"
On 6 Aug 10, the Catholic News Agency reported that U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, in his ruling which overturned California’s Proposition 8, listed a document written by then Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, as an example of religious references which “harm gays and lesbians.”
In his ruling regarding Perry vs. Schwarzenegger, Walker's 77th finding of fact states, “Religious beliefs that gay and lesbian relationships are sinful or inferior to heterosexual relationships harm gays and lesbians.”
In the citation of testimony and documentation which supports the finding, several statements and documents of religious authority were listed. The finding of fact also referenced the deposition of two experts, Katherine Young, a professor of religious studies at McGill University, and Paul Nathanson, a researcher at McGill’s Faculty for Religious Studies.
The first citation referenced the deposition of Nathanson which included the statement, “Religions
teach that homosexual relations are a sin and that contributes to gay bashing.”
The second citation referenced the deposition of Young which included the statement, “There is a religious component to the bigotry and prejudice against gay and lesbian individuals.” The citation specifically calls out Catholicism by referencing that the “Catholic Church views homosexuality as 'sinful.'”
In addition to Catholic documents, the finding of fact also referenced documents from the Southern Baptist Convention, Evangelical Presbyterian Church, Free Methodist Church, The Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, and the Orthodox Church of America.
The list of references concluded with a summary of a statement by Kenneth P Miller, a professor of government at Claremont McKenna College. The summary stated, that Miller, “agrees with his former statement that 'the religious characteristics of California’s Democratic voters' explain why so many Democrats voted for Barack Obama and also for Proposition 8.”
The reference was apparently related to questioning by plaintiffs on data showing 84 percent of those who attend church weekly voted yes on Proposition 8, 54 percent of those who attend church occasionally voted no on Proposition 8 and 83 percent of those who never attend church voted no on Proposition 8. The implication is that religion prejudices; and therefore, invalidates the votes of those who vote consistent with their religious beliefs. Extending this logic, only votes consistent with a secular belief may bear the will of the people.
The Catholic document referenced in the ruling as causing “harm” begins, “No ideology can erase from the human spirit the certainty that marriage exists solely between a man and a woman, who by mutual personal gift, proper and exclusive to themselves, tend toward the communion of their persons. In this way, they mutually perfect each other, in order to cooperate with God in the procreation and upbringing of new human lives.”
The document concludes, “The Church teaches that respect for homosexual persons cannot lead in any way to approval of homosexual behaviour or to legal recognition of homosexual unions. The common good requires that laws recognize, promote and protect marriage as the basis of the family, the primary unit of society. Legal recognition of homosexual unions or placing them on the same level as marriage would mean not only the approval of deviant behaviour, with the consequence of making it a model in present-day society, but would also obscure basic values which belong to the common inheritance of humanity. The Church cannot fail to defend these values, for the good of men and women and for the good of society itself.”
Cited Articles and Posts
Catholic News Agency (6 Aug 10)
Vatican (3 Jun 2003)
Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons
United States District Court for the Northern District of California (5 Aug 10)
https://ecf.cand.uscourts.gov/cand/09cv2292/
"