Catholic Church | Gay Marriage | New York | News | Pope Benedict | Timothy Dolan | Vatican

NY Archbishop on Catholics: 'We're Not Anti-Gay, We're Pro...Marriage'


New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan told the New York Post this week that same-sex marriage advocates are "asking for trouble" in their quest for equality.

Said Dolan: "We believe that human beings are hard-wired with a sense of right and wrong. It's sort of in our DNA. And there are certain things that deep down we just know, because nature, and nature's God has implanted that sense within us. That's what philosophers, not even Catholic ones, like Aristotle, call natural law. There's an in-built code of right and wrong that's embedded in the human DNA...Hard-wired into us is a dictionary, and the dictionary defines marriage as between one man, one woman for life, please God, leading to the procreation of human life. And if we begin to tamper with the very definition of marriage, then we're going to be in big trouble. We're not anti-gay -- we're pro the most basic definition of marriage."

Watch the interview, in which Dolan says "we're not against gays" and "the Catholic church would defend the human dignity of gay people," AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Fuck him. Uh, Aristotle was homosexual? LMAO!!

    Posted by: Bobby | Apr 23, 2009 12:08:42 PM

  2. That is the biggest load of shit Ive have heard today.

    "we're not anti-gay,we're pro-marriage"

    In other words they are anti-gay,they dont feel that gay & lesbian people should have a right to be married.

    Rationalizing your own bigotry.Thats a big low.

    Like kathy griffin said

    "what the fuck is it to you"


    Posted by: Yaz | Apr 23, 2009 12:09:57 PM

  3. I like how he cited Aristotle to justify opposition to same sex relationships. And it's cute that a (supposedly) celibate man would speak of "natural law"...seeing how celibacy is completely unnatural. And who is a better authority on marriage than someone who chooses not to be married because his cult tells him not to?

    Great stuff.

    Posted by: paul c | Apr 23, 2009 12:13:04 PM

  4. Reminds me of South Africa's apartheid-era government: "we're not anti-black, we just don't want to let them vote."

    Posted by: Craig | Apr 23, 2009 12:16:38 PM

  5. i've always wondered about the catholic view that marriage is about families and procreation

    does that mean that people who are infertile shouldn't be allowed to get married?
    or the elderly?

    it would seem that by their logic if you do not plan on reproduction, for whatever reason you choose not to, then you shouldn't be allowed to get married

    Posted by: reddevilboy | Apr 23, 2009 12:20:02 PM

  6. I wish the people would stop pretending to know what God wants. He's a big boy, he can speak for himself/herself. And so am I, for that matter.

    Separation of church and state, NOW!

    Posted by: JTlvr | Apr 23, 2009 12:23:15 PM

  7. He's right when he says "...human beings are hard-wired with a sense of right and wrong..." That's how I know Christianity and specifically the Catholic Church is wrong.

    Posted by: JSH | Apr 23, 2009 12:25:14 PM

  8. I find it interesting that the church takes no issue with the LACK of 'seperation of church and state'.

    This guy is not an elected official. He's simply willing to spew Catholic rhetoric to the masses, and the media gives him the platform. Who's he to speak for people who had no say in his recent promotion within the church?

    Posted by: jim | Apr 23, 2009 12:26:45 PM

  9. Yes indeed, my dear bishop, and that concept of natural law that you quote so effusively to defend that hardwired sense of right and wrong in people, was used by Aristotle himself to condone *natural* slavery, i.e., the fact that some people are born to be slaves.

    Posted by: Blue dog | Apr 23, 2009 12:33:10 PM

  10. We're hardwired with a dictionary? Congrats to this fuckwit, that's easily the stupidest argument on gay marriage I've heard yet.

    Posted by: Glenn | Apr 23, 2009 12:35:58 PM

  11. It is a sign you have lost the debate when all you can resort to is "we just feel we know this is right/wrong".

    I was a bad debater in middle and high school, and I could have destroyed that one myself.

    Posted by: Andrew K | Apr 23, 2009 12:38:51 PM

  12. 50 years ago this butthead would have been saying" We're not anti-negro, we're pro-segregation."

    Posted by: Mark | Apr 23, 2009 12:40:19 PM

  13. "I'm not anti-gay, I'm pro marriage."
    "I'm not anti-Jew, I'm pro-oven."
    "I'm not anti-black, I'm pro-lynching."
    Shut. The. Fuck. Up. Stay out of the civil marriage debate and keep your ever-shrinking church to yourself.

    Posted by: MikeMick | Apr 23, 2009 12:46:37 PM

  14. I don't pay attention to what child fuckers have to say.

    Posted by: JohnInManhattan | Apr 23, 2009 12:47:28 PM

  15. The archbishop will excuse me if I choose to transcend the hard-wiring of my primal ape brain. It's a human thing.

    Posted by: Scott H | Apr 23, 2009 12:50:13 PM

  16. I’m not about to take moral advice from the Roman Catholic Hierarchy, who willfully covered up generations of sexual abuse by its own members. The Hierarchy needs to have a serious talk about reality as it impacts dogma. The Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith is one of the august and influential offices of the Hierarchy:

    “Slavery itself, considered as such in its essential nature, is not contrary to the natural and divine law, and there can be several just titles of slavery and these are referred to by approved theologians and commentators of the sacred canons. … It is not contrary to the natural and divine law for a slave to be sold, bought, and exchanged or given.”

    This missive was composed for Pope Pius IX by the Congregation for the Doctrine of Faith. This is the same “congregation” of Vatican bureaucrats (headed by Ratzinger before his ascension) who a few years ago offered up the admonishment to Catholic politicians about supporting any type of legal recognition for same-sex relationships–everything from marriage to civil unions to domestic partnership statutes.

    Says Ratzinger, “To give the support of one’s vote to such harmful legislative text for the common good of society is a gravely immoral act,” according to ZENIT [an international news agency].

    As I understand it, natural and divine law is not something that can be changed by man. It is deity-given and thus immutable to the whims of man. The same group of celibate, dress-wearing patriarchs who says that it’s perfectly okay for people to be “sold, bought, and exchanged or given” is the same group calling the legal recognition of same-sex marriages, a “gravely immoral act.”

    I don’t know about anybody else, but I don’t think that a group of people who condone and support the buying and selling of people should be pontificating about gravely immoral acts. The fact that these celibate, dress-wearing freaks feel it perfectly okay lecture about the morality or immorality of human sexuality, while hiding for generations the abuse inflicted upon children by their membership, is an example of the deepest hypocrisy I can imagine.

    Fuck them and the dresses they rode in on.

    Posted by: David | Apr 23, 2009 12:54:14 PM

  17. Apparently he learned his science from Aristotle and mixed that up with some modern scientific terms like DNA. It is sad that a so called religious leader can be that ignorant.

    Posted by: simon | Apr 23, 2009 12:54:30 PM

  18. What a sad life these religious folks lead...supposedly trying to "save" others when they can't even save themselves from their own illogical stupidity. :)

    Posted by: SFshawn | Apr 23, 2009 1:00:39 PM

  19. I'm not anti Catholic—I'm just pro separation of Church & State.

    That's a lie. I am anti Catholic, at least in terms of their, or any other religious group that says ONE word about a secular law, keeping their civil tax exempt status.

    Alas, this will never change in my lifetime, and is unlikey in that of anyone reading this.

    SO, in the meantime, it is all the more important that we aggressively and unapologetically call him a BIGOT!

    Posted by: Leland Frances | Apr 23, 2009 1:01:25 PM

  20. That big puffy queen. He's probably sucking load after load through the "glory hole" that is his confession booth.

    Posted by: Dishy | Apr 23, 2009 1:06:57 PM

  21. Did I miss the part where that if gays were allowed to get married that straight people all of a sudden couldn't get married anymore???

    Posted by: Ford | Apr 23, 2009 1:07:46 PM

  22. so with the statement "the dictionary defines marriage as between one man, one woman for life" then I say that divorce should be illegal. Since that's what he's telling us is the proper thing to do.

    Posted by: Dan | Apr 23, 2009 1:10:13 PM

  23. Can Mr. Dolan explain how two men or two women getting married affects his own marriage for the worse?

    Aha! I thought so!

    All this wisdom on the family by people who have no families.

    Posted by: Esther Blodgett | Apr 23, 2009 1:21:53 PM

  24. Wouldn't the most basic definition of marriage be: two loving people?

    Posted by: Scott B. | Apr 23, 2009 1:24:27 PM

  25. We are not Anti-Jew, we just do not want THEM staying in our Hotels, joining our Country Clubs, or living in our neighborhoods(40's - 50's)! We are not anti-negro, we just do not want THEM to live in neighborhoods, marry our white women or attend any of our colleges or schools(post 1900 - 1960's), we are not anti- gay they can do as they wish BUT not enter into CIVIL MARRIAGE (today)! "ALL MEN ARE CREATED EQUAL"! U S Constitution - Bill of Rights

    You tell me it's not about rights and equal protection under the US Constitution?

    Posted by: alex in boston | Apr 23, 2009 1:30:13 PM

  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment


« «Report: One LGBT Person Killed Every Two Days in Brazil« «