Wuerl's tone not so pastoral for some

It's sad that Archbishop Wuerl has chosen the same attitude of some of his brother Bishops; to be so overtly hostile to the equal rights of homosexual citizens within this country. Hopefully at some point the, through prayer or some other means of conversion, the Bishops and all those whose hearts are similarly inclined on this issue will understand that championing justice and equality does not just mean standing up for the inherent dignity of human beings as persons but also means protecting and promoting their rights under the law, no matter the circumstance. Why can the Bishops just simply resign the matter of same-sex marriage which does not concern them? It's a matter of the seperation between Church and State. Ok, the Church is currently opposed to same-sex marriage as an institution, why do they have to fight this reality civily? What good does it produce?

As long as we have closeted gay clerics who are conflicted about their own sexuality and self worth, gay laity will continue to receive a mixed message in which their underlying dignity is officially affirmed while their right to express their truth is denied and actively suppressed.

The expectation of a true gay Catholic is they stay in the same sick and dysfunctional closet as their clerical betters and lead lives of secrecy and deception.

The expectation is to remain celibate and chaste. That is not the same as closeted, eh?

"And even more importantly, are gay and lesbian Catholics actually comforted knowing that the church hierarchy isn’t after them, only their rights?"
The challenge that Archbishop's Weurl's letter presents is to separate the pastoral aspect from the political. Whether civil law calls it "marriage" or "civil union", it is only the contractual aspect that its jurisdiction is concerned with. That is why civil law recognizes unlimited divorce and remarriage as long as contract law is observed and fulfilled.
Our faith recognizes the Sacrament of Matrimony as instituted by God in Genesis and celebrated by Jesus and Mary at Cana. We just heard our Brother and Lord again reaffirm that "what God has joined together, no human being must separate". Our faith does not recognize divorce but only decides whether the marriage covenant was valid or not. If not, then there was never any sacrament and the marriage is annulled.
We live in a political society where civil contractual law governs relations between persons, and the responsibilities and rights of those persons in a society that is not only political but also pluralistic, "with liberty and justice for all". Our faith calls us to live a sacramental life in this society as an example of the call to holiness Jesus invites us to live. As loyal citizens, we recognize and uphold just civil laws. But as Christians, we are called to live the Beatitudes so that the prayer Jesus taught us can be fulfilled: Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven.
Until we succeed in making the Beatitudes the way of life for all of our sisters and brothers, civil laws will be necessary to regulate our relationships, responsibilities and rights. These unfortunately include unions whether same or opposite sex, abortion counselling and supervivion, crime and punishment including the death penalty, declaration of and participation in war, social assistance at all stages of life and end-of-life care.
Our faith tells us how to live in this world as we journey together to our Father's House. Jesus came to show us the Way, the Truth and the Life. He did this as the Prince of Peace, rendering to Caesar that which is Caesar's and to God that which is God's. Living a pastoral life, Jesus shed new light on political life and offered us a way to change the world: the way of forgiveness, the way of reconcilliation, the way of love. Until all human beings freely chose to follow this way, human weakness must be regulated by human law. If the laws are just, we must respect them and observe them as far as our faith and conscience allow. God's law is written in our hearts and never changes. Natural law springs from our genes, is not universally the same and does evolve.
Our challenge as children of God, sisters and brothers of Jesus and temples of the Holy Spirit is the fulfill Jesus' prayer at the Last Supper: That they all may be one.
Paz y Bien, Rolando.

What Wuerl fails to grasp is that equal rights under the law is a matter of social justice... equal access to health care, to joint insurance, the rights to inherit property, the right to visit hospitalized partners and to be proxies for their life-and-death decisions should it come to that, etc.

In these respects, equal access means equal access to that which stands between same-sex partners and poverty, the ability to depend on one's most significant other in one's hour of greatest need, etc.

Though I might not make the same lifestyle choices as my gay and lesbian sisters and brothers (apparently through my genetic pre-disposition not to), I can still not bring myself, in Christian charity, to deny them the very basic temporal considerations that are accorded to myself and an heterosexual life partner.

To me it comes down to a very real sort of "loaves and fishes" issue; the denial of equal rights (and obligations) to same-sex couples who are willing to make a legal commitment to one another denies them what can be essential to life.

Interestingly, we don't see the Church in America attempting to block civil rights to other marriages which it does not recognize. For example, the marriage between a Catholic man and woman where one has received a civil divorce from a prior marriage but lacks an annulment from the Church. That marriage is no more "valid" in the "eyes of the Church" than the one between two men or two women.

It would be unthinkable, would it not, for the Church to declare that in such marriages one spouse should not be automatically permitted to visit the other in hospital, to make medical decisions, to be the default heir to property and to pensions, and so on. To advocate such would be considered unthinkably harsh and cruel.

Then again perhaps it would not be so unthinkable. That sort of thing survived until recently in Ireland, until the population wised up and chose to choose charity over cruel enforcement of religious norms. Against, of course, the opposition of the Church.

There's plenty of "marriage" to go around. Nobody else's marriage, whatever its form, can take away from mine, and vice-versa.

Does anybody really believe that when they come through the front door at the end of the day and say "honey I'm home!" that it will really feel any different if a same-sex married couple with the same civil rights next door is doing the same thing?

If Bishop Wuerl wishes to define marriage for members of his Catholic flock, then apparently that is one of the powers accorded to this man who has promised never to marry. But he oversteps his bounds when he attempts to do so for the non-Catholic majority. Especially when equality may be the difference between a life of prosperity and one of poverty for some.

The opening line of your post is false. You say that Archbishop Wuerl "voiced his opposition to any legislation that would grant same-sex couples full and equal protection under the law." Is that right? He opposes the right to vote for homosexuals? He opposes the rights of homosexuals to worship as they see fit? He opposes to right of homosexuals to move? No. What he does is voice the timeless teaching of the Church that marriage can only be between one man and one woman. You really ought to be more careful in your polemics.

To make the Bishops shoulder the blame for this sad situation is very inhumane. You are making them scapegoats. They are not doing this to hurt people. You yourself need to look into the Liturgy of the Catholic Church and the Mysteries, if you did you would realize that no one is hurting these people. Everything the Catholic Church has to offer is also theirs. There is no reason why they cannot participate in the Mass, the Liturgy, Adoration and go up to the Altar to get a Blessing. That is more than enough in this dark world. The Catholic Church was never intended to be a social movement, it is Christ's Kingdom. A Kingdom is not a Democracy. The Bishops are trying to protect the Eucharist. Jesus was a Jewish Man. This is His Body everyone seems to want to throw around in this debate. The gay and lesbian communities in all of these cases are making themselves look worse because they are clearly NOT respecting of the Divine Kingdom here on earth. There are alot of straights who can not take communion because of Divorce and remarriage or for whatever reason, but they still go to Mass every week and to for a Blessing. Why isn't going up for a blessing enough ? If they want to take Communion that badly then what is wrong with becoming celebate. The rigors required in the early Church were much stricter than now, we have all become soft. All Catholic Christians are called to chastity but in different ways, the gay community shouldn't complain about their own specific and unique call to chastity. What do you want more, God, Christ, or your own life in the world. This Kingdom you are demanding things from is not of this world. None of us can be of this world and take Communion and neither can you !! Please open your heart to the Real Mysteries of the Catholic Church. If you really love Jesus in the Eucharist why would you want to take a chance in offending Him ?? It is something to think about and ponder over and talk it over with Him at Adoration