The Catholic Church has boomed that, “'marriage is a faithful, exclusive and lifelong union between one man and one woman, joined as husband and wife in an intimate partnership of life and love'” (CNS). With this assessment, I have not the slightest growl. As a young mind growing and serving in the Catholic tradition, I came to firmly hold that union within in the Church is to be cherished by only a man and a woman-not a man and a dog, not a woman and a parakeet, and certainly not a man and a man. Moreover, a heterosexual following is my choice of lifestyle. But, to me, marriage outside sacred walls is nothing more than a legal union entered by those who seek to reap its benefits. It is here the Church and I begin to drift apart as we bob down society's river of moral ambiguities.
What is marriage? When asked to define it, judges and senators have shown that they share the Church's ideologies. Our nation's authority has spoken, and clearly, marriage is to be between one man and one woman. This connection of church and state edges on violating the First Amendment, but the masses are easing a blind at the issue. Why must legal union be between opposite sexes? For one thing, the basic function of marriage in societal terms is to collect benefits denied to those that remain single. If martial status is a right collecting tool, how can we restrain homosexuals from an attempt at these rights? Perhaps, it is because when faced with something alien Americans tend to become primitive club-bangers. Perhaps, it is because when surroundings begin to change Americans hurl aspersions against the cause. Unknown to many, homosexually-parented families produce enlightened children and may even be seen logistically superior in the dollar-sign-filled eyes of governmental power.
Through the decades, the American “family” has morphed into an unidentifiable home structure. From the era of the nuclear Cleavers, to the extended Waltons, and now to the single-parent dwellings that litter suburbs, family life as never been so confusing to grasp. Divorce has sent a shockwave into cultural America ripping the family nucleus apart. The remaining nuclear shards operate as single parents attempting to provide their children with the full nucleus experience. From the 2000 census, statistics indicate that 27% of children under the age of 18 live in homes headed by one parent (Lugaila & Overturf 9). As this number stares down America's cultural chef, single-parent households have been tossed into the family pot diversifying an ever murkier stew. America's inhabitants have birthed yet another double-standard, accepting divorcees into the family soup but not homosexuals. The typical heterosexual points out gay families are phony because a father figure and a mother figure are lacking. Considering, through separation, many of these “heteros” manufacture family units bossed by only one parent, the nation's soup seems to be poisoned with hypocrites. The family recipe should be tweaked so a new spice may be added, ignoring the hypocrites boasting that their spice is better than another.
An additional strike my fellow “heterolings” cast upon homosexual union is the stereotype that gays and lesbians rear inferior children. It is as if these youngsters are viewed like Little Orphan Annie-neglected, abused, and deprived of a typical childhood. Cries for Daddy Warbucks to swoop away these homo-raised degenerates come in the form of Sharpie-covered signs stapled to wooden thatching. Picketers decree that children in gay families are emotionally damaged and will only enlarge the gay community as they are destined to become homosexual themselves. Lack of true investigation and a charged ignorance blinds bigots from witnessing the facts. A non-partial summary by the American Psychological Association covering countless studies over the past three decades concludes, “…there is no evidence to suggest…that psychosocial development among children of lesbian women or gay men is compromised relative to that among offspring of heterosexual parents” (Patterson 15). From this same review it is shown that, “the data do not suggest elevated rates of homosexuality among the offspring of lesbian or gay parents” (Patterson 10). More interesting findings of the review propose that, “…lesbian mothers' and gay fathers' parenting skills may be superior to those of matched heterosexual couples,” (Patterson 8) and, “…gay men are no more likely than heterosexual men to perpetrate child sexual abuse…” (Patterson 12). So, those with gaping minds and open eyes are able to see that homosexually-led families are not as foreign as they appear. While courtrooms install drive-thru divorce counters, gay couples push to provide nurturing surroundings for their children. And succeed. These children could even possess a heightened sense of acceptance born through experiencing their guardians crawl toward justice.
