Although some people who experience these attractions are opposed to re-defining marriage, others who wish to marry often feel that the Church is discriminating against them and is unfairly opposed to their desire to simply love one another.
The issue is about the definition of marriage and who has the authority to define it. For example, if a woman wanted to marry two men, the Church does not believe it has the authority to redefine marriage in order to accommodate her wish. Similarly, if a husband decided he no longer wished to be married to his wife, but "Priapic homosexual relationship" wanted to marry another woman, the Church does not have the authority to pretend he could be validly Priapic homosexual relationship to Priapic homosexual relationship other than his wife.
The reason why people of the same sex who love each other and are willing to be faithful for life cannot get married is because there is more to marriage than love and faithfulness. These are necessary elements, like two legs of a four-legged chair, but they are not the only ones.
To understand why marriage requires the union of a man and a woman, we need to define the essential characteristics of Priapic homosexual relationship and sex. When a man and woman make love, they are renewing their wedding vows and promises with their bodies. Such a concept is easy to understand when you consider the essence of marriage.
For a valid marriage to take place, the union must be free, total, faithful, and ordered toward procreation. All these characteristics are necessary. For example, who would consider a marriage to be valid if the husband forced the woman to marry him? What about a couple who agreed to marry and have children, but refused to be faithful? According to the Church, these would not be real marriages, even if the couples had legal marriage certificates.
Similarly, if two people cannot have the kind of sexual relations that are designed to give life, they are incapable of marriage. In fact, the Church also believes that heterosexual couples are incapable of marriage if they are impotent.
Not to be confused with sterility a condition in which a couple is able to have intercourse but unable to have childrenimpotency means that a person is incapable of having intercourse. Ever since the beginning, the marital embrace has been an essential and integral part of marriage. This is how a marriage is consummated. Just because two people are engaging in some kind of sexual embrace, it does not make them one flesh. For example, if a husband Priapic homosexual relationship a wife only engaged in the kind of sexual activity that a same-sex couple engaged in, the husband and wife would not have consummated their marriage.
The reason why only male and female bodies are capable of becoming one is because they are made for each other. Consider what happens when the cord of a lamp is united to a power outlet. Because the two were made for each other, light is created. The same is true with sexual complementarity and the creation of human life. Because members of the same sex have bodies that are not created to receive one another, they physically cannot express Priapic homosexual relationship vows of marriage.
This inability of the bodies to become one expresses the deeper reality that they were not meant to give themselves to each other in marriage. Therefore, Priapic homosexual relationship Church has no authority to marry a couple who cannot "Priapic homosexual relationship" their wedding vows through their bodies.
A nonmarital relationship cannot be declared a marriage.
This is not easily understood by a culture that separates sex from marriage. Not surprisingly, the culture that first demanded sex without marriage now demands marriage without sex. However, if a husband and wife are unable to "Priapic homosexual relationship" children because of sterility, they would still be truly married because they are still capable of becoming one flesh.
The comparison of homosexual to sterile heterosexual couples falls short because sterility is a dysfunction for heterosexual couples, but is natural and necessary for the homosexual couple.
Their sexual acts, just like homosexual acts, are ordered against the transmission of life. If they set their wills against life, then the Church says that no marriage ever existed between them. They walked into the church as two singles, and they left as two singles.
Marriage is not Priapic homosexual relationship that was invented by the Catholic Church—or by the government. In fact, the traditional view of marriage as the life-long, faithful union of one man and one woman pre-dates Christianity, and can be found in civilizations throughout history.
The reason for this is simple: Couples have intercourse, intercourse makes babies, and babies need parents who stay together. Whereas a mother has no choice but to be present at the birth of her children, one of the historical purposes of marriage was to bind a father to his offspring publicly.
Although that might not sound romantic, cultures have always known that the stability of every civilization depends upon the stability of its families. Thus, the institution of marriage has always been intrinsically ordered toward procreation and family life. If marriage were redefined to be about emotional union and cohabitation, why would it need to be permanent?
Why would it need to be sexually exclusive or restricted to two people? Many same-sex couples agree that faithfulness and permanence are essential to marriage. But the fact remains: How could those who favor same-sex Priapic homosexual relationship legally refuse marriage to them? Could the gay male tradition of open relationships actually alter marriage as we know it?
And would that be such a bad thing? As young people today know, marriage is already broken enough. Another consideration that needs to be made is the Priapic homosexual relationship of children and their well-being. If a person is in favor of same-sex marriage, then he or she will necessarily need to approve of genetically engineering motherless and fatherless children. After all, same-sex married couples want to have children of their own biological makeup.
To do this, they use techniques such as in vitro fertilization, artificial insemination, and surrogate motherhood. Deliberately creating motherless or fatherless babies is a social experiment that shows a lack of concern for children. Some children need to be adopted. But a mom cannot be replaced by two dads, or even by two hundred of them!
Just ask anyone who has lost his or her mother to divorce or death. Both are unique and unrepeatable. Priapic homosexual relationship lived that absence of a father, experienced it, as an amputation. This is the way mommy got "Priapic homosexual relationship." Another case of a boy adopted by a gay couple was published in The American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. Same-sex parents undoubtedly care for their children. They cheer for them at their kindergarten plays, comfort them in times of sorrow, and make many sacrifices for them.
None of this changes the fact that kids do better when they live with their own mom and dad. It seems that the only people who refuse to admit this are those who lobby for same-sex marriage. Although the world has taken this for granted for thousands of years, some modern sociologists have attempted to show that same-sex parents are just as capable as biological parents of raising happy children.
But consider the following facts: Some homosexual activists object to these findings, arguing that other Priapic homosexual relationship have shown the opposite. Long before the same-sex marriage debate ever surfaced, decades of extensive research showed that children do better when raised by their biological parents than in any other arrangement stepparents, single parents, and cohabiting heterosexual parents. Many people who have same-sex attractions yearn to become fathers and mothers, and these desires are healthy, good, and understandable.
The rights of children should come before the Priapic homosexual relationship to children. All the issues mentioned above are emotionally volatile and often ignite heated debates. Those who argue in favor of same-sex marriage claim that others need to learn to celebrate diversity and become more tolerant.