Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

Gay marriage is no different, should be accepted

Religious Reflections

Published: Thursday, September 27, 2012

Updated: Thursday, September 27, 2012 15:09

Four years ago, my best friend Matt told me he was gay. I was so proud of him for opening up and accepting himself. Since we were young, Matt and I had been imagining our weddings; however, gay marriage is not legal in the United States.

Technically, the Church and State are supposed to be two completely separate institutions that stand on their own. Yet, the main reason gay marriage is not legalized is because conservative, religious groups believe it is immoral and against God.

However, I ask one main question: How can love be against God? If God creates everyone, why would he create someone he thought was wrong and immoral? God would not make someone he did not love.

Being gay is not a choice. No one decides to whom they are attracted or whom they love. If we could decide whom we love, everyone would be so much happier and there would be no more heartache. When Matt told his family he was gay, his sister asked how long he had known. He told her he always knew, and then said, “I played Barbies with you.”

In my opinion, gay marriage should be legal and should be accepted by all religious groups. Who are we as humans to dictate whom others can marry and love? We are not God and do not know his master plan or what he believes.

Going to Catholic schools my whole life, I have heard many times over the Christian view on why gay marriage is wrong.

Yet, homosexuality has not recently popped up on our radar; it has been going on since the beginning of time.

In ancient times, laws about sexuality were few. No one really cared how people acted or expressed their sexual appetites. The gods of antiquity did not care how the citizens behaved. Perhaps we should adopt these ways.

Today, religious groups claim that God forbids homosexuality. However, how does anyone know what God is thinking, and why would he all of the sudden care about gay people? If he really did not like gay people, he would not have made them, or he would have stopped homosexuality long ago.

At Loyola, we have such diversity and a great acceptance towards gay people. I have made so many amazing friends that I am so proud of because they are unashamed. I love that at Loyola no one needs to be afraid of who they are.

Matt is not my only gay friend and I am looking forward to the day that I can go to each of their weddings. I want to be a bridesmaid at my friends’ weddings and I want to be the godmother to their children.

One day, all of those things will come true. One day my friends will be able to marry whomever they love.

Kaitlyn O’Connor is a history sophomore and can be reached at

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

Mon Oct 8 2012 18:59
I would like to ask the bigot who posted on Oct. 6 one question: On what date did you choose to be straight rather than bi or gay?
Daniel Quick
Mon Oct 8 2012 15:40

If you're interested in extending your thoughts on any of the subjects in the Maroon, please feel free to send them to or If they are a minimum of 450 words, we'd be happy to publish them at some point in the future.

Daniel Quick, Op/Ed editor

Sun Oct 7 2012 03:08
To the person that said " Guess you haven't hd children. I never saw any of mine coming from the womb with a sexual preference", all children are born with certain traits (although, they can be altered/enforced by their environment while growing up), character traits, emotional traits, etc, and you can't see ANY of these in a newborn infant. Wake up and and let the hatred leave your heart. You'll feel a lot better. The gay rights movement of today is the modern version of the civil rights movement. During our children't generation, people that spout hate like you will be viewed in the same light that KKK members and those that sprayed African-Americans with fire hoses are viewed in today.
Sat Oct 6 2012 20:02
People that sit here and mock the writer or The Maroon obviously have no life. So someone wrote a column expressing their opinion, it doesn't really matter. This is material that is printed in a college newspaper so why are you wasting your time sitting here bashing the writer or the editors for what they put in the paper. It isn't harming you in any way and again, they are a college newspaper so get the fuck over it.
Sat Oct 6 2012 10:06
LOL! "People are born gay". Guess you haven't hd children. I never saw any of mine coming from the womb with a sexual preference. "People do not hve a choice in ho they love." Thank God I am not your man with your fickle heart. The author of this article has alot to learn about life.
Thu Oct 4 2012 15:23
1) What happens tomorrow does not change the law today.
2) Stating that it will be declared unconstitutional is a BIG assumption. We'll just have to wait to see what happens there.
Thu Oct 4 2012 14:54
The Defense of Marriage Act will be declared UNCONSTITUTIONAL when the U. S. Supreme Court takes up this issue.
Thu Oct 4 2012 14:52
As a result of the Equal Protection Clause of the U. S. Constitution mentioned below, it is unconstitutional for any state government or the federal government to deny same-sex couples the financial and other benefits provided to opposite-sex couples. These benefits include income taxes, health care, social security, and end-of-life decisions, to name four. Whether or not various religions recognize same-sex couples is not the issue. The issue is the denial of constitutional rights to same-sex couples. It won't be long before the U.S. Supreme Court takes up this issue and finds that what is being done all over the country is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Thu Oct 4 2012 14:51
The federal government, in the Defense of Marriage Act, defines marriages as between one man and one woman. All people are equally entitled to marry (as it is federally defined.) This being stated, the 14th amendment does not apply.
Thu Oct 4 2012 14:40
Anonymous, Wed. Oct 3: The Equal Protection Clause, part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, provides that "no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause applies only to state governments, but the requirement of equal protection has been read to apply to the federal government as a component of Fifth Amendment due process.

More concretely, the Equal Protection Clause, along with the rest of the Fourteenth Amendment, marked a great shift in American constitutionalism. Before the enactment of the Fourteenth Amendment, the Bill of Rights protected individual rights only from invasion by the federal government. After the Fourteenth Amendment was enacted, the Constitution also protected rights from abridgment by state leaders and governments, even including some rights that arguably were not protected from abridgment by the federal government. In the wake of the Fourteenth Amendment, the states could not, among other things, deprive people of the equal protection of the laws.

Wed Oct 3 2012 12:25
"It is a violation of the U.S. Constitution to treat same-sex couples differently than opposite-sex couples." Where do you read this in the Constitution?
Tue Oct 2 2012 15:43
I am a Loyola graduate and I am shocked by the logical inconsistencies in this article. I was upset not by the content of the article, rather the lack of coherent rationale. Aren't Loyola students still mandated to take philosophy and logic classes?
Tue Oct 2 2012 14:38
Marriage is (1) a legal status and (2) a religious bond. It is certainly within the rights of any religion to refuse to recognize and to marry people of the same gender. However, it is a violation of the U.S. Constitution to treat same-sex couples differently than opposite-sex couples. I don't care what various religions choose to do. I do care when my rights are violated because of pressure from religion. It won't be long before the Supreme Court recognizes the different between what religion says and what the Constitution says.
Mon Oct 1 2012 21:51
Oh boy, the homos are getting emotional
Mon Oct 1 2012 19:08
Oops I totally meant The Maroon, some habits die hard. My bad.
Mon Oct 1 2012 19:07
I love, love, love that the moron is acknowledging gay marriage and to all the people bitching get a life.
Mon Oct 1 2012 14:08
It seems that your headline makes better any point I could try to make. It states, "Gay marriage is not different." Actually there is a difference. Men and women are different. Therefore, what a man and a woman can do is different than what two men or two women can do. I am not trying to be petty with my observation. This is a point that is so obvious that it is often overlooked in the heated discussions. Any type of union between two people of the same sex is different in kind to unions between people of different sexes. Acknowledging this fact is critical when starting off any discussion on this topic. Please note that it is not based in hate, ignorance or prejudice. It is an indisputable and observable fact.
Mon Oct 1 2012 12:21
Thank you for reminding me why, as an alum, I give no support, financial or otherwise to Loyola.
Mon Oct 1 2012 09:53
So are you saying as a student who attends a Catholic university, you would allow homosexuals to marry in the Catholic church or are you saying that legally they should be allowed to marry?
Sun Sep 30 2012 22:38
While the logic may be slightly flawed, I think it is a topic that a lot of people don't talk about it just kind of goes away and pops up again every once in a while. Why are we not doing more to make this happen? If you can screw a horse in 23 states, I think gays should be able to get married in more than 6.
Personal experience with your friend also adds a nice touch. HERE HERE

You must be logged in to comment on an article. Not already a member? Register now

Log In