The rainbows have been nagging at me, because I did not deal with the gay marriage issue at all adequately in my last post.

With such a huge issue, it’s not enough to be in favor of something just because one wants to be in favor of it, because it seems like the right opinion. If other people have powerful and dissenting opinions, one cannot simply walk away from their arguments as if one cannot articulate an appropriately complex and sound counterargument.

Is it enough to say, “Jesus never talked about gays.” No, it’s not. Is it enough to say, “Sex wasn’t that important to Jesus, because He didn’t talk about it much.” No, it’s not.  He did tell that woman, “Don’t sin anymore.” (As He said to everyone.)

“Why not decide for yourselves what is right?” He said. There we have a decisive endorsement of the concept that one ought not be afraid to think for one’s self and come to one’s own conclusions. And if Jesus says, “Joe, explain yourself,” I’ll have the opportunity to explain myself and my argument will be judged on its merits. If my argument is insufficiently persuasive compared to another argument, let the better argument prevail.

Opponents of gay marriage and gayness in general have their arguments, and what pains me, as a Catholic, is that many visible and powerful Catholics are making flawed arguments.

As an American, and a Catholic, I take government seriously. In one of His more memorable episodes, Jesus looked at the coin and said, “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s.” As we give to the government what belongs to the government.

The government is entitled to legitimacy, to our respect for it as the legitimate governing body of our nation, and to our demands that it uphold its and our principles.

One of my demands on our government is that it protect and promote the welfare of everyone subject to its laws. On that basis, the government is obligated to allow and facilitate gay marriage. Clearly and simply, this is a civil rights issue. Complicate it however much, whoever wants to, it still comes back to that.

That the Catholic Church has opposed laws advocating civil protections for gays against discrimination has been incomprehensible and embarrassing to me.

One cannot wish away the sexual issues, though.

The beginning and end of this aspect of the issue is this: sex is meant for procreation.

Yes, it is.

Is that truly the beginning and end of this issue?

Oh no.

Sex might be an individual’s primary and most primal expression of individuality. (If it’s not, it’s near the top of the list.)

To use dichotomies for the sake of discussion, sex is a constructive force within one’s life, or a destructive force. Selfless vs. selfish.

If not a means of procreation, it is an ultimate expression of intimacy, acceptance, and trust that a human being is compelled toward as an essential part of the human experience. In such a case, sex is a positive and creative force expressive of the highest human dignity as experienced by that individual.

There is the letter of the law, and the spirit of the law, and in the spirit of human dignity, sexuality is one of the aspects of the human experience that is as much about soul as about body, soul and body being not two halves of a false dichotomy, but a whole.