Messing With Marriage

In the past week I have read many critical comments from politicians and columnists arguing that President Bush's support for a federal marriage amendment is divisive, politically motivated and will crush public debate on this issue of societal acceptance of homosexual marriage (“Bush Revs Up Marriage-Amendment Debate,” March 7-13). I believe President Bush is acting on his convictions and is promoting an opportunity for all Americans to participate in the affirmation of change of the traditional definition of marriage.

The proposal of a marriage amendment is done recognizing the right of a free people not to have activist judges and rogue mayors impose a redefinition of marriage without public debate. This amendment proposal does not stop the debate. The very process of pursing a constitutional amendment is the debate. It involves the people through their elected representatives in Congress and the state legislatures. No activist judicial agenda or veto by chief executives can preclude it.

I believe marriage is the union of a man and a woman and is the best way to raise children. This definition has been recognized for 5,000 years by all types of civilizations. I understand the necessity of the unmarried to be able to assign heirs, share title to real property and designate power of medical attorney, among other legal matters. This should be provided for by proper legislation, regardless of sexual orientation or whether a sexual relationship of homosexuals should not be approved.

MIKE MCKAY WAUCONDA, ILLINOIS

California vs. Charity

Regarding “‘Interference’ by Court Could Apply Church-wide” (March 14-20):

The California Supreme Court has ruled that the Catholic organization Catholic Charities is not a “religious employer” and therefore must provide contraception as part of its health care coverage. Failure to do so is considered discrimination against women. The reasoning is fundamentally flawed.

First of all, to label a practice discriminatory against women is to imply that something is being given to men that is not being given to women. Contraception is not being provided to male employees. For the vast majority of women, contraception is an elective medical intervention. It is not medically necessary. It is a lifestyle choice. These women should take personal responsibility for this choice and not expect it to be subsidized by their employer.

The second area of flawed logic is the argument that, because Catholic Charities engages in “secular” activities — such as low-income housing assistance, counseling and immigration services — and because it serves non-Catholic clients, it is the equivalent of a secular business. The court is obviously not aware of the Catholic doctrine regarding corporal works of mercy. This doctrine instructs Catholics to feed the hungry, give drink to the thirsty, clothe the naked, shelter the homeless, visit the sick and imprisoned, and bury the dead. The work of Catholic Charities is a direct response to this doctrine.

The California ruling threatens the religious freedom of Catholic physicians, nurses, pharmacists and hospitals. If a Catholic physician sees non-Catholic patients, is he obligated to provide them with contraception, abortion services, physician-assisted suicide or euthanasia? Religion is not something reserved for Sunday services and proselytizing. It is the standard by which every aspect of one's life is governed. This court decision is a direct assault on all those who try to faithfully live their religion, not just Catholics.

DENISE J. HUNNELL, MD

Burke, Virginia

Lenten Diets

“Is it Okay to Diet for Lent?” (Feb. 29-March 6) is correct as far as it goes in distinguishing dieting and fasting, but I think there is more to the story. Dieting is done for one's own benefit, but so is fasting. One is primarily material, the other spiritual. Lent should be a time of intensified penance through prayer, mortification and works of charity. And just as fasting might have beneficial physical “side effects,” temperance in diet for the purpose of health could also bring spiritual benefits, in Lent or any other season.

St. Thérèse of Lisieux points out that every action of daily life, however mundane, can be offered to God with great spiritual benefit. Even getting out of bed in the morning, doing our daily work and being patient with others can be worthy mortifications if offered to God in a penitential spirit. Why not offer also what we do for health — diet, exercise, getting enough sleep — as little crosses?

Human beings rarely do anything with completely pure motives. All of us carry some selfishness into what we do. Perhaps the natural/ supernatural calculus should not be “either/or” but “both/and.” Christ became incarnate and offered his body for us on the cross, redeeming the whole of creation, matter as well as spirit. Maintaining our health is a moral obligation. Why not invite God into our efforts?

WILLIAM WHITE

Franklin Park, Illinois

Kids Facing Evil

I agree with and appreciate the column “Kids Have the Right to be Rightly Disturbed” by Barbara Nicolosi (March 7-13). I have heard parents discussing the subject before, but no one as of yet has been up front and open about it. There is so much evil, immorality and grotesqueness in the world that we can't possibly shut out all of it.

One of the most important points Nicolosi made was: “Even if you could block out the culture, how is that a Christian response? A better strategy is to parent with the media, not against it. The key is to introduce your child to a kind of evil before the world would introduce it to them. Parents need to get there before Satan does with his tricks and disguises.” The last two sentences are extremely important. Nicolosi has put into words what myself and others would have trouble doing if we attempted it.

A second point Nicolosi made more indirectly is that not all evil appears attractive, even if made to look as such. For example, many viewers of The Lord of the Rings film trilogy have been repulsed by the hideousness of the Orcs. But that shouldn't disturb them the way it seems to have done. (Though young children should not see the Orcs! This kind of evil brings inevitable nightmares until they reach a certain age. But not all movies have to be viewable for all ages in order to be great films.) That's what evil really is: hideous. We have to face it. The Orcs are the epitome of visual evil. And anyway, who wants villains that are laughable?

GENEVIEVE CUNNINGHAM

Boerne, Texas

Correction

“Teaching With the Church? Gonzaga Won't Say” (March 14-21) said Gonzaga University trains deacons for the Diocese of Spokane, Wash. This is incorrect. The Spokane Diocese's deacon-formation program is organized and carried out by the directors of deacon formation for the diocese. Most of the classes and formation sessions take place at Bishop White Seminary in Spokane.