God it is still stiffly resisted in many sectors there. This lobby can be traced all the way back to Satan, believe it or not but again to trace it step by step to him is another topic altogether. Let me just put it this way: how far removed is legalized gay marriage from legalized pedophilia? Not very far. Just ask any senior citizen and they will tell you those fifty years just passed like the blink of an eye. Satan can make you believe anything. just give him enough time.

    • Justaskingseriously on

      “icons” used to refer to eastern orthodox religious paintings. Now they are applied to computers. Clicking icons leads one to other things. Priests are celibate, because they are living icons that lead people to think of things beyond this world

      The subject of Kit Tatad’s column is marriage. Marriage is an icon that leads people to think of the human family in terms of fruitfulness as our participation in creation. Throughout scriptural revelation, marriage plays a central iconic role in our appreciation of the Creator’s relationship with us, His creation. He is the bridegroom. And guess who is the bride? We, the created, that keep on participating in creation.

      It is quite interesting to note that the swing vote in the SCOTUS (supreme court of the United States) tried to point to marriage as an icon of eternal love that goes beyond death. Was the swing justice being religious? I think he was trying to relate to religious people. The plaintiff, as a matter of fact, could not quite get “obergefelling” that his name could not be legally connected to his “John” who had passed over to the other side. Quite sentimental, really.

      As celibacy (not getting married) is an icon to things above, marriage is an icon to things below (pun intended for emphasis). We are still on our way over to the other side. Has someone come from the other side? That someone could tell us, “I’ve been there.” The Sadducees who disbelieved in resurrection or in the spiritual realm argued with Jesus. They used marriage as an argument. A woman married a man who died soon after. The second brother married her. He too died soon after. A series of marriages included the fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh brother. Now, they argued, if there is resurrection, whose wife will she be? There is resurrection, because God is God of the living. Out of the burning bush, “I AM the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.” The Patriarchs are alive somehow. And as to whose wife will the woman be? No one’s. There is no marriage beyond death. (cf. Matthew 22:23-34).

      Methinks Justice Kennedy was taken in by sentimentality. And to think that he was trying to incorporate logic! It really truly had nothing to do with the U.S. Constitution, Justice Roberts emphatically asserted. Can anyone really be truly thoroughly secular? There is no dogma like “no dogma”, a Washington Post writer succinctly put it.

  12. arthur keefe on

    This article rests heavily on religious belief (“a human institution touched by god”).
    Christians are not required in the US or UK to avail of gay marriage. Neither should atheists or non christians be denied this. Both the US and UK are secular states, and unlike the Philippines, many of the population follow no faith.

  13. laguatanlawzen.com on

    This is an erudite postulate of the highest degree about the folly of the wisdom (is it wisdom?) of the US Supreme Court ruling on marriage nationwide. Remember Sodom and Gomorrah-how God rained brimstones on these two sinful places and destroy them? Is it history repeating itself?

  14. Felimon A. Soria on

    I disagree with you Mr. Tatad about the same sex marriage and the reproductive law. Like you I belong to the Catholic church. On the same sex marriage, I do believe that by being made law of the land in Ireland and United States, freedom to choose what is best is an inalienable right of any human being that live in a democratic society whether you are religious or not. On the reproductive bill, it has nothing to do with abortion. As a physician who is against abortion no matter what term of pregnancy, I do believe that contraception artificial or natural is the best way to control an exploding population. I am also in favor of prescribing the pill that prevents pregnancy after an intercourse between a man and a woman within 24 hours.

    • Sir Felimon Soria , who said there is over population? US and UK? even the UN bodies conceded that the world population is an aging population which presents greater problems that cannot be corrected for considerable period of time. The economic recessions in Europe and USA, and in Japan are directly linked to its low labor force, so that they have to pay their citizens just to bear babies, for the mean time they rely so much on migrant labor force. But they can afford to pay because they have the money earned by their once vibrant citizens now ageing.

      Now, Phil. Population Commission also noticed that the increase of senior aged filipinos is a bit fast projecting that by 2025 if the pace continues, our population will be officially ageing. And im sure you know that our prime economic stimulant is the remittances of our migrant workers, in short our population is still our best economic driver, cut it and we will be in great crisis.

      The BRIC countries (Brazil, India, China) are the new mega economies and they share one commonality, big population.

      The population of the country is not a problem, but a mighty wealth though not so well maximized. The problem is not the population but the failed policies of government, crafted by politicians who care not for genuine service but only for populist projects that will assure them a sit every election. The problem is that the people running the government dont want to create economic freedom for its populace because in doing so means giving the citizenry freedom to choose rightful and qualified people to man those elective positions.

      Why do we have to pay billions for contraception? You are a doctor, and I hope you understand that the real reason why people are dying out of reproductive health issues, is primarily because of the lack of facilities. there are still hundreds of villages in our country without health centers so that people have to put their trust on quack doctors.

      You do not promote reproductive health thru contraception… I would have put my total support on the law if it made mandatory upon all local governments thru the aid of the national government that every barrio should have its health center, that may effective discuss family planning and other health issues that affect the people.

  15. P.Akialamiro on

    The U.S. Supreme Court decision doesn’t change much; it’s a matter of faith and belief in the Scriptures which is already in the hearts and minds of each individual even before the ruling. After all, “to each his/her own” when the judgement day comes.