In the last few years, the law has been changed
in Ontario and in Canada to change the definition of marriage
from its natural law meaning to a "constructed"
(invented) meaning to satisfy the novel "equality
right" of same-sex partners.
The
"same sex marriage" controversy has been the subject
of many articles and arguments. For example, Cere and Farrow
write:
"Marriage is a unique
cultural institution that affirms and supports a distinct social ecology in
human culture: the bridging of the gender gap; the generation of life through
the fusion of the sexes; the birth-right of children to know, to be connected
to, and to be in stable relationship with, their natural parents.
Marriage pre-exists
European colonization and reaches back into Canada's aboriginal traditions. It
is also a pillar of the Judeo-Christian traditions that have helped to shape
Canadian life. In the recent parliamentary hearings aboriginal, Muslim and other
cultural or religious groups in our diverse society have urged parliamentarians
to resist proposals to abolish (by over-extension) the legal recognition of this
distinctive human institution so vital to Canadian culture and history.
Without implying that
there is one comprehensive understanding of marriage to which everyone ought to
give full assent, nevertheless there are core elements, purposes, and
aspirations of marriage that have won wide approval and deserve to be handed on
from one generation to the next:
Marriage is based on the
free consent of one man and one woman to join as husband and wife in a union of
life together.
Marriage is truest to its
nature when monogamous and faithful.
Marriage serves the vast
and complex social-sexual ecology of male-female bonding (99.5% of all couples
in Canada are heterosexual).
Marriage serves the
procreativity of male/female bonding; conjugal union between a man and a woman
is the only social union that can be a reproductive union.
Marriage, as an
institution, has a child-centred dimension; it directs mothers and fathers to
the care and support of their children.
Marriage establishes the
norm that children have a prima facie right and a need to know, to be connected
to, and to be raised by their own mother and father, unless exceptional adverse
circumstances dictate otherwise.
Marriage is generational
and genealogical; it binds together the past and the future.
Marriage pre-exists the
state and religion; while it is appropriately recognized, regulated and affirmed
by the state and religions, nevertheless, it is not created or determined by the
state or religions.
While marriage has a
unique and indispensable place in human existence, nevertheless it is neither
necessary nor good that every human person should enter into this particular
form of social union. All of the above can be affirmed without prejudice to the
fact that there are other forms of personal relationships that have their own
distinct dignity and purpose."1
The
FCP supports
and defends the institutional value of marriage, being the union
between a woman and a man to the exclusion of all others5.
D.H. Lawrence recognized: "The marriage bond is the fundamental
connecting link in Christian society. Break it, and you will have to go back to
the overwhelming dominance of the State".
The natural
law definition of marriage is recognized as valuable to society.
Family and taxation laws in western societies have recognized
this value. Any
other partnership, whether loving, blood, heterosexual,
polygamist or
otherwise, are instead recognized as destructive to society.
Governments,
that impose taxes on families for the "common good",
when spending the collected revenue must account for it and
explain the return on society. Since other relationships are not
as valuable to society as the traditional family based on
marriage, or may even be damaging to individuals and to society,
only this definition will be used in the provision of spousal
benefits and for any program funded or administered by the
government.
REFERENCES:
[1] "Statement on the Status
of Marriage in Canada", 18 June 2003, Dan Cere
and Douglas Farrow,
Document
signed by 30 Canadian scholars.
[5]
"Defending
the Family: Why We Resist Gay Activism", By Peter
Briggs, Family Research Council, October 2004.
