Same-sex marriage in Mass

An article in the Boston Herald of Tuesday, June 12, by Peter Meade and Rosanne Bacon Meade drew some very disturbing and illogical conclusions, it seems to me, in support of the recently enacted legalization of same-sex marriage. Lifesite News reported that Mr. Meade is the former chair of "Catholic Charities in Boston and currently serves as a lay advisor to Cardinal O'Malley.

Their reasons to support the disavowal of a popular vote in favor of legislative action were punctured by examples of: (1) such legislative actions as the Supreme Court’s ruling in 1954 (Brown vs. Board of Education) throwing out the notion of separate but equal schools for blacks and whites; (2) the evolution of social change in America, citing the election of a Catholic president, in spite of the history of the Know Nothing Party which worked so mightily to prevent Catholics from holding office; (3) a Mary Dyer hanged for her religious beliefs in 1660; (4) the Black Regiment which fought with distinction in the Civil War.

The authors: “Though their times were very different, the men of the 54th, Mary Dyer and Catholic politicians were all denied fundamental freedoms; freedoms we now widely recognize were unjustly denied. Social evolution in our country is often slow but it carries an immense power.”

The problem with this reasoning is the failure to distinguish between God-given rights and Man-made laws. The cases cited are recognized as unjust. We believe that certain rights are inalienable and so declared in our Constitution. For example, slavery was always bad, even when condoned. Unjust war was always bad, no matter where the battlefield. Illicit sexual acts are always evil, even when legal. Discrimination based on color or sex is wrong.

But marriage is a sacred union of one man and one woman. To change its definition seems both unreasonable and immoral.

But, at least, I say, let the voters of Massachusetts decide this and not a few liberal lawmakers.