From the first article I presented:
Whatever of the postal vote, the Church needs to reflect on why there such strong support for same-sex marriage among the young. They are driven by a strong emotional commitment to equality, and this is surely something to respect and admire. They know the reality of homophobia, and the destructiveness that it, like racism and sexism, can have in the lives of people, and especially on the young. They are idealistic in the value they ascribe to love, the primary gospel value. Any argument against same-sex-marriage must respectfully address these core values, or they will fail a basic test of credibility with our young. Such arguments must appeal to believer or non-believer alike.
A start is made by Archbishop Costelloe of Perth who in a pastoral letter written in defence of a traditional view of marriage articulates some carefully chosen words about a Catholic approach:
This view presumes that marriage is about more than the mutual love between two people: it is also about the creation of a family. None of this suggests that there should be any unjust discrimination against same-sex couples. Nor does it suggest that legal protections and government benefits should be denied to same-sex couples.
Many of us have family and friends in same-sex relationships: we love and respect them and want to see them treated with dignity,
For many Catholics engaged in the debate the critical question is whether the denial of the right to civil marriage is an “unjust discrimination”?
He sets out facts - the position of young People who were the primary YES voters by the way - and the preconditions to influence them. I agree with what he said. I also concluded NO was the right vote.
