Homosexuality, Marriage

7 May 2005

Dear Ms. Rina Jimenez-David,

I wish to commend your for the article in your column, At Large ("New and old ways of loving", Philippine Daily Inquirer, 6 May 2005). I understand that your article argues for the acceptability of homosexuality using, as a demonstration, the examples presented in two TV shows and a movie.

I share the sympathy you have toward the gay community. The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. They do not choose their homosexual condition; for most of them it is a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

But a distinction must be made between homosexual tendencies and homosexual acts. Homosexual tendency can be understood as an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. These merit understanding. Homosexual acts, on the other hand, are sexual acts performed by two or more persons of the same sex. Using the Bible, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity (Cf. Gen 191-29; Rom 124-27; 1 Cor 6:10; 1 Tim 1:10.), our elders have always declared that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered. They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not originate from a genuine love for each other as persons, but from a desire for self-gratification. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity.

Homosexual persons are called to sexual uprightness. By acquiring the habit of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and divine grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

Your TV show and movie examples, as arguments, are unreliable, partial and biased. At first reading, your article seem to give a good and strong argument for homosexuality. But the three examples are TV shows and a movie. Are not the people depicted there do not act naturally as in real life? Their actions are dictated by the scriptwriters and controlled by the film directors. Even what we see in reality TV shows, like Amazing Race, cannot be considered natural and realistic. The race participants are aware that they are in-front of a camera. They can adjust their behavior to the way they want their viewers to see.

In my opinion, raising homosexual relationship (we can assume that homosexual acts are committed in that set-up) to the same level as heterosexual marriage through legalization will definitely destroy the traditional family as an institution. People's understanding of heterosexual marriage, as a stable mutual relationship of love and life, will suffer a distortion and confusion. There is no way can a same-sex relationship equal the social contribution a heterosexual marriage could make by begetting and bringing-up new responsible members of society. Let us respect these homosexual persons but let us not exalt their homosexual relationships as equal to traditional marriage!

Thank you for your time and best regards.