January 26, 2019  |    Download Brief

A Catholic perspective: The Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops’ opposition to abortion is rooted in our understanding that it is a violation of the fifth Commandment, given to Moses by God: “Thou shall not kill.”[1] In addition, throughout Christian Scripture, we are reminded of God’s love and concern for each human person: “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.”[2] We believe Christ teaches us that we must care for each neighbor and that “our neighbor” is precisely the individual who is most vulnerable, marginalized, despised, forgotten, and cast aside.[3] Catholics thereby receive two of our most fundamental moral imperatives: respect life and care for the weak and defenseless. The very possibility of our salvation rests upon love for God and care for our neighbor.[4]

Abortion is a direct attack on the dignity of a human person which promotes and encourages the devaluation and dispensability of life.[5] Therefore, the Church teaches: “No one can under any circumstance claim for himself the right directly to destroy an innocent human being.”[6] In accord with this, Pope John Paul II wrote: “Abortion and euthanasia are crimes which no human law can claim to legitimize. There is no obligation in conscience to obey such laws; instead there is a grave and clear obligation to oppose them by conscientious objection…. In the case of an intrinsically unjust law, such as a law permitting abortion or euthanasia, it is therefore never licit to obey it, or to take part in a propaganda campaign in favor of such a law, or vote for it.”[7]

Our stance on abortion is informed by currently accepted biomedical facts, according to which human life begins upon completion of fertilization, at which point a single-celled embryo contains “a new combination of chromosomes that is different from that in the cells of either of the parents.”[8] What is present thereafter is a new human life whose development is coordinated, continuous, and gradual:

1. Genetic information in the new being guides and controls acts at the cellular level so that the embryo itself coordinates its development to accomplish its potential.[9]
2. The process that begins at fertilization is, if uninterrupted, a continuous formation of an individual human being which is acquiring its definitive form.
3. Multicellular organisms attain a final form by gradually passing through simpler forms, yet from the beginning, such beings keep their own identity and individuality.[10]

These are the attributes of a living being. They are confirmed by biomedical facts and demonstrate that life begins at fertilization. The tradition of the Catholic Church—from the Apostles in 2^nd century to the 21^st century—has always held that every human life shall be protected and cherished from its beginning.

Texas law and policy: Before Roe v. Wade, Texas had a law that made it a crime to procure an abortion, with one exception which permitted an abortion procured by medical advice for the purpose of saving the life of the mother.[11] Roe held Texas’ laws to be unconstitutional and established a new trimester framework to regulate state laws on abortion.[12] As a result, most state laws that previously regulated abortion were pre-empted by the Court’s new national standard. However, in Planned Parenthood v Casey, the U.S. Supreme Court opened the door to greater state regulation. It did so by moving away from Roe’s trimester framework and toward a framework in which states could regulate abortion after viability, because that was the point in fetal development at which the State’s interest in life has “sufficient force that a woman’s right to terminate her pregnancy may be restricted.”[13] Texas regulates abortion in the Health and Safety Code[14] and the following regulations are currently in force:

• partial birth abortion is prohibited;[15]
• abortion after 20 weeks is prohibited;[16]
• after 20 weeks, abortions may be performed an ambulatory surgical center if a baby has a severe fetal abnormality;[17]
• abortion providers must receive a woman’s voluntary and informed consent;[18]
• a sonogram must be provided, and the baby’s size must be explained, its limbs and organs pointed out, and the heartbeat must be made audible;[19]
• an abortion cannot be provided less than 24 hours after a sonogram is provided;[20]
• abortion providers cannot perform an abortion on a minor without parental consent;[21]
• abortion providers cannot sell or donate a baby’s organs or tissue,[22]
• abortion providers and their affiliates cannot receive state funding,[23]
• monthly insurance premiums paid into a general private or public health insurance plan cannot be used to pay for elective abortions;[24]
• abortion providers must report complications to Health and Human Services, and [25]
• abortion facilities must be licensed.[26]

Bill Summaries: Several pro-life bills have passed through the Texas Legislature since the Roe v. Wade decision in 1973, but abortion remains legal throughout Texas.[27] While we recognize that ending abortion requires a U.S. Supreme Court ruling, we support good-faith attempts to uphold the sanctity of life at the state level. We therefore support legislation which would:

• prohibit all state and local government funding for abortion providers or their affiliates,
• increase funding to abortion alternatives for expectant parents,
• remove the wrongful birth cause of action,
• establish a trigger ban to prohibit abortion as soon as Roe v. Wade is overturned, and
• require that abortion providers acquire malpractice insurance in accord with the common practice of healthcare providers.

Call to action: To support this proposal in the Texas legislature, please use the tool above to contact your lawmaker. Please also pray for Texas and for our legislators, that they may respect innocent life and care for the weak and defenseless.

Download Brief

Endnotes

[1] Exodus 20:13

[2] Jer. 1:5; cf. Job 10:8-12; Ps. 22:10-11, 139:15; Jn. 10:10; Mt. 22:37-40; Deut. 6:5; Lev. 19:18; Lk. 10:25-37; Mt. 25:1-46.

[3] Lk. 10:25-37.

[4] Mt. 25:1-46.

[5] Supreme Court of the U.S., Gonzales v Carhart. 550 U.S. ___ (2007). Page 8. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. (CCC #2272) In contrast, Pope Francis reminds us: “Things have a price and can be sold, but people have a dignity; they are worth more than things and are above price. (Address to Participants in the Meeting Organized by the International Federation of Catholic Medical Associations, September 20, 2013. Sec. 2, quoting CDF Declaration on Procured Abortion, Sec. 11. See also Pope Francis, Amoris Laetitia [On Love in the Family], The Vatican. (March 19, 2016). Sec. 83.)

[6] CCC #2258; CCC #2270; CCC #2278.

[7] Pope John Paul II, Evangelium Vitae [The Gospel of Life], The Vatican. (March 25, 1995). Sec 73.

[8] Drs. Keith Moore and Vid Persaud. The Developing Human: Clinically Oriented Embryology. Page 33.

[9] Elio Sgreccia, Personalist Bioethics: Foundations and Applications (Philadelphia, PA: The National Catholic Bioethics Center, 2007). Pages 423-424.

[10] Sgreccia 425. On continuity, cf. Moore 2.

[11] Vernon’s Texas Statutes: 1948, Texas Penal Code: Articles 1191-1194, and 1196.

[12] Roe at 164; cf. Casey at 877.

[13] Planned Parenthood v. Casey 505 U.S. 833 (1992) at 869.

[14] Texas Health and Safety Code (HSC), Chs. 170, 171, 172, 173, and 245.

[15] HSC Ch. 171 § 101-106. Effective 2017. Supreme Court of the U.S., Gonzales v Carhart. 550 U.S. ___ (2007). Page 8.

[16] HSC Ch. 171 § 044. Effective 2013. Several exceptions are made to the 20-week ban. See HSC Ch. 171 § 046.

[17] Ibid. at Ch. 171 § 004. Effective 2011.

[18] Ibid. at Ch. 171 § 012. Effective 2011.

[19] Ibid. at Ch. 171 § 012(a)(4).

[20] Ibid.

[21] Texas Occupations Code Sec. 164.052(a)(19); Texas Family Code Sec. 33.0021. Effective 2016. However, minors may seek judicial bypass. See Texas Family Code Sec. 33.003.

[22] Texas Penal Code Sec. 48.03; HSC Sec. 173.005.

[23] Texas Human Resources Code, Sec. 32.024(c-1); 85 RS SB 1 (2017), page II-72-74, IX-34. There is no prohibition on local governments funding abortion providers or their affiliates.

[24] Texas Insurance Code, Chs. 1218, 1695, and 1696. Coverage for elective abortion must be separate from other health insurance plans so that general monthly premiums do not fund elective abortions.

[25] HSC at Ch. 171 § 006. Effective 2017.

[26] HSC at Ch. 245 § 003.

[27] Guttmacher Institute, State Facts About Abortion: Texas.

January 26, 2019  |    Download Brief

A Catholic perspective: Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops supports the elimination of all funding to abortion providers. This is based on our understanding of Christian Scripture, which proclaims that each of us is loved and indispensable: “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, and before you were born I consecrated you.”[1] We interpret Christ’s teaching to love our neighbor to mean that our neighbor is precisely the individual who is most vulnerable, marginalized, despised, forgotten, and cast aside.[2] Catholics thereby received from Christ two of our most fundamental moral imperatives: respect life and care for the weak and defenseless. The very possibility of our salvation rests upon love for God and care for our neighbor.[3]

When Catholics seriously consider this teaching and consider what abortion is, we understand the gravity of intentionally cooperating or materially supporting abortion.[4] Moreover, Scripture warns us against sharing in sin: “Do not lay hands on anyone hastily, nor share in other people’s sins; keep yourself pure.”[5] Pro-life Texans should not be forced to support the taking of innocent life, nor should any Texan be encouraged to be complicit in abortion’s legality.

Texas law and policy: Texas restricts private and public funding for abortion in three ways. First, the state restricts funding for abortion through health insurance.[6] The law requires that any coverage for elective abortion be entirely separate from other health insurance plans and that the monthly premiums for abortion coverage fully cover the cost of abortion. In effect, the law prevents monthly insurance premiums paid into a private or public health insurance plan from being used to pay for elective abortions.

A second limit on abortion funding exists in state law, which prohibits the Healthy Texas Women Program from using funds to promote or perform abortions, pay contracts to entities that promote or perform abortions, and pay contracts to entities that affiliate with entities that promote or perform abortions.[7]

A third limit exists in state appropriations bills. Since 1997, legislators have prohibited family planning program funds from being used to pay Department of State Health Services (DSHS) contractors for the direct or indirect cost of abortions.[8] In 2003, legislators added to this by prohibiting any DSHS funds from being used to pay for the direct or indirect cost of abortion, and added that family planning program funds cannot be distributed to any entity that performs abortions or any entity that contracts with an abortion provider.[9] In 2005, legislators copied the prohibition on using family planning program funds and applied it to Medicaid.[10] From 2007 through 2015, legislators maintained most of these prohibitions, but allowed family planning funds to be paid to entities that affiliate with abortion providers if the abortion affiliate and the abortion provider were legally and financially distinct.[11] In 2017, the exception was removed. In addition, the legislature prohibited—to full the extent allowed by federal and state law—any appropriations from being distributed to entities that perform abortions, are managed by an entity that performs abortions, or is a franchise of an entity that performs abortions.[12]

Bill summary: State law can be improved in the following ways: first, the prohibition on state government funding for abortion should be moved from the appropriations bills to state law. Whereas a budget bill controls only the two years that the budget is in effect, state law retains its force until it is revised or repealed. Second, nothing in the budget bill or existing state law prohibits local governments from contracting with entities that promote or provide abortion, or entities that affiliate with entities that promote or perform abortion.

As a result, abortion providers can and do operate with financial assistance from local governments. For example, the City of Austin has leased to Planned Parenthood a city-owned 3,720 square-foot facility for $1 annually since 1972.[13] In November 2018, the city’s council voted to renew the lease for 20 years with the option of a 20-year extension at the end of the term. Based on 3^rd quarter real estate data in 2018, the market rate to rent office space in East Austin was $42.85 per square foot.[14] Therefore, the estimated local government subsidy is valued at $160,000 per month, or $38.3 million for the first 20-year term of the contract.

The TCCB supports legislation which completely and without qualification eliminates government funding for abortion providers and their affiliates.

Call to action: To support this proposal in the Texas legislature, please use the tool above to contact your lawmaker. Please also pray for Texas and for our legislators, that they may respect innocent life and care for the weak and defenseless.

Download Brief

Endnotes

[1] Jer. 1:5; cf. Job 10:8-12; Ps. 22:10-11, 139:15; Jn. 10:10; Mt. 22:37-40; Deut. 6:5; Lev. 19:18; Lk. 10:25-37; Mt. 25:1-46.

[2] Lk. 10:25-37.

[3] Mt. 25:1-46.

[4] Supreme Court of the U.S., Gonzales v Carhart. 550 U.S. ___ (2007). Page 8. The Church attaches the canonical penalty of excommunication to this crime against human life. CCC #2272

[5] 1 Tim. 5:22.

[6] Texas Insurance Code, Chs. 1218, 1695, and 1696.

[7] Texas Human Resources Code, Sec. 32.024(c-1); Texas HHS, Healthy Texas Women.

[8] 75 RS HB 1 (1997), page II-38; 76 RS HB 1 (1999), page II-36; 77 RS SB 1 (2001), page II-35.

[9] 78 RS HB 1 (2003), page II-30.

[10] 79 RS SB 1 (2005), page II-56, II-86.

[11] 80 RS HB 1 (2007), page II-55 and II-81 but see II-66; 81 RS SB 1 (2009), page II-62 and II-93 but see II-73; 82 RS HB 1 (2011), page II-61 and II-92 but see II-69; 83 RS SB 1 (2013), page II-62 and II-96 but see II-70; 84 RS HB 1 (2015), page II-93 and II-107 but see II-107.

[12] 85 RS SB 1 (2017), page II-72-74, IX-34

[13] City of Austin, Recommendation for Council Action for Nov. 1, 2018; City of Austin, Agenda: Questions and Answers Report (November 1, 2018). Page 3.

[14] Cushman & Wakefield, Austin Office MarketBeat Snapshot. (Q3 2018)

January 26, 2019  |    Download Brief

A Catholic perspective: The Texas Catholic Conference of Bishops supports increased funding to abortion alternatives for expectant parents. As Pope Benedict wrote, “Children truly are the family’s greatest treasure and most precious good.”[1] Yet parents are sometimes troubled or burdened with the news that they are expecting a child. We should understand more about their daily struggle so that we can effectively help them care for their families and thereby become witnesses of moral strength for us all.[2]

Texans and Catholics have a duty to help families make life-affirming choices, and we cannot ignore the circumstances under which a woman may be pressured to have an abortion.[3] Circumstances such as abuse, poverty, and lack of support must be included in the conversation when discussing pro-life legislation. We support programs intended to remedy those circumstances, as well as promote adoption as a legitimate option for families who cannot care for their children.

Texas law and policy: Texas legislators established the Alternatives to Abortion (A2A) program in 2005 and currently operates using funds from Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) and General Revenue.[4] The Alternatives program contracts with two agencies providing support to new families, one of which is the Texas Pregnancy Care Network (TPCN). TPCN is a network of adoption agencies, residential care facilities, pregnancy resource centers (PRCs), and social service providers. The network provides:

• counseling and mentoring;
• material goods such as car seats, clothes, diapers, and formula;
• education regarding pregnancy and parenting;
• maternity home support groups; and
• referral to and enrollment in other social services.[5]

Eligibility is extended to any pregnant woman or adoptive parent for:

• 3 years after birth;
• 3 years after adoption, regardless of the child’s age; or
• 90 days after miscarriage or the loss of a child.[6]

As a result, the TPCN continuity of care extends for 45 months.[7] In FY 2017-18, TPCN supported the work of 135 subcontractors in 218 of the state’s 254 counties, thereby serving in counties which account for 99 percent of Texas abortions.[8] As Figure 1 (below) illustrates, since its creation, TPCN has served a total of 219,073 women, adoptive parents, and other clients.[9] In maintaining and expanding the A2A program, Texas legislators show their strong dedication to supporting women, children, and families.

Call to action: To support this proposal in the Texas legislature, please use the tool above to contact your lawmaker. Please also pray for Texas and for our legislators, that they may respect innocent life and care for the weak and defenseless.

Endnotes

[1] Pope Benedict XVI, Address at a Meeting on Family and Life Issues in Latin America, December 3, 2005. Sec. 5.

[2] Pope Francis, General Audience. January 7, 2015.

[3] Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), Quaestio de abortu [Declaration on Procured Abortion], The Vatican. (November 18, 1974), Sec. 26.

[4] 79 RS SB 1 ENR. Page II-111; Texas Health and Human Services, Alternatives to Abortion. December 2017, page 6.

[5] Ibid., Alternatives to Abortion, page 3; TPCN, FY 2017-18 Annual Report to Health and Human Services Commission, FY 2017-18. Page 11.

[6] Ibid.

[7] TPCN, FY 2017-18 Annual Report. Page 2.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Ibid. Page 8.

January 26, 2019  |    Download Brief

A Catholic perspective: A wrongful birth lawsuit is one in which the law considers a disabled child to be a damage to his or her parents, and therefore provides such parents with the ability, or “cause of action,” to sue their doctor for delivering a disabled child. The TCCB supports the elimination of the wrongful birth cause of action because we believe that the birth of a disabled child is not a valid reason to sue a physician.

We believe this because we have received from Christ a commandment of love: “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the greatest and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”[1] Christ teaches us that our neighbor is precisely the individual who is most vulnerable, marginalized, forgotten, and cast aside.[2] Catholics thereby receive two of our most fundamental moral imperatives: respect innocent life and care for the weak and defenseless. In the words of Pope Francis, “even the weakest and most vulnerable, the sick, the old, the unborn and the poor, are masterpieces of God’s creation, made in his own image, destined to live forever, and deserving of the utmost reverence and respect.”[3]

Texas law and policy: In Texas, this cause of action was established in 1975 by the Texas Supreme Court in Jacobs v. Theimer, in which the parents of a disabled child born in 1968 sued their physician for negligence because he did not inform them that Mrs. Jacobs had contracted rubella during pregnancy and therefore the child was likely to be born with physical disabilities. The court distinguished two separate causes of action: one which seeks repayment for wrongful life, and a second cause which seeks repayment for the cost of disabilities caused by the child’s birth. After noting the difficulty of comparing the financial burden of no life to disabled life, the Court permitted the second cause of action in which parents could recover the cost of disabilities caused by the child’s birth.[4] This is a wrongful birth cause of action and Figure 1 illustrates its status in the U.S.

This cause of action implies that allowing a disabled person to be born is an injury or damage to his or her parents. The TCCB rejects this notion and has supported bills such as Senate Bill 25 from the 85^th Legislative Session.[5] The bill’s authors explained that such lawsuits encourage doctors to take a defensive posture by searching for disabilities and recommending abortion to avoid litigation.[6] Laws which foster eugenic abortions must be removed.

Additionally, Texas law requires physicians to offer prenatal diagnostic tests, communicate the results to their patients, and allows patients to sue physicians who are negligent or engage in malpractice. We fully support these laws because they maintain a high standard of healthcare. The proposed law would never excuse a doctor from the duty to offer tests and communicate the results to patients. Nevertheless, when those tests indicate that an unborn child is disabled, there should be no ability to sue a doctor for their willingness to care for the disabled child. We see intrinsic value and ineffaceable human dignity in every person and we encourage legislators to reject the idea that someone’s life can be reduced to a financial damage that must be repaid.

Call to action: To support this proposal in the Texas legislature, please use the tool above to contact your lawmaker. Please also pray for Texas and for our legislators, that they may respect innocent life and care for the weak and defenseless.

Download Brief

Endnotes

[1] Mt. 22:37-40; cf. Deut. 6:5; Lev. 19:18; CCC #2055.

[2] Lk. 10:25-37.

[3] Vatican Radio, Pope Francis: All life has inestimable value. (July 17, 2013)

[4] Jacobs v. Theimer 519 S.W.2d 846 (1975) at 849-850.

[5] Creighton, et al., Senate Bill 25, 21 November 2016 < https://txcatholic.org/85th-legislature-bill-positions/>

[6]  “Layout of CSSB 25,” in Audio/Video Archive (Austin, TX: The Texas State Senate, March 20, 2017)

A Catholic perspective: The TCCB supports policies that recognize the sacredness, fidelity, and permanency of marriage. Families, which are the fundamental unit of a healthy society, are created and maintained through marriage. As such, the U.S. Bishops have written: “We are a society built on the strength of our families, called to defend marriage and offer moral and economic supports for family life.”[1] Such a call rests upon the Catholic Church’s teaching that the two principal purposes of marriage are the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of children.[2] In accord with this twofold purpose, the Church recognizes that marriage is a union of a man and a woman for the whole of life.

The U.S. Supreme Court, for its part, has reduced marriage to friendship by jettisoning the twofold purpose.[3] Nevertheless, marriage remains distinct from friendship and so we do not tire of maintaining: “Children have a basic right, wherever possible, to know and be loved by their mother and father together. The law has a duty to support every child in this most basic right.”[4] By nature, the role of parents in procreation cannot be replaced and the role of parents in education is invaluable.[5] As such, civil law should encourage and support families by:

1. maintaining the freedom to establish a family and educate children in keeping with the family’s own moral and religious convictions;
2. maintaining the freedom to profess one’s faith, hand it on, and raise one’s children in it;
3. promoting access to medical care and aid for the elderly in keeping with our institutions;
4. maintaining access to private property, free enterprise, and opportunities to obtain work and housing, as well as the right to emigrate;
5. countering dangers to a family’s security and health, including drugs and pornography;
6. promoting the formation of free associations between families; and
7. supporting the recruitment, formation, and support of foster and adoptive parents.[6]

Texas law and policy: The Family Code contains our state’s marriage laws and defines the main public policy goals of Texas marriage law, which includes providing stability for those entering into marriage and an orderly determination of parentage and security for children.[7] Furthermore, the Family Code outlines the main requirements to receive a marriage license, including an age requirement, waiting period, and a process of solemnization with a religious or judicial official.[8]

Additionally, Texas is one of the handful of states that also permits common law marriage.[9]  Common law marriage can be recognized by the State if the spouses agree to be married, live together as husband and wife, and hold out to others that they are married. Finally, while Texas’ laws do not allow for same-sex marriage, that statute is currently unenforceable due to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Obergefell v. Hodges.[10] Nevertheless, Texas law does protect the religious liberty of certain organizations and persons from recognizing or performing marriages that conflict with their sincerely held religious beliefs.[11]

While social science confirms that marriage offers benefits to the members of each family, Figure 1 illustrates that the marriage rate in Texas has steadily been declining over the last four decades. The state government attributes multiple factors to this downward trend in marriage rates: the age structure of the population, the trend of postponement of marriage, and the growing incidence of many young adults opting to cohabit prior to—or rather than—getting married.[12]

In response to these challenging trends, the TCCB supports laws that recognize the true nature of marriage and seek the well-being of spouses and children. In the Catholic view, the family is the original cell of social life; it is the foundation for social freedom, security, and fraternity.[13] Because families are a child’s first education, our state will go where our families lead.

Bill summaries:

• HB 922 requires that both parties to marriage agree to the insupportability of the marriage in order to grant a no-fault divorce. The TCCB supports this bill as an incremental improvement that promotes the sacredness, fidelity, and permanency of marriage by reducing the use of no-fault divorce against the objections of a spouse.
• HB 926 establishes a six-month waiting period for no-fault divorce in marriages with minor or school age children or disabled adult children. The TCCB supports this bill which is an incremental improvement in protecting the permanency of marriage in families with children.
• HB 938 allows unmarried minors who are mothers to consent to medical treatment related to contraception. The TCCB opposes this bill because it interferes in parental rights.
• HB 978 / SB 153 would change laws referring to man and woman and husbands and wives to gender-neutral terminology in marriage documents. The TCCB opposes this bill which would erode the sacredness, fidelity, and permanence of marriage.
• HB 980 / SB 152 revises sexual education materials such that homosexual conduct would be taught to be acceptable. The TCCB opposes this bill because it would promote gender ideology among children and subvert parental rights.
• SJR 9 would repeal the constitutional amendment limiting marriage to one man and one woman. The TCCB opposes this constitutional amendment which contradicts the nature of marriage.

 Call to action: To support this proposal in the Texas legislature, please use the tool above to contact your lawmaker. Please also pray for Texas and for our legislators, that they may uphold the sacredness, fidelity, and permanency of marriage.

[1] USCCB, Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship. 9. For helpful reflections on the communicative, moral, religious, and spiritual aspects of marriage, see Amy Kass and Leon Kass, Wing to Wing, Oar to Oar. (Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press, 2000).

[2] Canon Law #1055, Catechism #2201.

[3] See Griswold v. Connecticut for the definition (Page 381 U.S. 486 (1965)) which was echoed in Obergefell v. Hodges (2015). If marriage is akin to friendship, a definition that requires lifelong commitment or requires one man and one woman appears arbitrary, capricious, or mean.

[4] TCCB, Statement by Texas Catholic Conference on Supreme Court ‘Same-Sex Marriage’ Ruling. June 27, 2015.

[5] CDF, Donum Vitae [Instruction on Respect for Human Life in Its Origin]. II.A.1, 7.

[6] Catechism #2211.

[7] Texas Family Code § 1.101.

[8] Texas Family Code § 2.003; § 2.204; § 2.202.

[9] Texas Family Code § 2.401.

[10] Id. at § 2.001; Obergefell v. Hodges 576 U.S. ___ (2015).

[11] Texas Family Code § 2.601-602.

[12] Texas Health and Human Services, 2013 Marriage and Divorce.

[13] Catechism #2207.