Today in Pacem in Terris, something on coercion, and the right not to experience it:
34. (Human) personal dignity requires besides that (they) enjoy freedom and be able to make up (their) own mind when (they) act. In (any) association with (others), therefore, there is every reason why (a) recognition of rights, observance of duties, and many-sided collaboration with other (people), should be primarily a matter of his (or her) own personal decision. Each (person) should act on (their) own initiative, conviction, and sense of responsibility, not under the constant pressure of external coercion or enticement. There is nothing human about a society that is welded together by force. Far from encouraging, as it should, the attainment of (human) progress and perfection, it is merely an obstacle to (human) freedom.
I wonder how the application of this would sit in the public debate about dealing with LGBT persons. If a society is inhuman by forceful unions, isn’t the converse true in situations where people who might choose to associate with one another find themselves forcefully broken apart?