Acceptance of Homosexual Marriage

  • Thread starter Thread starter Nate13
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

Nate13

Guest
I have a couple questions for those who can agree that for Christians same-sex relations and marriage is wrong, but when it comes to government they believe we should recognize same-sex marriages as marriages equal to man-woman marriages. One, I’m curious to hear why they believe God has told us homosexuality is wrong and that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Two, I would also like to ask those people if they can come up with an example of anything else God has condemned that has no serious negative consequences in society when it is promoted.

My point from this is basically that God doesn’t condemn things without a reason. Every rule he makes is for our own good not just personally, but also as a society. As Christians we know this and should vote accordingly to make sure as a society we are never promoting evil as a good thing which is exactly what our government would be doing if it recognizes gay marriages. You can post all the statistics you want, but as Christians we know that whenever a society promotes evil it will have a negative impact on the society as a whole. Thus, a smart Christian knew when contraception was first being promoted that it would have a negative impact on society and a smart Christian now should know that recognizing and promoting gay marriage as a good thing will have negative impact on society.

In summary I’m asking a proponent of gay marriage to show that a) our government recognizing gay marriages as equal to man-woman marriages and the privileges that go with that is not promoting it or b) give an example of something else God has condemned that society promotes and does not have a negative effect on society as a whole or c) explain why same-sex marriages is the exception in terms of things that God has condemned that don’t have a negative effect on society when they are promoted.
 
Nate13 said:
I have a couple questions for those who can agree that for Christians same-sex relations and marriage is wrong, but when it comes to government they believe we should recognize same-sex marriages as marriages equal to man-woman marriages. One, I’m curious to hear why they believe God has told us homosexuality is wrong and that marriage should be between a man and a woman.
Click to expand...
Insert standard Catholic explanation here.
Two, I would also like to ask those people if they can come up with an example of anything else God has condemned that has no serious negative consequences in society when it is promoted.
Click to expand...
Too many to count. Shellfish (Lev. 11:9) eating stands out. There’s also fabric-mixing and various others of similar type.
My point from this is basically that God doesn’t condemn things without a reason.
Click to expand...
I can’t recall the reason for the shellfish ban, but it wasn’t overly important in the long run.
Every rule he makes is for our own good not just personally, but also as a society.
Click to expand...
There are still many groups that follow the laws in Leviticus. Of those groups, some believe they should be applied to society at large by force (government).

What would you say to those people?

Religion isn’t exactly like science. Religious groups have little in the way of conflict resolution, whereas scientists have data to work with and can reach larger consensus.

So I guess if we’re going to go down this path, we’ll end up with a holy war. How could it end any other way?
As Christians we know this and should vote accordingly to make sure as a society we are never promoting evil as a good thing which is exactly what our government would be doing if it recognizes gay marriages. You can post all the statistics you want, but as Christians we know that whenever a society promotes evil it will have a negative impact on the society as a whole. Thus, a smart Christian knew when contraception was first being promoted that it would have a negative impact on society and a smart Christian now should know that recognizing and promoting gay marriage as a good thing will have negative impact on society.
Click to expand...
I think this is true, but there are also downsides to enforcing the Church’s law on society at large against their will.

While the Holy See is correct to resist contraception, we must also recognize the consequences that has had for the continent of Africa (further spread of the HIV virus, for example.) Also, while maybe we say that the Central and South America are better off for having been invaded by Catholic crusaders, there were also significant disasters that arose - near eradication of many Native tribes, for example. See, we can support this stuff all we would like but we shouldn’t put our fingers in our ears and drown out some of the unfortunate happenings. I don’t believe God would want us to be blind to the truth, and I doubt you do either.
 
Thanks for that link JamestheOlder .

… A superb essay which is even more applicable (prophetic) today.

👍
 
That was an extremely well-written article. Thank you for posting that.
 
@VeritasLuxMea
Your examples are old Levitical law. Condemning homosexual acts is in the New Testament as well as the Old. Point to something worthwhile that has not had a negative affect on society when it was promoted. Whether we are allowed to eat shellfish or not is something we all realize to be part of the Old law and no longer applicable as well as found no where in the New Testament. Either you are just dodging the question or you are trying to compare the condemnation of homosexual acts to the condemnation of eating shellfish in the Old Testament which is futile. Also, people weren’t killed in the Old Testament for eating shellfish…
 
Nate13 said:
@VeritasLuxMea
Your examples are old Levitical law. Condemning homosexual acts is in the New Testament as well as the Old. Point to something worthwhile that has not had a negative affect on society when it was promoted. Whether we are allowed to eat shellfish or not is something we all realize to be part of the Old law and no longer applicable as well as found no where in the New Testament. Either you are just dodging the question or you are trying to compare the condemnation of homosexual acts to the condemnation of eating shellfish in the Old Testament which is futile. Also, people weren’t killed in the Old Testament for eating shellfish…
Click to expand...
Christians still consider the worship of, for example, Vishnu to be against the Ten Commandments. Such worship is promoted by the state in that Hindu temples get the same tax breaks that Christian churches do.

rossum
 
rossum said:
Christians still consider the worship of, for example, Vishnu to be against the Ten Commandments. Such worship is promoted by the state in that Hindu temples get the same tax breaks that Christian churches do.

rossum
Click to expand...
From this I would get that your saying promoting worship of other god’s doesn’t not have a negative impact on society. I would disagree with you on that. I’d also point out that the tax breaks you refer to are based on the idea that these communities provide charitable services to the communities around them. I think its a stretch to say such tax breaks are promoting the religion. I’d rather say they are promoting the charitable actions and positive influence religious groups can have on the communities around them. If the tax break was being given purely because its a place where worship occurs I’m not sure I would support that. If so couldn’t any private home make that claim?
 
The Church does support a particular type of “same-sex” marriage: when a husband (or wife) undergoes a sex-change, and stays married to his/her spouse.
 
Ahimsa said:
The Church does support a particular type of “same-sex” marriage: when a husband (or wife) undergoes a sex-change, and stays married to his/her spouse.
Click to expand...
That’s because the Church refuses to recognize the operation changing the gender
 
Ahimsa said:
I believe that the state does recognize the operation changing the gender.
Click to expand...
Yes, but the point is that the Church does not recognize the operation therefore the marriage is still between a man and a woman in the eyes if the Church.

You could have domestic partnerships between any two co-domiciling adults (minimum time one year prior co-domiciling), it would allow extension of health benefits, survivors benefits, estate planning, mingling of assets, executor of estates etc. Why shouldn’t a brother and a sister co-domiciling be able to mingle assets? Why shouldn’t they be able to extend health benefits to each other? Of course homosexual “couples” would be able to benefit, but the intended helped are siblings and friends.
 
Dakota_Roberts said:
Yes, but the point is that the Church does not recognize the operation therefore the marriage is still between a man and a woman in the eyes if the Church.
Click to expand...
Does the Church try to prevent these transgendered, state-recognized “same-sex” marriages from happening?
 
Ahimsa said:
Does the Church try to prevent these transgendered, state-recognized “same-sex” marriages from happening?
Click to expand...
It seems the only difference is the wording. If the state is essentially saying you can change your gender then yes I believe the Church would have a problem with that. It seems the only real difference is in how each side words it though.
 
Nate13 said:
I have a couple questions for those who can agree that for Christians same-sex relations and marriage is wrong, but when it comes to government they believe we should recognize same-sex marriages as marriages equal to man-woman marriages. One, I’m curious to hear why they believe God has told us homosexuality is wrong and that marriage should be between a man and a woman. Two, I would also like to ask those people if they can come up with an example of anything else God has condemned that has no serious negative consequences in society when it is promoted.

My point from this is basically that God doesn’t condemn things without a reason. Every rule he makes is for our own good not just personally, but also as a society. As Christians we know this and should vote accordingly to make sure as a society we are never promoting evil as a good thing which is exactly what our government would be doing if it recognizes gay marriages. You can post all the statistics you want, but as Christians we know that whenever a society promotes evil it will have a negative impact on the society as a whole. Thus, a smart Christian knew when contraception was first being promoted that it would have a negative impact on society and a smart Christian now should know that recognizing and promoting gay marriage as a good thing will have negative impact on society.

In summary I’m asking a proponent of gay marriage to show that a) our government recognizing gay marriages as equal to man-woman marriages and the privileges that go with that is not promoting it or b) give an example of something else God has condemned that society promotes and does not have a negative effect on society as a whole or c) explain why same-sex marriages is the exception in terms of things that God has condemned that don’t have a negative effect on society when they are promoted.
Click to expand...
There is a distinction between legality and religious beliefs. That is the crux of the issue.

Legally, there was once a distinction of gender role in marriage. Today, there is not. At least that is the consistent ruling of the courts. Therefore, gender should not be considered in granting a marriage license. Like it or not, that is the momentum that we are observing as the Prop 8 case makes its way to the US Supreme Court, DADT is struck down, and DOMA is ruled to be unconstitutional.

Given that, then there is no legal grounds for denying same gendered couples the right to marry. Marriage is a legally recognized civil right. For example, when slavery was abolished, Negroes were allowed to marry. Prior to that, they were not allowed because they were property and unable to enter a marriage contract. The same logic applies to gay marriage. When gender roles in marriage were a legal principle, then opposite sexes were required to make a marriage. Since women have received equal rights under the law, those gender roles no longer exist. A woman cannot sue for divorce because her husband refuses to work. A man cannot sue for divorce because a woman will not relocate to Antarctica with him. The law has changed.

The CC teaches that there are specific gender requirements to make a marriage. Simple as that.

As long as the CC keeps its opinion out of the political arena, then it will be acting legally. It is OK for Catholics to make political decisions and statements as private citizens, but it is not OK for the CC to engage directly in political activity. A red flag was raised in the California Prop 8 campaign, where the CC and the LDS joined together to illegally influence the election. If they try it again, then they are likely to face some legal consequences. Imagine what would happen to the CC and LDS, if they lost their tax exempt status in the US for political activity. They have been more cautious in Europe, where they are held to a higher legal standard than in the US.

This interface between society and the CC is a difficult one. There was a time when Popes instructed rulers on what to do. That time is long gone, but there is still a sense in the Church that its opinions should be relevant to legal matters. It is, and it should be, but no more so than those who would like to marry, and their supporters. Both sides should be listened to.

In the end, this is a generational issue. There are good data which indicate that people over 65 oppose gay marriage by a wide margin, while people under 30 support it by a wide margin. People in the middle age range are split fairly evenly, but also depending on geographic location. The leadership of the Church, as with most large organizations, is quite old.
 
FormerWarrior said:
There is a distinction between legality and religious beliefs. That is the crux of the issue.

Legally, there was once a distinction of gender role in marriage. Today, there is not. At least that is the consistent ruling off the courts. Therefore, gender should not be considered in granting a marriage license. Like it or not, that is the momentum that we are observing as the Prop 8 case makes its way to the US Supreme Court, DADT is struck down, and DOMA is ruled to be unconstitutional.

Given that, then there is no legal grounds for denying same gendered couples the right to marry. Marriage is a recognized as a civil right. For example, when slavery was abolished, Negroes were allowed to marry. Prior to that, they were not allowed because they were property and unable to enter a marriage contract. The same logic applies to gay marriage. When gender roles in marriage where a legal principle, then opposite sexes were required to make a marriage. Since women have received equal rights under the law, those gender roles no longer exist. A woman cannot sue for divorce because her husband refuses to work. A man cannot sue for divorce because a woman will not relocate to Antarctica with him. The law has changed.

The CC teaches that there are specific gender requirements to make a marriage. Simple as that.

As long as the CC keeps its opinion out of the political arena, then it will be acting legally. It is OK for Catholics to make political decisions as private citizens, but it is not OK for the CC to engage directly in political activity. A red flag was raised in the California Prop 8 campaign, where the CC and the LDS joined together to illegally influence the election.

This interface between society and the CC is a difficult one. There was a time when Popes instructed rulers on what to do. That time is long gone, but there is still a sense in the Church that its opinions should be relevant to legal matters. It is, and it should be, but no more so than those who would like to marry, and their supporters. Both sides should be listened to.

In the end, this is a generational issue. There are good data which indicate that people over 65 oppose gay marriage by a wide margin, while people under 30 support it by a wide margin. People in the middle age range are split fairly evenly, but also depending on geographic location. The leadership of the Church, as with most large organizations, is quite old.
Click to expand...
You really missed the whole crux of my argument didn’t you. All gay rights proponents will ask you “well how does gay marriage even affect you and why do you care?”. I’m attempting to answer that question. My point is that God does not condemn anything without a reason. As Christians we should know that accepting the legalization of gay marriage is going to hurt society and civilization and its only a matter of whether we really need to wait and let it play out or if we will be smart enough to say no before we have to witness the fruits of allowing this to happen. If gay marriage hurts the society and civilization that I live in, then it affects me. Thus why should I vote to enact something that I believe will have a negative affect on society and civilization? My argument pertains to Christians. I fully realize that anyone who doesn’t believe the Bible is the inspired word of God is not going to care about his argument.
 
Nate13 said:
You really missed the whole crux of my argument didn’t you. All gay rights proponents will ask you “well how does gay marriage even affect you and why do you care?”. I’m attempting to answer that question. My point is that God does not condemn anything without a reason. As Christians we should know that accepting the legalization of gay marriage is going to hurt society and civilization and its only a matter of whether we really need to wait and let it play out or if we will be smart enough to say no before we have to witness the fruits of allowing this to happen. If gay marriage hurts the society and civilization that I live in, then it affects me. My argument pertains to Christians. I fully realize that anyone who doesn’t believe the Bible is the inspired word of God is not going to care about his argument.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t divorce hurt society?
 
Ahimsa said:
Doesn’t divorce hurt society?
Click to expand...
yes it does. There is zero reason why the government should be promoting divorce with its laws. If people want to get divorced and remarry over and over again they are free to do so, but I see no reason why our government should reward them for it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top