So, the religious groups in Canada are at arms about same-sex marriage, which comes as a surprise to absolutely nobody.
(insert sound of Drew's head smacking his desk here)
So my much, much, much, much, much better half informed me that in mass the other day, the priest (for, apparently, the fourth time in as many weeks) got into a tirade about same-sex marriage; at the end of which, apparently, someone stood up and cheered.
Now, I want it understood that this comes as second-hand information, and therefore should be given the grain of salt you feel it deserves; but from the description I got, there are a lot of arguments that were used which really, really scare me.
I will ignore the religious arguments he used, since I don't believe that any one religion should be writing our laws, he was basically singing to the choir there. The religious arguments have no meaning outside the Catholic faith, and as such have no influence upon the making, interpretation or enforcement of new laws. So, I'll ignore them.
One argument he did use which I've heard a lot is that the ruling was handed down by the supreme court, not by a democratic vote. He went on to claim that the majority does not want gay marriage, and therefore it should be prohibited.
Apparently, he fails to understand the concept of tyrrany of the majority. One of the fundamental flaws of a democratic system is that when majority rules, the rights of the minorities are at risk; and even the most ardently homophobic would not claim that homosexuals are not a minority. In a way, that's really why the Supreme Court of Canada (and the US) exists. Their entire purpose for being is to ensure that the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (or, in the US, the Bill of Rights) applies to all citizens. Minority, majority, whatever. Their role is to ensure that the rights assured to all citizens by the constitution are not abridged by the democratic process.
Case in point: when the Supreme Court of the US overturned the laws which prohibited interracial marriage, they had approval of over 90% of citizens in the states where such laws were in effect. Now, you would be hard-pressed to find someone today who agrees that these laws were right and just. That's the whole reason why the supreme court is appointed, not elected. Their job is to do the right thing, as dictated by the constitution; not the popular thing.
There was also a suggestion which truly scared me. He suggested that this was an attempt to take power away from the Catholic church.
One question: what power?
The Catholic church has no role in the writing of laws, the interpretation of those laws, or the enforcement of the law. The Catholic church, as far as the laws of the land are concerned, does not exist; and this is the arena in which gay marriage is being decided.
Second question: what power is being taken away?
The finding of the supreme court is very specific: namely that allowing gay marriage is legal provided (and the supreme court was very specific on this one) that no religious institution is required to perform a same-sex marriage ceremony if they choose not to do so.
So, what power is being taken away from the Catholic church? The short answer is "none." The Catholic church is not required to perform a same-sex marriage ceremony, should they choose not to do so. Within the framework of the Catholic church, they still have full autonomy where marriage is concerned; but they have no influence upon marriages performed outside that framework. It could be pointed out that they never did.
What does this mean? Well, when you come down to it, I suspect that this isn't really about Gay marriage at all. My suspicion is that they want an acknowledgement by the government that the Catholic faith is the "correct" faith.
And that, frankly, is a very, very scary place to go.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment