Do you stand behind two brothers marrying? How about two sisters? How about an infertile brother and sister? How about four consensual adults of either gender?We already have that, but some Protestant Churches are happy to marry gay couples but are not permitted to legally do it. And homosexual couples cannot legally refer to each other as husbands/wives, but as “partners”.
No.There is a simple solution: civil marriage registration for all, and a church wedding for those who want one and who are allowed to have one according to the Church’s rules.
Problem solved, no?
why should civil marriage only between a man and woman??? that’s your opinion. and its colored by your faith.No.
Marriage whether you call it civil, religious, or whatever is something that occurs between man and woman. Now the church will not ‘marry’ same sex couples any more than she will ‘marry’ grapefruit, the very nature of marraige lies in the unity of man and woman.
Government(in the U.K and elsewere) has already provided a legal framework for those who seek legal recognition of their contractual partnership which includes, as far as I’m aware, the legal benefits associated with marraige.
Actually, your statement is not exactly correct. The Church has always opposed the idea of civil marriage. This is just the latest iteration. You should read Pope Leo XIII’s Encyclical, Arcanum, written back in 1880, which decries the idea of civil marriage…primarily because it would make divorces easier.why should civil marriage only between a man and woman??? that’s your opinion. and its colored by your faith.
Civil marriages and indeed religious marriage (b4 Christianity) has kept changing and evolving.
now I understand the Catholic objection and that the Catholic Church has the right to keep Catholic Marriage between a man and woman…but why should our faith define marriage for those who don’t believe in our faith?
this goes back to the classic ‘separation of church and state’ debate, and sadly it seems clear to me that Catholics only support ‘separation of church and state’ when it suits them to do so.
The gay civil marriage issue will determine if the Catholic Church and other faith groups are actually serious about the ‘separation of church and state’, or if they are just waiting to jump out and try to declare a theocracy all over again!
I know that the Catholic church has historically rejected civil marriages…but tough titties for the church. the church also opposed democracy at one stage, here in Brisbane in the early 1900’s the catholic church bitterly opposed giving women the rights to vote with the excuse “if women have the right to vote it will mean they will no longer listen to husbands as the bible tells them too.”Actually, your statement is not exactly correct. The Church has always opposed the idea of civil marriage. This is just the latest iteration. You should read Pope Leo XIII’s Encyclical, Arcanum, written back in 1880, which decries the idea of civil marriage…primarily because it would make divorces easier.
The point being that the Church has always regarded marriage to be properly Her business, business that the State usurped back in the 19th century. So if it is the Church’s business, then why wouldn’t the Church speak up?
Ah, the dictatorship of relativism.Inside the Catholic Religion I agree it solely the catholic churches judgment but last time I checked the Catholic church didn’t have the equalivant of Sharia Law that it wants to impose on all people…or perhaps it does, and maybe it’s just starting to become clear…
what u call relativism is just a fancy word for intolerant catholic behavior.Ah, the dictatorship of relativism.
Not intolerant of persons. Intolerant of evil ideologies.what u call relativism is just a fancy word for intolerant catholic behavior.
The Church is not asking that there be a law that makes people attend a Catholic mass.think about the religions that don’t have an issue with homosexuality and gay marriage. say the one of the many hindu sects that support gay marriage rights? what happens to their right to practice their religion. they may believe like Catholics that sex outside of marriage is wrong but unlike Catholics may teach that 2 men or 2 women can get married. what about their rights???
Funny, coming from someone who demands the law impose immorality on others.you call it relativism but its just another catholic catch phrase for “you will do it my way or else.”…Im starting to think Islam and Catholicism may not be such strange bedfellows afterall!
and frankly the church used the same excuse over womens votes, and every other thing the church has kicked and screamed about for the last 150 or so years. sometimes the church is right but more times than not she is wrong. and this time over civil marriages the church is wrong to impose itself on a people who do not believe in the catholic defination of marriage.Ah, the dictatorship of relativism.
I do not believe the law should impose what you perceive to be immorality on you. you can chooise to be tolerant or not. you may choose if you have gay friends or not. you may chooise not to have the gay next door negibours around for dinner or not.Not intolerant of persons. Intolerant of evil ideologies.
The Church is not asking that there be a law that makes people attend a Catholic mass.
She is asking that the civil law not contradict the moral law which binds every person. This is known from right reason, not sectarian principles.
Funny, coming from someone who demands the law impose immorality on others.
unless the government is forcing you to preform homosexual acts you really don’t have much of a case!Not intolerant of persons. Intolerant of evil ideologies.
The Church is not asking that there be a law that makes people attend a Catholic mass.
She is asking that the civil law not contradict the moral law which binds every person. This is known from right reason, not sectarian principles.
Funny, coming from someone who demands the law impose immorality on others.
Not true.and frankly the church used the same excuse over womens votes, and every other thing the church has kicked and screamed about for the last 150 or so years. sometimes the church is right but more times than not she is wrong. and this time over civil marriages the church is wrong to impose itself on a people who do not believe in the catholic defination of marriage.
of the church wants people believe in the catholic definition of marriage then let those who do believe come to the church of their own free will and submit to a catholic wedding.
No, what you want is for hedonism and relativism to rule the day. Your standards will force more people into hardship. More people of principle will be forced to act against their conscience.but force never works, in fact it usually does the opposite.
and right now the church is trying to force a society that is no longer christian (or whos faith has little daily use to them) into accepting Christian, specifically Catholic ideas of marriage. it wont work, what u will do is turn people who otherwise dont care about the catholic church into anti-Catholics!
The governemnt is forcing us to accept a deformed notion of marriage and much else!unless the government is forcing you to preform homosexual acts you really don’t have much of a case!
no the govt is telling you that 2 people who love eachother are united under the Law of the land.The governemnt is forcing us to accept a deformed notion of marriage and much else!
While it is true that other religions may have some elements of truth, only the Catholic Church (all 23 Churches in union with the Pope) possesses the fullness of Truth. That means that all others are intrinsically flawed, and they have teachings that are false, and that includes any teaching which directly contradicts a Catholic teaching.think about the religions that don’t have an issue with homosexuality and gay marriage. say the one of the many hindu sects that support gay marriage rights?
I’m going to play a traditionalist for a moment, because I don’t seem to get to very often.what happens to their right to practice their religion. they may believe like Catholics that sex outside of marriage is wrong but unlike Catholics may teach that 2 men or 2 women can get married. what about their rights???
or the rights of the Episcopal Church?, or the rights of the Metropolitan community church?
What is moral or immoral for you is exactly the same as what moral or immoral for me. It’s called Natural Law and everyone is subject to it, including the universal Moral Law. The Moral Law is a fundamental part of Catholic teachings and the Deposit of Faith and the Church requires you to give assent to these teachings if you are Catholic.You cannot decide for me what is immoral or what is moral law, and neither should I do the same to you. but the governments responability is not to being about the kingdom of God on earth, but to make sure all, yes ALL it’s citizens are equal under the law.
Love? You call that love? Love means you care for the other and for their own soul. Committing sin with another person is never love.no the govt is telling you that 2 people who love eachother are united under the Law of the land.
Marriage does not belong to Caesar. Marriage is a Sacrament that does belong and has always belonged to God alone.Christ himself said render unto Caesar what belongs to Caesar …Civil Marriage belongs to Caesar in this case.
Like I said, some truth may be contained in other religions, but they intrinsically contain falsehoods. Anything that conflicts with Catholic teaching is false.and as mentioned their are many religions who do not condemn homosexuality, Hindus, Pagans, many Anglican and Lutherans, some sects of Taoism and many others.
why should your concept of morality be put into law in when it may infringe of the rights of others???
your missing the point! its not the governments job to bring about the kingdom of God on Earth. You and I may believe we have the fullness of the truth. but the Government has no right to impose our truth on others.While it is true that other religions may have some elements of truth, only the Catholic Church (all 23 Churches in union with the Pope) possesses the fullness of Truth. That means that all others are intrinsically flawed, and they have teachings that are false, and that includes any teaching which directly contradicts a Catholic teaching.
I’m going to play a traditionalist for a moment, because I don’t seem to get to very often.
Other religions don’t have a true moral right to exist. That’s because teaching falsehoods do not have a right to exist. Other religions are tolerated to keep civil order. The ultimate hope is that everyone will find the fullness of Truth in the Catholic Church (as Christ prayed that “they all may be one”).
What is moral or immoral for you is exactly the same as what moral or immoral for me. It’s called Natural Law and everyone is subject to it, including the universal Moral Law. The Moral Law is a fundamental part of Catholic teachings and the Deposit of Faith and the Church requires you to give assent to these teachings if you are Catholic.
Love? You call that love? Love means you care for the other and for their own soul. Committing sin with another person is never love.
Marriage does not belong to Caesar. Marriage is a Sacrament that does belong and has always belonged to God alone.
Like I said, some truth may be contained in other religions, but they intrinsically contain falsehoods. Anything that conflicts with Catholic teaching is false.
So you’re ok with people sinning and possibly choosing to give up eternal life? And you don’t think we should tell them of this?your missing the point! its not the governments job to bring about the kingdom of God on Earth. You and I may believe we have the fullness of the truth. but the Government has no right to impose our truth on others.
You misunderstand the meaning of the word “freedom”.what are you people not understanding about the difference between a theocracy and a democratic nation which has pledged itself to freedom and equality for all???..and by all it means ALL not those who the Catholic church says should have equality.
Missing the point once again…the USA, UK, AUS, NZ etc does not use st pauls definition of Freedom to our modern nations.So you’re ok with people sinning and possibly choosing to give up eternal life? And you don’t think we should tell them of this?
You misunderstand the meaning of the word “freedom”.
Freedom does not mean the ability to do whatever you want. True Freedom (as St. Paul speaks of) means Freedom to live out the Law without the need for the Law; it means that you don’t need the Law to tell you to live a moral life because you just do.
This “freedom to do anything” that people proclaim is not freedom, but slavery: Slavery to the flesh, slavery to the senses, and slavery to the things of the world. Every Catholic should strive for people to leave this slavery behind and embrace true freedom.
frankly I fail to see much difference between yourself and Sharia Law.So you’re ok with people sinning and possibly choosing to give up eternal life? And you don’t think we should tell them of this?
You misunderstand the meaning of the word “freedom”.
Freedom does not mean the ability to do whatever you want. True Freedom (as St. Paul speaks of) means Freedom to live out the Law without the need for the Law; it means that you don’t need the Law to tell you to live a moral life because you just do.
This “freedom to do anything” that people proclaim is not freedom, but slavery: Slavery to the flesh, slavery to the senses, and slavery to the things of the world. Every Catholic should strive for people to leave this slavery behind and embrace true freedom.