In the ninth paragraph of Humanae Vitae the Pope expresses his opinion on married love. He states that, "This love is above all fully human, a compound of sense and spirit. It is not, then, merely a question of natural instinct or emotional drive. It is also, and above all, an act of the free will, whose trust is such that it is meant not only to survive the joys and sorrows of daily life, but also to grow, so that husband and wife become in a way one heart and one soul, and together attain their human fulfillment. It is a love which is total—that very special form of personal friendship in which husband and wife generously share everything, allowing no unreasonable exceptions and not thinking solely of their own convenience. Whoever really loves his partner loves not only for what he receives, but loves that partner for the partner's own sake, content to be able to enrich the other with the gift of himself. Married love is also faithful and exclusive of all other, and this until death. This is how husband and wife understood it on the day on which, fully aware of what they were doing, they freely vowed themselves to one another in marriage…Finally this love is fecund. It is not confined wholly to the loving interchage of husband and wife; it also contrives to go beyong this to bring new life into being.” In this passage the Pope explains how special the relationship between a husband and wife is. He describes the bond they share and will continue to share for the rest of their days. He also explains how their relationship is also important to replenishing the population by having children.
I really enjoy the pope's idea of marriage, although it is hard to relate considering my parents are divorced. However, the real problem I had with this paragraph was his use of using the words "husband and wife". I believe that his description of marriage can be easily applied to same sex couples too. Why aren't gay men able to feel this love for one another and "become in a way one heart and one soul?" Are they not able to "generously share everything, allowing no unreasonable exceptions and not thinking solely of their own convenience, Whoever really loves his partner loves not only for what he receives, but loves that partner for the partner's own sake"? I do not think it is right for gay marriage to be banned because who's to say that their love is not even more greater than that of an average married couple? Next year Minnesotans will vote on whether "the state Constitution should be amended to define marriage as only the union of a man and woman" according to this article. I do not agree with the pope whatsoever on his view that marriage should only be reserved for man and women and therefore next year I plan to vote against this amendment.
On the other hand, the pope has a good argument when he describes how part of the importance of marriage is the idea of having children. It is true that gay men and gay women are not able to have a child that is biologically both of theirs. I personally find it sad that gay families must adopt or use surrogate mothers, even though this would mean that the child would only be related by blood to one of it's fathers or mothers. The best option a gay couple would have is to have one of their sisters (or brothers) be the surrogate parent, since that sibling shares similar DNA. In this day and age, there are are technologies that help in providing the best possible solution for a gay couple looking to have a child, however the pope and many others oppose this idea. I believe every couple who is in love, as the pope describes, and ready to have a child should be allowed to. If this couple, for example, decides to adopt a girl from China, they may be saving her life. Plus as it states in Humanae Vitae, "Children are the supreme gift of marriage".
Overall, I have a very opposing viewpoint to the pope on his idea of marriage. Although his description of marriage sounds wonderful, I do not feel that he, or anyone else, should be able to take away the right for gay couples who feel this way to get married and spend the rest of their days with one another. I also believe that although gay couples cannot, unfortunately, conceive a child, I do not believe that government should be allowed to ban gay couples from adopting, thus preventing them from the "supreme gift of marriage".
I have the same viewpoint on this claim as you do. Western culture is so different today than it was in 1968 when the Humanae Vitae was first introduced. I understand that the Church was built on certain principles and foundations but our culture is constantly changing. I am certain that any higher being would accept a gay man or woman. Although they are not able to conceive a child, they are not doing any other harm towards a higher being. And like you said, there are so many children in the world that are orphaned and need to be adopted. Gay parents would most likely consider this option above the others you stated and possibly save a child's life. I also agree with you on that I would vote against the amendment that is being presented next year.
ReplyDeleteIt is. After the law being posted that homosexual marriage is legal in U.S, there is increasing gay couples in this land and more kids are adopted by these couples. This has great positive effect which can offer a family to the child who need the love.
ReplyDeleteThe Pope's description of marriage is quite good in my opinion, although few marriages today posses all of those qualities. I feel like same sex marriage was not prevalent enough of an issue at the time for the pope to feel the need to include an opinion about it.
ReplyDeleteI agree we should give gays tha rights to get married. But I don't think it's a right decision to let gay couple adopt children. It's not fair for the children. They will be brought up in a different condition and probably become homosexual when they grow up. I think it will be better for a child to live in a ordianry family with a father and a mother.
ReplyDeleteI may be misinterpreting your statement in the third paragraph, but I don't understand why it is "sad" that gay families must adopt of use surrogate mothers if they wish to have children. I think both of these options are very realistic and acceptable for gay couples to consider. I agree more with your statement about the fact that a gay couple who decides to adopt a child may be saving that child's life. In almost every case of adoption this is true due to the fact that growing up in a nurturing and loving environment is much healthier than spending one's childhood in the care of an orphanage.
ReplyDeleteI do not see what is so inherently wrong with gay couples. They do not TRY to be gay... so how is it unnatural or immoral? The only difference between a straight couple and a gay couple is the fact that straight couples can have babies. But if a straight couple is infertile, can't that deem them towards a gay couple status as well?
ReplyDelete