Pastor Angel Farlan of the United Lutheran Protestant Church of Argentina. Courtesy of YouTube.

Juan Marco Vaggione | Professor of Law at the Universidad Nacional de Córdoba

In July 2010 Argentina modified its civil code to grant same-sex couples the right to marriage. The possibility of this right, as well as the majority of sexual and reproductive rights, brings into focus the complex articulation between religion and politics in contemporary democracies. The major religions have a long history in the regulation of sexual order, and they obviously constitute one of the most robust obstacles to legal reform. In Latin America, the Catholic Church has played a historical role in the regulation of affective and sexual relations. In Argentina, for example, each modification of the laws governing matrimony has required vigorous defense by an autonomous state government willing to confront the lobbies and pressures of the Catholic hierarchy. This occurred at the end of the 19^th century when marriage was secularized and the religious ceremony was distinguished from the civil one. It occurred again in the 20^th century when divorce was legalized, and yet again last year when the Catholic hierarchy supported a model of marriage based on “complementarity of the sexes.” The Catholic Church continues to be a crucial actor in politics in the region, and its forays into the political arena are at their most virulent when education or the family is at stake.

It is not surprising, then, that the recognition of sexual and reproductive rights in Argentina is considered by many academics and activists to be a result of the secularization of the state, which provides an important space—one that is autonomous from the Catholic hierarchy—from which to legislate. In a place where the Catholic Church has played such a preponderant historical, cultural, and political role, the secular state emerges as a political platform for the democratization of sexuality. Without minimizing its importance, however, it is also necessary to reflect on other articulations of the religious and the political, which have characterized the debate over same-sex marriage in Argentina. The politicization of sexuality has diverse effects on the political forms that the religious acquires. The specific objective of this essay is to illuminate two specific interactions between religion and politics that are largely a result of the impact of the feminist movement and the movement for sexual diversity.

I.

Although the Catholic Church has long maintained hegemony over the regulation of sexuality in Latin America, the inclusion of sexual and reproductive rights in public agendas confronts poses new challenges to this regulatory power and forces the Church to generate alternative strategies in the defense of a traditional sexual order. The achievements of both the feminist movement and the movement for sexual diversity prompted a reaction from the Vatican, which focused its political agenda on resisting the demands of these movements. In 1992 for example, and in reaction to anti-discrimination legislation, the Vatican argued that the exclusion of people from certain spaces or activities based on their sexual orientation did not constitute “unjust discrimination.” Adoption and the childcare were specifically mentioned, as well as the military and teaching physical education (Algunas consideraciones concernientes a la Respuesta a propuestas de ley sobre la no discriminación de las personas homosexuales).[1] In 2003 the Vatican pronounced itself against the legal recognition of same-sex couples, since this would mean “not only approving of deviant behavior and converting it into a model for contemporary society, but also obscuring fundamental values that belong to the common patrimony of society.” (Consideraciones acerca de los Proyectos de Reconocimiento Legal de las uniones entre personas homosexuales).[2] Both documents called for the Catholic hierarchy as well citizens and politicians of different nationalities to resist this type of legislation and to defend a concept of sexuality as supported by the Catholic doctrine. Both documents also offered a series of arguments to be used by both religious and political authorities to articulate their opposition to the recognition of these rights. While these documents draw upon the previously described doctrinal positions, they are important in that they provide various secular arguments to be used in legal debate. In order to oppose the recognition of rights for same-sex couples, the Vatican offers “rational arguments” that are of biological, anthropological, social and juridical nature.

These political instructions influenced the way in which the debate over same-sex marriage was put on the agenda in Argentina. The official documents of the Argentine Catholic Church, as well as the public pronouncements of its hierarchy, followed the framework laid out by the Vatican. Secular arguments—particularly legal ones—were prioritized to justify the rejection of the proposed right of same-sex couples to marry. These documents and declarations were directed at (Catholic) legislators, prompting them to defend heterosexuality and the legal status quo as essential to the laws governing marriage. Citizens and leaders of conservative evangelical religious denominations also gathered in street protests, calling for the rejection of the reform. Although the Catholic Church continues to be the main actor in the defense of a patriarchal and hetero-normative sexual order, their strategies and discourse have adapted to the political changes generated by the inclusion of sexual and reproductive rights in the public agenda. The use of secular arguments has intensified as a means to publicly resist the possibility of legal reform. These changes make evident the precarious character of the religious/secular dichotomy in the Catholic Church’s sexual politics. While the majority of analytical and normative frameworks used in support of sexual and reproductive rights are based on this dichotomy, the Catholic Church’s public actions transcend it both in political strategy and public discourse.

II.

Feminism and the movement for sexual diversity have had a second impact on Catholicism that generates different relationships between the religion and politics. Although the changes affected by these movements are most visible in changing legislation, they have also yielded transformations within the Catholic front that impact sexual politics. On one hand, regional polls reveal changes in Catholic identification in relation to sexuality. For one sector of the population, to consider oneself Catholic does not imply a rejection of sexual and reproductive rights; to the contrary, self-identified Catholics often support issues such as sex education, birth control, legalization of abortion, and recognition of the rights of same-sex couples. On the other hand, Catholicism is currently subject to theological debates that break with the tenets of its leading hierarchy as a single Catholic position. Feminist and queer theologies reconstruct and deconstruct the official doctrine, articulating new positions that favor sexual and reproductive rights based on Catholic tradition. While this pluralization of religious identifications is evidence of a broader structural phenomenon that extends beyond the influence of feminist and sexual diversity movements, the growing acceptance of sexual and reproductive rights, both in the Catholic-identified populations and theological discourses, should nonetheless be attributed to these movements.

These changes in Catholic identification were also evident in the ways in which religion and politics were put in conversation during the debate over the sanctity of marriage. Groups of Catholic priests adopted the tradition of liberation theology and publicly demonstrated their support for same-sex marriage. Citing the Bible or referring to Christian principles, these priests not only expressed their opposition to the Church’s official position, but also prompted legislators and members of the faith to support legal reform. Even though the effect of these protests was relatively minor when as a religious compared to the preponderantly conservative role of the Catholic hierarchy, it had an important effect on the media and on politics. One of the strategies of the movement for sexual diversity was to counter the construction of the religious as resistant to sexual rights through a campaign called “The Faith Says YES to the Law of Marriage Equality,” in which they gave voice to representatives of diverse religious traditions who favored reform. This strategy was also evident during the parliamentary debate, when various self-identified Catholic legislators justified their support for the project as well. Instead of keeping their beliefs private while supporting a project that contradicted the mandate of Church authorities, these legislators chose to justify their support as Catholics. Religion entered the debate on marriage in ways that were favorable to the protection sexual rights among legislators, citizens, and the Catholic hierarchy. Just as the conservative Catholic sectors brought their arguments to the secular arena, activism in favor of sexual and reproductive rights included Catholic arguments (among others) to justify marriage for same-sex couples.

The debate over the regulation of sexuality reflects different types of interactions between religion and politics in Latin America. On one hand, it generates discussion around the question of state secularization, a process still incomplete in the majority of the Latin American democracies (in Argentina, Catholicism is even defined as the official religion at the constitutional level). Nonetheless, this debate also highlights other forms of articulations between Catholicism and politics that not only transcend the dichotomy between conservative and progressive, but also the divide between the religious and the secular. While the politicization of sexuality reinforces some of the region’s historical problems, such as involvement of church and state, it also sheds light on other connections between religion and politics that, paradoxically, propose some novel solutions  to this old problem.

Juan Marco Vaggione is professor at the School of Law, National University of Córdoba, and researcher at the National Research Council of Argentina (CONICET). His research and teaching interests connects with the contemporary roles of religion in contemporary democracies and the debates and recognition of sexual and reproductive rights in Latin America. He also collaborates with Catholic for a Free Choice in Argentina.