It took some fortitude to write this for the …

… opinion pages of The Washington Post:

It’s undeniable that, from age to age, marriage has been humanity’s greatest success and source of prosperity, crossing all cultures and religions. We shouldn’t mess with it.

But even more so to follow it up with this:

Full disclosure: I am gay. A few years ago, I was on the other side of the fence on this topic. But the more I read, thought, investigated and attempted to defend my position, the more I realized that I couldn’t. I feel very strongly that gay relationships should be supported by society. I have grown convinced, however, that the term “marriage” should not be altered or adjusted in any way.

I’m not, of course, saying that homosexuality is a good or morally upright thing—keeping in mind the distinction between homosexual tendencies and homosexual acts (see CCC, 2357-59). Still, I admire the honesty and integrity shown by the author, Doug Mainwaring. It would be interesting to hear more specifics about how and why his views changed. He also states:

Let’s face it: We should not attempt to force into an old construct something that was never meant for same-sex partnerships. We should welcome the opportunity to christen a new tradition, beginning a new chapter in the history of gays and lesbians within American society. Same-sex relationships are different from heterosexual relationships, and gay men and lesbians need to accept that and design their own tradition.

The problem, it seems to me, is that the most vocal homosexual activists are intent on having homosexuality viewed and declared as completely normal, mainstream, and wholesome as heterosexuality. The push for “same-sex marriage” is not, for many, a desire for domestic tranquility and monogamous commitment (although it is for some, surely), but for society’s stamp of full and unqualified approval of homosexual relationships. Having “their own tradition” means being an outsider—”different”, as Mainwaring puts it—and I cannot imagine that a large percentage of homosexuals will go for it.

A quick glance at some of the comments indicates that such is the case. “The writer is gay and a invovled [sic] with the National Capital Tea Party,” writes one reader. “It sounds like Jews for Hitler or something equally absurd.” Because, of course, Tea Party members are rounding up homosexuals and killing them. Please.

Read Mainwaring’s entire essay, “Why I oppose gay marriage” (Washington Post, Sept. 21, 2012).