Catholic Church | Gay Marriage | New York | Timothy Dolan

NY Archbishop: Same-Sex Marriage Is 'Orwellian Social Engineering'

Timothy Dolan, the Roman Catholic archbishop of New York, is still spouting his homophobic rhetoric. In a new blog post, he defends himself from accusations of bigotry by insisting that the Catholic Church is "not anti anybody; we are pro-marriage." That's not the first time he's used that excuse.

Dolan In that same blog post, Dolan calls same-sex marriage "Orwellian":

"To tamper with that definition, or to engage in some Orwellian social engineering about the nature and purpose of marriage, is perilous to all of us.  If the definition of marriage is continually being altered, could it not in the future be morphed again to include multiple spouses or even family members?"


"If big, intrusive government can re-define the most basic, accepted, revealed truth that marriage simply means one man + one woman + (hopefully) children, in a loving family, then, I’m afraid, Orwell’s works will no longer be on the fiction shelf.  As someone commented to me the other day, 'Wouldn’t it be better for our government to work on fixing schools than on redefining marriage?'"

In March, Dolan told 60 Minutes that same-sex marriage is equivalent to marrying one's own mother.

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Wouldn't it be better for churches to work on eliminating their pedophilia problems rather than perpetuating their traditions of bigotry and fear-mongering?

    Posted by: Mitch | May 14, 2011 11:35:39 AM

  2. Love the Orwell reference: "All pigs are equal..." This one is certainly more equal than the others.

    Posted by: Hue-Man | May 14, 2011 11:41:22 AM

  3. HAHAHA we're not the one worshiping a giant faceless "leader" who says we will be punished if we don't obey. Cognitive dissonance much?

    Posted by: Tonez | May 14, 2011 11:42:00 AM

  4. I can't believe any intelligent person can make that statement suggesting that "redefining" marriage is displacing work to better educate our children. I can barely wrap my mind around how utterly moronic that statement is.

    Posted by: Glenn | May 14, 2011 11:45:39 AM

  5. It's very simple, you smug, pontificating scum: no one is attempting to redefine your version of marriage nor how you proceed to implement or practice it within the confines of your "religion." Irrespective of any state granting of a certificate of marriage, you and your ilk will always be fully empowered to continue your perception and your practice of marriage within your theology - still mired and entrapped in the intellectual confines of the thirteenth century.

    Any such "redefinition" will apply only to the state's governance, implementation, and certification of a contractual matter between two consenting parties and the families that will (yes, very hopefully) result from such an expansion of marriage in the eyes of the state.

    Guess you've never heard of the concept of the separation of church and state, huh? You sanctimonious idiot.

    Posted by: dave02657 | May 14, 2011 11:46:22 AM

  6. his time would be better spent helping all people hurt by abusive members of his church. why is the church can get involved in everyones's life but hid the abusive priests from the law. if someone makes any inquiry into the church they scream victim and intolerance of catholics. they bring on themselves. beside how can my marrying a man be like marrying my mother. last thing i knew my mother didn't have a penus.

    Posted by: walter | May 14, 2011 11:51:06 AM

  7. why do these priests, who are nothing but emotionally-stunted and sexually-starved boys, and who are not allowed to have relationships with ANYONE (men or women), feel that they are some kind of authority on the complexities of intimacy and marriage?

    Posted by: EO | May 14, 2011 12:01:32 PM


    please vote in this poll, the christianists are way ahead.

    Posted by: Manfred | May 14, 2011 12:01:42 PM

  9. that flaby turkey neck he has screams GLUTTONY!!!!!!!!

    Posted by: | May 14, 2011 12:34:42 PM

  10. Wouldn't it be better if the Church fed the hungry, housed the homeless and tended to the needy, instead of hating those who chose to love, rather than molest children?

    Posted by: patrick nyc | May 14, 2011 1:04:20 PM

  11. I love how these Christians act like they personally came up with the notion of unions between individuals. Every culture has had these, and some did in fact acknowledge unions between members of the same sex, including the great all powerful church. Funny how history only matters when supporting their own myopic views.

    Posted by: LiamB | May 14, 2011 1:15:31 PM

  12. I wish there were a way to block all religious posts on Towleroad. I know I don't have to read them, but I invariably do, and they annoy the hell out of me with their simplistic repetition and utter lack of intellectual sophistication.

    As for Orwell, he painted a picture of a future were government controlled people's thoughts and actions, enslaving them. Marriage equality is a case of its supporters demanding change from government, seeking freedom and fairness. I don't see the parallel.

    Posted by: Paul R | May 14, 2011 1:45:38 PM

  13. to your church, boogieman, ......believe in the Little People if you want to, but stop f***ing with the children, stop wanting people to be sent to hell, stop calling homosexuals "disordered" (Benedict xvi), stop interfering in secular society, stop crushing the spirit and character of young people; dissolve Opus Dei, Legionairs of Christ, Knights of Columbus and Columbanus ant the other myriad lay and religious subversive organisation you have, and PLEASE get over your infallibility delusions

    Posted by: JackFknTwist | May 14, 2011 1:49:05 PM

  14. Does anyone actually believe that he really believes in the magic sky fairy? He's in it for the money, power, and boy ass.

    Posted by: homer | May 14, 2011 1:49:18 PM

  15. Sorry, the first half of my post disappeared ! maybe the gods thought it was for the best.......scary !

    Posted by: JackFknTwist | May 14, 2011 1:51:53 PM

  16. What's Orwellian is operating an organization where people are terrorized with burning in eternal flames into telling you their secret bad deeds or even thoughts, which can then be used to blackmail them when it becomes convenient. Even if the secrets are never exposed, it exerts pressure on people and coerces their behavior.

    Posted by: Randy | May 14, 2011 2:09:22 PM

  17. I went over and posted a comment, very simple, no foul language. Describing how my husband and I got married in 1996 (religious service, not legally recognized), and then AGAIN in 2008 (another religious service, this time legal). Our eleven year old son (adopted) asked, 'why are you doing this, aren't you ALREADY married?'.

    I can hardly wait to see if it passes moderation, or if some Archdiocesan Cyberchancellor decides it is insufficiently reverent toward Holy Mother Church.

    Posted by: Robert | May 14, 2011 2:32:28 PM

  18. "Now, gather 'round everyone! It's time to eat the dead guy and drink his blood — like we do every week."

    Posted by: KeithK | May 14, 2011 3:27:16 PM

  19. So Dolan is simply, pro-marriage... well, that's fantastic then, because so are 'the gays'!

    Problem solved. :)

    Posted by: pete N SFO | May 14, 2011 3:58:11 PM

  20. They are so pro-marriage that not a single member of the church hierarchy is allowed to marry. They say gay is bad because "what if everyone were." Well, what if everyone were in a celibate (sic) order?

    Posted by: Storey Institute | May 14, 2011 3:59:46 PM

  21. Dolan should keep drinking his beer, like he was during 60 Minutes... and stop trying to appear relevant and/ or intelligent. Looks like he has not missed many buffets, except the true buffets of real life. He's pretty consistent with Rome.. which is why Rome loves him, but so many people are deserting Rome.

    Posted by: pierre | May 14, 2011 4:22:08 PM

  22. Calling us "Orwellian" is kind of odd coming from a big brother.

    Posted by: Kevin | May 14, 2011 4:29:48 PM

  23. I added this comment to Dolan's article:
    John Patrick says:
    Your comment is awaiting moderation.
    May 14, 2011 at 3:45 pm


    I was going to leave more of a comment, but I understand that comments criticizing your article have been deleted. So I am going to add these comments to another blog where they will remain.

    I might add that you are following the traditions of your predecessors in opposing every single right that should belong to gay citizens as citizens of this country while saying that you “love and respect” us. Your predecessors and John Paul II and Benedict have opposed laws protecting our access to housing, public accommodations and the protection from job discrimination. You have opposed the rights of foreign partners of gay people to remain in this country without being thrown out, the rights of gay people to adopt, the rights of gay people to have legal recognition for their relationships.

    Benedict has denied that our relationships can be loving and he has called our relationships a threat to society. He has declared that gay couples do violence to the children they raise.

    You have opposed protection for our relationships and our families. You continue to declare that you are pro marriage when you attempt to impose your religious beliefs on the whole of society and to prevent or dissolve those legal marriages into which we have entered.

    You continue to overlook the violence that we often have to face and you overlook the suicides too many of our youths attempt or commit due to the negative things you say. You basically say that we are not worthy of full citizenship and full rights because you believe that our love is immoral based on some old biblical references (while conveniently overlooking the fact that your predecessors for centuries justified slavery on some old biblical passages).

    You neither love nor respect us when you oppose any legal recognition of any of our rights and of our loving relationships. Thank God that we are a society that is not ultimately a theocracy. God save us from the control of the priests and ayatollahs.

    We are not asking for you to bless our relationships in church any more than we are asking or demanding that you bless the relationships of atheists or Jews or thrice married and divorced persons in church. We just want you to get out of our way and stop putting much more money and energy and enthusiasm into opposing our rights than you do into the effort to provide health care for all and jobs for the jobless – and more effort and energy than you do in addressing the scandal of the oppression of the poor by the rich in our society.

    It is time for you to stop talking and start listening to us and our children. It is time for you to stop preaching to us about how much you love and respect us while you turn a deaf ear to our stories and try to drown out the reality of our lives with lies in unison with the National Organization of Marriage.

    How long will this post remain on your blog before you delete it as though it never existed, the same way you attempt to delete the rights and lives and stories of those of us who are gay as though we never existed – the same way you ignore the cries of those who are beaten and killed and those who commit suicide because of the words you preach about us from the pulpit and in the lying ads for which you pay?

    You are on the wrong side of history. The tide is turning and ultimately our relationships will be recognized and our right to marry will be guaranteed in law. You are on the wrong side of history because young people see through your arguments. You are on the wrong side of history because love is more powerful than hate in the end. And if you truly believe in a God of love, you or your successors will come to realize that contrary to what your pope says, our love is a blessing of the creator who made us who we are and who gave us the gift of love.

    Posted by: John Patrick | May 14, 2011 5:02:02 PM

  24. It's really not clear what they hope to gain by opposing gay civil marriage. I doubt it increases donations or advances any kind of PR agenda. The only thing that makes sense is that they are in a recruitment battle with other religions in 3rd world countries and this helps the image of the church in those countries. Of course they know it does not affect the church directly, just as existing divorce laws don't affect the church directly.

    Posted by: anon | May 14, 2011 5:14:48 PM

  25. @dave02657, I couldn't have said it better myself.

    Hey Pope-wanna-be, we're not trying to redefine marriage, we're simply expanding WHO gets to have it. The hets can still have their lovely lie of marriage, infidelity, ugly divorce and damaged children. Don't worry, we won't keep that from them.

    Posted by: johnny | May 14, 2011 5:30:30 PM

  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment


« «Roger McDowell Returns To Baseball, Apologizes Again« «