Ethics Quote of the Week

“Some, including the archbishop, have argued that by providing health care to a gay or lesbian spouse we are somehow legitimizing gay marriage. Providing health care to a gay or lesbian partner — a basic human right, according to Church teaching — is an end in itself and no more legitimizes that marriage than giving communion to a divorced person legitimizes divorce, or giving food or shelter to an alcoholic legitimizes alcoholism.”

—–Tim Sawina, former chief operating officer of Catholic Charities, in a letter protesting the Washington D.C.-based organization’s recent decision, dictated by Archbishop Donald W. Wuerl, to eliminate health benefits for all new employees’ spouses in response to the legalization of same-sex marriage in D.C.

Even if one is inclined to be sympathetic to the Catholic Church’s plight in the gay marriage issue, as it finds itself locked into a centuries-old moral code that declares homosexuality a sin while the world steadily rejects the premise as ignorant, cruel, and wrong, the Catholic Charities decision is indefensible. It is especially brain-melting to try to justify such a decision by a charitable social service organization. Taking a service or benefit away from everyone to avoid having to provide it to those you reject for legitimate or illegitimate reasons is cutting off one person’s nose to spite another’s face. Sawina has an unanswerable argument. The Church teaches charity towards all, and providing a benefit simply acknowledges the recipient’s humanity; it does not imply approval of the recipient’s conduct.

Someone should explain to Mr. Sawina, however, that alcoholism is a disease, and a rather nasty one. It doesn’t require “legitimizing.” You can take the executive out of Catholic Charities, but you can’t take the Catholic Charities out of the executive, I guess.

2 thoughts on “Ethics Quote of the Week

  1. Interesting how everything is interconnected, and by that, I mean in relation to how Health Insurance has become a “requirement” and is no longer a “benefit”. Well, this organization just kicked it right back into the “benefit” category, and their “benefits” package will have a deep implication in the talent they acquire.

    The new policy will most likely affect young heterosexual men seeking a family. I’m not sure what the going rate for hospital delivery of a baby is, but it can’t be cheap.

    I wonder if they plan on offering health care for employee’s children, and if hospitals would treat the baby and not the mother.

  2. Pingback: Ethics Dunce: Itawamba County, Miss. School Board; Ethics Hero: Constance MacMillan « Ethics Alarms

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.