NEWS
By John E. McIntyre and The Baltimore Sun | March 10, 2012
We've been hearing a lot about marriage lately from celibate clergy and other experts, so I thought that a layman's prspective might be of interest. Much of the talk keeps returning to procreation as the fundamental component of marriage, presumably because of the "be fruitful and multiply" injunction in the Creation story, though neither the church nor the state objects to the marriage of people who are past childbearing age, or unable to bear children, or uninterested in bearing children.
NEWS
February 2, 2011
Since when are we living in the 1950s? Or the 1850s or the 1750s or the 1650s, for that matter for a newspaper to print an op-ed stating that the only reason for marriage is for procreation ( "Same-sex marriage is contrary to the public interest," Feb. 2)? I am a happily married, heterosexual, devoutly Christian woman with three children, and I am absolutely appalled you would print that. Peter Sprigg is entitled to his opinion, but it is irresponsible of you to print it. Our society has long since recognized that marriage is about the love and commitment two people have for each other.
NEWS
February 20, 2011
If Maryland becomes a same-sex marriage state, there is no doubt that some openly gay men and women will come to church demanding acceptance. Under the false pretense that they are married, in their minds they should not be denied church membership. But what the world must understand is that as Christians, we're not homophobic and bigoted as many would depict us. We do not hate men and women caught up in the homosexual lifestyle. We simply believe that marriage is ordained of God and the family is sacred.
NEWS
February 7, 2012
The recent letter from R. Smith ("The flawed arguments against same-sex marriage," Feb. 6) is false and disingenuous. The logic is fallacious because the examples do not define the object, in this case the Biblical definition of marriage. The bad examples and failures do not change marriage as between one man and one woman. And they do not justify changing marriage to include same-sex couples. God had a lot to say about marriage. Most specifically, in the beginning, God created humans as male and female.
NEWS
February 9, 2012
In response to R. Smith's recent letter ("The flawed arguments against same-sex marriage," Feb. 6), it is quite clear to me that the writer has never read the Bible. God made it quite clear that a marriage is not made of two people of the same gender. Specifically, I refer to Matthew 19:4-6, "that at the beginning, the creator made them male and female, and said, For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh. ... So they are no longer two, but one. Therefore what God has joined together, let man not separate.
NEWS
April 19, 2012
I can understand the Catholic Church not recognizing or performing same-sex marriages. I can also understand the church not recognizing or performing marriages where one party is divorced and has a spouse living. The church takes the attitude that marriage is between one man and one woman for life. Fine. But I don't understand the church taking such a different attitude to the two situations. I don't recall the church ever denouncing Ronald Reagan for living in open adultery - even though in the eyes of the church that is what his "marriage" to Nancy Davis amounted to, assuming his first marriage was a valid marriage and not a sham.