RICHARD A. SOKERKA
In the coming days, the U.S. Senate will take up a vote on the so-called “Respect for Marriage Act,” which would codify same-sex marriage into federal law.
On the surface, the name of the bill (H.R. 8404), which has already been passed in the U.S. House of Representatives, seems innocuous enough, but it is far from that. In fact, it would pave the way for radical expansions of the legal definition of marriage; would encourage lawsuits against proponents of natural marriage, and encourage IRS penalties against organizations committed to natural marriage.
In a letter sent to all members of the U.S. Senate, Archbishop Salvatore J. Cordileone of San Francisco, chairman of the U.S. Bishops Committee on Laity, Marriage, Family Life and Youth, urged Senators to oppose “The Respect for Marriage Act.”
“It is not lost on us,” he wrote, “that this bill comes in apparent response to the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, which returned to the people the right to protect preborn children and their mothers from abortion. It is unfortunate that Congress has not responded with a meaningful effort to help women in need with unexpected or difficult pregnancies. Rather, it is advancing an unnecessary bill to create a statutory right to same-sex civil marriage, which some claim is threatened by Dobbs, even though the Supreme Court’s majority was explicit in its Dobbs holding that the decision had no bearing on the issue. There is also a question as to whether the ‘Respect for Marriage Act’ would grant federal recognition to civil marriages of more than two people performed in any state that would allow for them.’
“People who experience same-sex attraction should be treated with the same respect and compassion as anyone, on account of their human dignity, and never be subject to unjust discrimination. It was never discrimination, however, to simply maintain that an inherent aspect of the definition of marriage itself is the complementarity between the two sexes. Marriage as a lifelong, exclusive union of one man and one woman, and open to new life, is not just a religious ideal - it is, on the whole, what is best for society in a concrete sense, especially for children,” the archbishop wrote.
The U.S. Bishops’ letter to the Senate is in line with the opinion of the Religious Freedom Institute (RFI) on the bill. According to Tom Farr, RFI president, “This law would punish the tens of millions of honorable Americans who embrace, on grounds of faith, reason, and nature, the ancient and timely truth that marriage is a union of one man and one woman. The bill represents a growing conviction on the American Left that such people are not honorable, and that they are haters and bigots who must be driven from our public life. This bill would intentionally subject such Americans, and the tens of thousands of religious institutions they represent, to ruinous lawsuits in federal courts. This tragic result would not only be unjust. It would undermine the most dynamic and compassionate non-governmental civil society in history, one comprised of the entire spectrum of American religions - from Jewish schools, to Muslim health clinics, to Christian homes for the aged and dying, to countless others that bring hope for the marginalized and the desperate. Those who devote their lives to these ministries are lovers, not haters.”
In his letter, Archbishop Cordileone pointed out, “The ‘Respect for Marriage Act,’ would do the opposite of what its name implies, codifying a demand for states and the federal government to honor whatever may be deemed ‘marriage’ by any other state. The concern that the bill could require federal recognition of ‘marriages’ of more than two persons is not far-fetched, as at least three cities in Massachusetts have already legally enshrined so-called polyamorous domestic partnerships. By making federal recognition of such relationships automatic upon their recognition by any state, the bill would create a massive incentive for radical activists to concentrate their efforts in a single state - further lending plausibility to this potentially disastrous scenario.”
Given what the “The Respect for Marriage Act” entrails, we urge all people of faith to contact their Senators telling them to cast a “no” vote.