Updated: February 13, 2014 6:29AM
As one who has ridden the matrimonial merry-go-round with only mixed results, I have decided to accept the Catholic Church’s offer of exculpation.
The church’s official view of marriage is that it is under fire by gays. By under fire, we mean they are gay, and we can’t stop them from being gay. And by that, we mean it’s not merely that they do “gay things,” but they “are gay.” It’s hideous.
Gays are doing something bad to heterosexual marriage, and we must construct moral fortresses to thwart the effects of their gayness upon us. For all we know, they sneak into your house at night and make you gay without warning or approval.
If you have a lousy marriage or have — gasp — ended one through the civil legal methods at your disposal, then it was not your fault.
It was gay people all along. Go, my son, and sin no more.
Whew! That’s a relief. Until now, I thought it was because I am a supercilious, sanctimonious, intemperate jerk. Until now I had stood before the court of public judgment with no useful cloak of invisibility.
But it turns out all those former in-laws were wrong. I’m fine. It’s the gays.
I don’t know how it was gay people. But it was.
Right after the Church announced that being gay will almost surely send you to hell — the big hammer in the Thor sub-ministry — they enforced hell through politics. The Indiana Legislature has an identical view.
Letting gay people be gay, as in not hiding gayness as any self-respecting gay person should do, not only adds to their sins, but it causes you distress, too.
You are diminished. Your religious rights are challenged. You are less of a sanctified, free citizen under God than you would be without their interference.
Because of, well, there’s the problem. I don’t know why. No clue.
The last person to make this case was our own Sen. Dan Coats, the only senator to rise recently and argue against banning discrimination against gays in the workplace. It’s not like other Republicans have stopped believing in bilious bigotry. It’s part of the franchise; it’s just that Coats was the only one who spoke up for it. But that’s just the Senate. There are plenty of ignoramuses in the House if the law is ever called for a vote there.
Here’s the Coats’ argument, which augments the Catholic Church position. The current non-law appropriately encourages employers to fire anyone for being gay; stop their promotion because they are gay; reject them from being hired because they are gay; even fire them because they MIGHT POSSIBLY be gay.
Their very gayness imperils religion, and we believe in the absolute right of religious expression, except for the ones that blow up young girls for going to school.
The Church certainly does not want litigation with more lawyers peering into its own gay sex issues. We understand that completely.
In the signature letter from the U.S. Conference of Bishops on this issue, the princes of the Church suggested: “No one should be an object of scorn, hatred, or violence for any reason, including his or her sexual inclinations.” However…
Yes, the dreaded conjunction.
However, the bishops said, the “definition of ‘sexual orientation’ was too vague, could include other forms of sexual conduct and would legitimize same-sex marriage.”
When sophistry must be argued aloud, it often sounds like gibberish, because it is. The bishop of Springfield, Ill., staged a “Mass of Sort-of Exorcism” this month to call down the seraphim against marriage equality in Illinois. Too late; the law passed.
But things are getting strange. Even the pope offered misgivings about judging people he does not understand. Bishops trembled.
Maybe gays have tricked the pope, too. Some gays are very sneaky that way, and don’t “look” gay or “sound” gay. They are so expertly camouflaged that you cannot tell they are smitten with the gay bug.
While they were ruining my married life, I never even saw them. But if their role in my problems is confirmed, I’ll expect a hefty alimony refund. An apology wouldn’t hurt, either.
I trust the Church. After all, who knows more about marriage than an organization run by aging celibates?
David Rutter was an editor at six community newspapers more than 40 years, including nearly a decade as managing editor of the Post-Tribune. His column appears Sundays in the Post-Tribune. Contact him at david. firstname.lastname@example.org.