According to Catholic Chastity Site, If You Are Impotent, Your Marriage Doesn’t Count October 21, 2013

According to Catholic Chastity Site, If You Are Impotent, Your Marriage Doesn’t Count

The folks over at the Catholic-based Chastity Project (unofficial slogan: Sex can wait! Masturbate!… But don’t do that either!) are just trying to get our young folks to stop banging long enough to go to Church. It’s a hard job (*hehe*) but apparently someone has to do it.

If you feel particularly masochistic, you may want to take a few minutes to peruse their website. And if you’re suuuuper self-loathing, you may want to click on the “Homosexuality” tab. (It’s right between the “Pornography, Etc.” and “Birth Control” tabs. Can’t miss it.)

Under the Q&A section, the website gives a lengthy (OhMyGodIt’sSoFreakingLong) explanation about why two people of the same sex can’t really get married.

Since you probably don’t have all day to read their long, long, long diatribe (Seriously. It’s 2,800 words long. No joke), I’ll bring you some of the more bonkers highlights.

They kick off by basically saying the same thing I would when waiting tables:

“I know, ma’am. If it were up to me, I would totally allow you to substitute your side of fries for an additional steak, but my d-bag manager says I can’t!” Except in this scenario, the steak is letting two consenting adults get married and my d-bag manager is the Bible.

If you’re like me and you have friends who experience same-sex attractions, you know that this is a deeply personal and sensitive issue. Although some people who experience these attractions are opposed to re-defining marriage, others who wish to marry often feel that the Church is discriminating against them and is unfairly opposed to their desire to simply love one another. However, the issue of same-sex marriage isn’t ultimately about equal rights, bigotry, hatred, or even about homosexuality.

The issue is about the definition of marriage and who has the authority to define it. For example, if a woman wanted to marry two men, the Church does not believe it has the authority to redefine marriage in order to accommodate her wish. Similarly, if a husband decided he no longer wished to be married to his wife, but instead wanted to marry another woman, the Church does not have the authority to pretend he could be validly married to anyone other than his wife. As Jesus said, “Every one who divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery” (Luke 16:18).

For those of you keeping score at home, because a roughly-2,000-year-old book says so, gay people can’t get married and divorced people can’t get remarried in the eyes of the Church. Even though divorced people totally can get remarried in the eyes of the Church. (I guess the precedence for the Bible dictating law is way broken… but what do I know? I’m just a crazy person rambling on the Internet.)

But those aren’t the only examples of non-valid marriages:

For a valid marriage to take place, the union must be free, total, faithful, and ordered toward procreation. All these characteristics are necessary. For example, who would consider a marriage to be valid if the husband forced the woman to marry him?

Right. We can’t find any examples in the Bible of women being forced into marriage.

What about a couple who agreed to marry and have children, but refused to be faithful? According to the Church, these would not be real marriages, even if the couples had legal marriage certificates. Similarly, if two people cannot have the kind of sexual relations that are designed to give life, they are incapable of marriage.

This really isn’t a new thought — there are a lot of anti-gay marriage advocates who root their arguments in the fact that a homosexual couple can’t reproduce. But then the fine, fine folks over at Chastity Project just took the argument to its logical conclusion:

Because of this, some argue that the Church is “discriminating against gays.” This is an understandable reaction, but realize that the Church is not singling out same-sex couples. In fact, the Church also believes that heterosexual couples are incapable of marriage if they are impotent. Not to be confused with sterility (a condition in which a couple is able to have intercourse but unable to have children), impotency means that a person is incapable of having intercourse.

This couple’s marriage is clearly a sham because… well… you know

This is quite a leap to say the least. So, before anyone gets married, they have to double-check that all of their sex parts are working properly? Hands up for anyone who wants that gig!

The reason why only male and female bodies are capable of becoming one is because they are made for each other. Of all the biological systems in a person’s body (circulatory, nervous, digestive, and so on), only the reproductive system cannot fulfill its purpose without uniting to a member of the opposite sex. Consider what happens when the cord of a lamp is united to a power outlet. Because the two were made for each other, light is created. The same is true with sexual complementary and the creation of human life.

First of all, stop using science in stupid ways to justify your absurd points of view. Second of all, that lamp metaphor is super creepy. “United to a power outlet”? *shudder* (I guess the Chastity group bans power strips at their headquarters because… polygamy?)

So, they continue talking about how marriage wasn’t invented by the government or the Church, that it was originally designed to bind a father to his family. But wait, there’s more!

Let us assume, though, that marriage doesn’t need to be ordered toward bodily union and family life. If marriage were redefined to be about emotional union and cohabitation, why would it need to be permanent? Why would it need to be sexually exclusive or restricted to two people? Many same-sex couples agree that faithfulness and permanence are essential to marriage. But the fact remains: If the traditional view of marriage discriminates against same-sex couples, then won’t the mere recognition of same-sex marriage discriminate against others who wish to have “marriages” that aren’t monogamous or permanent? How could those who favor same-sex marriage legally refuse marriage to them?

As it stands, people in open marriages (including Christians) or short-term marriages (on purpose or not) are already allowed to get married without a problem. As for the “more than two people” argument, if it ever became something we seriously needed to consider in our society, it’d be a separate conversation not tied to legalizing same-sex marriage. They’re slippery sloping their way through bad arguments… and I’m pretty sure the “Pornography, Etc.” section of their site forbids anything slippery.

The whole thing rambles on for quite some time after that. A lot of the same old stuff about how a kid needs two opposite-sex parents, and so forth. I’m sure I’m missing some good stuff, but I’m just going to quote one more awesome part before I relieve myself of the misery of re-reading their whole thing:

All the issues mentioned above are emotionally volatile and often ignite heated debates. Those who argue in favor of same-sex marriage claim that others need to learn to celebrate diversity and become more tolerant. But at the same time, such advocates will not tolerate those who believe in traditional marriage. Laws are enforced against those who do not agree with the alternative lifestyle, and same-sex marriage is portrayed in the media as a human-rights issue, equivalent to interracial marriage. But if belief in traditional marriage is on par with racism, then those who support it will be viewed like racists. They will be scorned and looked down upon as close-minded, hateful bigots.

It’s only fair that an anti-pornography group would have no problem with martyrbation: We’re being bullied by the media for not letting other people do what they want! We’re the real victims here!

The whole piece wraps up with this rather odd rant about how gay people should encourage their partners to be chaste because, after all, that’s what this is all about, right guys?

So, a few take-away points:

  • Only the Church can define marriage. So I hope none of you guys married, say, under a gazebo or something, because that wedding totally did not count. [Hemant’s note: DAMMIT!]
  • If you’re sterile, you can get married. If you’re impotent, get outta here. Jesus doesn’t want to be a part of your threesome.
  • If you are pro-gay marriage, you are intolerant against intolerant people.
  • It’s all about love. And to love someone properly, you need to stop having sex with them. Unless you’re married. Which a bunch of you should not be allowed to do.

There you have it. Words of advice from Team Chastity. I’m sure they’ve convinced all of you to stay away from unmarried sex! Right?!

(Thanks to Kathleen for the link! Image via Shutterstock.)

Browse Our Archives

What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
error: Content is protected !!