Human Life International President Fr. Shenan J. Boquet expressed disappointment Wednesday with the United States Supreme Court rulings on the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and California’s Proposition 8 but said that no matter what the court decided, God’s definition of marriage has not, and will not, change and must continue to be defended.
“Since marriage is an institution that predates any government, the nature and definition of marriage were never in doubt, and thus could not justly be changed by any court or vote,” Fr. Boquet says. “Marriage still is, and has always been, a covenant by which one man and one woman establish a partnership for life that is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of children.”
“We must continue to demand that our political leaders recognize and protect this most natural institution, especially in this time of intense bigotry and discrimination toward those who defend marriage in the public square,” he adds.
“Most Americans know that this debate over marriage will never ultimately be settled by the court, for at least two reasons. First, those who are leading the assault on marriage have demonstrated again and again their disdain for laws that defend marriage and for the will of those with whom they disagree. Theirs is a crusade against both faith and reason, and they are no more likely to stop with a court decision than are the defenders of marriage.”
“Second,” he says, “the definition of marriage is not determined by any court or any legislative vote. A just nation recognizes and upholds the true meaning of marriage for the common good of the people and the institutions of the nation.
“Our larger task remains the same—to remind all people of good will that without marriage, there is no prosperous and unified future for any nation. As the lifetime, faithful and life-welcoming union of one woman and one man, marriage is naturally the best place to welcome children into the world and form them in love and truth. The more a society understands this natural fact, the healthier and more unified it will be. The more this natural fact is attacked, the more divided we will become, needing ever more expensive governmental solutions (welfare, prisons, etc.) to compensate for the natural good that has been discarded.”
“Finally,” Boquet concludes, “we note that these decisions do not bode well for the freedom of those religious institutions, such as the Catholic Church, who can only uphold the true definition of marriage. We expect that persecution of the Church will increase as opponents of true marriage demand that no dissent be tolerated, and that religious institutions participate in performing ‘marriage’ ceremonies for same-sex couples or suffer charges of discrimination. We are prepared for these inevitable events, and we stand in solidarity and hope with all who defend marriage.”
