Apologetics Bible Catholic Church Catholic Faith

TWO BIRDS IN ONE STONE: Same-Sex Marriage and Divorce

By: Pastor Manny

Note: I am not forcing you to hold sa libertarian view on marriage in relation to same-sex marriage and divorce. I am just saying that this is one logical position that a Catholic may hold in terms of public policies.

————————–————————–


In the Philippines, may dalawang issues ang laging napapag-usapan tungkol sa marriage. Yun ay ang same-sex marriage and divorce. For example, si Senator Hontiveros and Senator Cayetano ay parehas na sumusuporta sa bills na yan, as well as other senators and politicians. Kung makikita niyo ang title, I said “Two Birds in One Stone.” I believe that there is one solution that can address both the issue of same-sex marriage and divorce. And, ang solution na tinutukoy ko ay libertarianism. Libertarianism is defined as a:
.
“philosophical principle that suggests that a GOVERNMENT’S INVOLVEMENT in civil economical and social matters should be LIMITED, and that the issues should be settled amongst civilians [1] [emphasis added].”
.
Take note of those keywords. Ang main view ng libertarians ay ang involvement ng government should be limited. So, anong libertarian solution ba ang tinutukoy ko. Ang tinutukoy ko ay dapat, wala ng civil marriages or marriages legally recognized by state. The idea that the government should no longer handle civil marriage is a position that a Catholic can hold. Randy England is a Catholic writer and a retired criminal defense lawyer [2]. In his book, “Free Is Beautiful: Why Catholics Should Be Libertarian”, he said:
.
“In a LIBERTARIAN order, the definition of MARRIAGE would NOT be the BUSINESS of the GOVERNMENT, nor would spouses need its approval [3] [emphasis added].”
.
In an article in Catholic Exchange, we can see a recognition na back then, ang marriages ay handled ng Church, not by the government. In the article, it says:
.
“If a man and a woman want to get married, that is their OWN AFFAIR because it does not harm anybody else. … This is why for MANY CENTURIES MARRIAGE was regulated by the CHURCH, NOT by GOVERNMENT [4] [emphasis added].”
.
So, after knowing that a Catholic can hold to this position at may history na ang marriages ay hindi handled ng government, why is this solution the best solution, at least for me, in terms of same-sex marriage and divorce?
————————–————————–
Issue #1: Same-Sex Marriage
Sa same-sex marriage debate, ang dalawang main positions ay anti-same-sex marriage, and pro-same-sex marriage. If a person is an anti-same-sex marriage, that means that he or she only believes na ang heterosexual marriage ang dapat lang malegally recognize ng state. I will say na this is the right position because marriage is only between man and woman capable to engage in vaginal sex. I have an article on that kung saan only believing in a traditional view of marriage is the way to filter out other forms of false marriages tulad ng open marriage, threesome marriage and incest marriage [5]. However, the anti-same-sex marriage position may be discriminatory in the sense na because other people don’t believe in the right definition of marriage, therefore they can’t have legal and financial benefits na makukuha sa isang civil marriage. As such, this position is something that I call as “right but discriminatory.”
.
If a person is a pro-same-sex marriage, that means that he or she believes na even homosexual marriage should be given legal recognition. This position is wrong since ang same-sex marriage is not real marriage. This can be seen logically since if vaginal sex is intrinsic to marriage, and same-sex couple can’t engage in vaginal sex, therefore they don’t satisfy the definition of marriage. However, this position is non-discriminatory since even if mali ang definition nila ng marriage, they want other people to have the benefits na makukuha sa civil marriage. As such, this position is something that I call as “nondiscriminatory but wrong.” Ngayon, may position ba na “right and nondiscriminatory” at the same time. This leads us back sa position ng libertarianism.
.
If wala ng nirerecognize ang state na civil marriage, then wala ng debate sa same-sex civil marriage. As such, magkakaroon ang lahat ng marriage equality in the sense na they can marry in their own churches or groups kung saan sila pwede magkaroon ng marriage contract based on their definition of marriage. You might be asking, paano naman ang financial benefits? Tinatanggalan na ba natin sila ng benefits? Syempre, hindi. Rather than irecognize ng government ang marriage, ang irerecognize nila ay civil union. You might also be asking, akala ko ba, may criticism ka sa civil union? It’s true that I made an article in response sa civil union as mentioned by civil partnership bill [6]. Pero, those criticisms don’t mean na civil union is wrong in and of itself. It just means na may problem pagdating sa definition ng civil partnership bill. As such, kapag may gusto magpakasal, pwede nila to gawin sa sariling Church nila, at ang irerecognize ng government ay civil union nila, hindi ang marriage at even if hindi sila kasal, they can have civil union as well, even if hindi sila romantically involved.
.
So, this position is “right and nondiscriminatory.” It’s right since kapag wala ng civil marriage, it actually promotes marriage equality, and it’s not discriminatory since even if someone is heterosexual couple, homosexual couple, siblings, just friends, etc, pwede sila pumasok sa isang civil union since ang basis ng civil union ay freedom of association which everyone can have with anyone.
————————–————————–
Issue #2: Divorce
Sa divorce debate, may dalawang main positions. Ito ay ang anti-divorce and pro-divorce. If a person is anti-divorce, that means na naniniwala siya na ang isang marriage contract shouldn’t have a divorce option. Ang options lang na meron ay legal separation and annulment. I would say na this position is right since a marriage contract should reflect what marriage is, marriage is not marriage without marriage vows, and marriage vows include “till death do us part.” In my previous article, I provided a secular reason kung bakit hindi dapat malegalize ang divorce based on the marriage vows [7]. However, this position can also be discriminatory in the sense na may mga tao who disagree sa view ng indissolubility of marriage. Hindi lahat, naniniwala na ang kasalan ay pangmatagalan and nadidiscriminate sila in the sense na ang Muslims, na may ibang view ng marriage, ay pwede makaenter sa isang marriage contract na may divorce option, at ganun din ang mga Pilipinong kinasal sa ibang bansa. So, to summarize this position, it is “right but discriminatory.”
.
If a person is pro-divorce naman, naniniwala siya na ang isang marriage contract ay dapat, may divorce option. I find this position to be wrong and illogical since sabi ko nga sa taas, ang marriage vow includes the statement of “till death do us part.” By definition, it is only through death kung saan pwede sila magpakasal ulit. However, this position is not discriminatory in the sense na may “exit” sa mga tao na nagpakasal sa “maling tao”, and this gives them a new beginning. Mas magiging comfortable rin to sa mga tao na naniniwala na marriage is dissoluble since there are some Christians who believe in it, and kailangan din iaddress ang mga secular people na hindi religious. We just can’t say na either iforce natin sila marriage contract na walang divorce or sabihin na huwag na lang sila magpakasal since that means na ayaw natin sila bigyan ng benefits. We need to be compassionate as well. As such, I summarize this position as “nondiscriminatory but wrong.” Fortunately, libertarianism provides a position that is “right and nondiscriminatory.”
.
You can’t have a civil divorce if walang civil marriage to begin with. As such, kapag may marriage contract sila sa kanya-kanyang simbahan nila or sects or organizations, then if gusto nila ibreak yung contract na yun or whether hindi pwede ibreak yung contract is dependent sa kung saan sila nagpakasal. For example, if may nagpakasal sa Catholic Church, walang divorce at kapag nakapagpakasal siya sa ibang denomination, he or she can be excommunicated. Different rules may apply sa ibang groups. And, ang pwede irecognize ng state ay ang civil union. So, if gusto ng isang tao na humiwalay, they can terminate that private contract at may freedom ang isang tao to do that. This position is right since there is a difference between a divorce option in a marriage contract and a termination option sa civil union. Sa divorce option sa marriage contract, it contradicts the statement “till death do us part.” Sa termination option sa civil union, it’s part of the freedom of association to join or LEAVE groups voluntarily [8]. Therefore, walang contradiction sa termination ng isang contract. This is also nondiscriminatory since if naniniwala ang isang tao sa dissolubility ng marriage, pwede sila makipag civil union, have termination and have civil union with others. Some people who may be anti-divorce say na this can lead to people sinning. However, we have to understand that we can’t force people to do good. And, forcing people to do good can bring more harm. As such, they have the freedom to sin, hope the best for them and pray for them as well. This is the reason why I summarize this position as “right and nondiscriminatory.”
————————–————————–
Some liberals support the legalization of same-sex marriage and civil divorce to promote “liberty.” Personally, I think that if they want to promote liberty, they should promote libertarianism over liberalism.
References:
[1] http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/Libertarianism.html
[2] https://freeisbeautiful.com/about
[3] Free Is Beautiful: Why Catholics Should Be Libertarian
[4] https://catholicexchange.com/should-the-government-be-involved-in-marriage
[5] https://www.facebook.com/dcfvanguardsoftruth/posts/2917613021796313
[6] https://www.facebook.com/dcfvanguardsoftruth/posts/2919541964936752
[7]https://www.facebook.com/dcfvanguardsoftruth/photos/a.1926587387565553/2833999200157696/?type=3&__tn__=H-R
[8] https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Freedom_of_association

Defend The Catholic Faith
Safeguards have been created to ensure the orthodoxy of the contents of our website. If, despite strictly adhering to the dogmas and magisterial authority of the Church, errors have been pointed out and proven, I will humbly submit to the authority of the Church.