Christine Galea, Sliema
Same-sex unions
I am writing in response to the comments by Gabi Calleja (February 16), where she claims that in my article The Family in Europe Today (February 2) I made a number of assertions and claims, many of which were “dubious and unsubstantiated”.
With reference to her first claim that there is “the rather generic reference to the decrease in the ability to reflect”, I cannot deny that good education enables individuals to think critically and reflectively about their lived experiences, yet to a large extent, education is focused on simply getting students up-to-standard academically on the various aspects of the curriculum. I feel that there should be more tasks that encourage students to apply their newfound knowledge by thinking creatively and critically, hence providing them with opportunities for self-assessment and reflection.
Secondly, Ms Calleja questions whether I am implying that a “heterosexual married couple in (several countries) would consider their marital relationship of less worth, or love their spouse less because a same-sex couple next door could now get married?” She has interpreted my words beyond their meaning. I wrote: “The evolution of same-sex unions has dealt a blow to the family based on the conjugal bond” in the sense that it contributes to undermining marriage as an institution, and this is because same-sex marriage erodes the elements of the natural institution of marriage at its most basic level.
These basic elements purport that marriage is a union between a man and a woman who love and nurture one another for the purpose of mutual support and also for the procreation of children. Therefore, it follows that, at natural level, same-sex unions are not compatible with marriage.
In a similar vein, other elements common to natural marriage are unity, indissolubility and exclusiveness and these factors indicate that even divorce and adultery are not compatible with marriage in its natural form. With all due respect to Ms Calleja, it was never my intention to enter into a full-blown discussion on heterosexual vs same-sex marriage. Neither was I making disparaging references to same-sex marriages. This was not the aim of my article at all!
Popular Stories
In Discussion
3 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Zachary Stewart
Feb 26th 2011, 20:33
The Term "Natural Marriage" is an oxymoron. What other species in the Animal Kingdom enters into a bond for life, much less, one that is initiated through a legally binding contract? Since there are no other examples of this in the natural world, it stands to reason that marriage is unnatural and a product of human society, subject to redefinition as that society advances.
Joe Zammit
Feb 24th 2011, 19:28
God has created humanity men and women, on purpose for marriage. He could have created us just men or just women, but we are not that. God does not create homosexuals but human beings.
After Original Sin, all people have some evil tendency. Some have the evil tendency of homosexuality but are not homosexuals for that matter. They become so if and when they start indulging in homosexuality. The can resist the temptation as well, always by God’s grace. But homosexuality remains a grave sin that separates the sinner from God and puts him or her on the path to hell.
In Genesis 19: 1 – 29 we read that people committed the grievous sin of homosexuality. God punished them severely for this sin and sent on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone and fire from heaven.
Between homosexuals there cannot be love but lust.
Joseph Carmel Chetcuti
Feb 25th 2011, 22:10
How would you know? Are you a closet homosexual?