C
After NY Marriage Vote, Archbishop Dolan Warns of Further Redefinition
- Status
L
LSK
Guest
I am becoming more and more convinced that we need to take the word ‘marriage’ out of the civil code in every state.
I believe people should have to register with the state so that the state can track their whereabouts, properly tax them, make sure their property rights and inheritence rights are protected, etc etc etc.
But then, for those who believe as we do that Marriage is NOT a civil contract but a Sacramental Covenant, we take our little piece of paper from the state to our Priest and say, “We would like to partake of the Sacrament of Marriage, please”.
Because I think, if we do not make it very VERY distinct, we will have same-sex activists show up at our Church demanding the priest ‘marry’ them so that they can file a law suit when the priest refuses to do so.
that is my fear.
I believe people should have to register with the state so that the state can track their whereabouts, properly tax them, make sure their property rights and inheritence rights are protected, etc etc etc.
But then, for those who believe as we do that Marriage is NOT a civil contract but a Sacramental Covenant, we take our little piece of paper from the state to our Priest and say, “We would like to partake of the Sacrament of Marriage, please”.
Because I think, if we do not make it very VERY distinct, we will have same-sex activists show up at our Church demanding the priest ‘marry’ them so that they can file a law suit when the priest refuses to do so.
that is my fear.
T
Teelynn
Guest
And a very substantiated fear! This might be one way to skirt the problem that is looming overhead.
It’s coming anyway, and Churches will be persecuted, no doubt about it, but to get the states to change “marriage” to ALL civil unions might be asking for the moon. Sometimes I think the idea is to force Churches to marry gay people one way or the other. The gay activists would like to change God’s mind.
O
OriginalJS
Guest
I disagree. No church, pastor, priest, or rabbi, has ever been sued for refusing to marry anyone. Many churches have firm rules about who they will marry and who they will not. The Catholic Church has such rules and they have never, to my knowledge, been challenged in a civil suit. If I am wrong I’m sure someone here will correct me by citing specific cases.And a very substantiated fear! This might be one way to skirt the problem that is looming overhead.
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
Yeah, what planet are you living in?
D
Dale_M
Guest
That isn’t a good comparison with marriage. Adoption is not a religious practice, the ceremony and sacrament of marriage is a religious practice. This distinction is fundamental and provides legal protections (in the US, under the Constitution.)
L
laszlo
Guest
I wont be so sure. The next step of the battle is to force the Church o accept openly homosexuals as teachers in the Catholic schools or as lay associates. The logical step afterward will be to force the Church to bless their civil union.
Unfortunately the !st amendment of the Constitution keeps away the religion (with the exception of the atheism) from the public life, but do not keeps away the Government from the internal affairs of the Churches.
S
St_Francis
Guest
40 years ago, no one even imagined homosexual “marriage.” 30 years ago people would have been horrified at the thought of homosexual couples adopting.
The changes which have talen place over the past 90 years are tremendous, starting with the acceptance of artificial birth control in 1930 by the Anglicans. Marriage has been close to destroyed.
If two people of the same sex can have their relationship recognized by the state as a marriage, why stop there? Why not more than two?
No, no one has yet been sued, but just a few years ago, no state had been sued to recognize as marriage the relationship between two people of the same sex. Just because something hasn’t happened doesn’t mean it won’t.
S
sedonaman
Guest
There was a time before the idea of same-sex marriage was even considered. What didn’t happen in the past is no indication of what won’t happen in the future.
S
sedonaman
Guest
Do you want men not to have a place in society? The social goal of marriage is to tie children to their parents and their parents to one another.
Take a look at this presentation. It is in four parts and about an hour in total length. It is the best non-religious argument against same-sex “marriage” I have ever seen.
Jennifer Roback Morse, Phd
Same Sex Marriage: Why Not? (Part 1 of 4) youtube.com/watch?v=osCnn-ATrcI
Same Sex Marriage: Why Not? (Part 2 of 4) youtube.com/watch?v=ZdzCFMCsIb4
Same Sex Marriage: Why Not? (Part 3 of 4) youtube.com/watch?v=atsAiYpyI9M&feature=related
Same Sex Marriage: Why Not? (Part 4 of 4) youtube.com/watch?v=VwyOHhJAYko&feature=related
It explains, among other things, why same-sex “marriage” will destroy the institution.
S
sedonaman
Guest
S
sedonaman
Guest
Besides, adoption is child-centered to give the child the parents he needs, not to give adults the children they want. The purpose of marriage is altogether different.
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
Adoption is also a part of everything that is moral. You cannot say that adoption is not part of religious practice. I believe before U.S ever existed, adoption was already part of life. Adoption by gay couples is wrong and the Church is agaisnt it.
It is the mission of the Church to uphold the Truth and morals revealed to her.
Where have you been?
G
GeorgetownHoya
Guest
I always enjoy seeing outraged moral indignity being expressed by a Catholic leader… it fits so well with their historic stand on handling sexually abusive priests…
J
Jack_Bauer
Guest
I think that this ploy to push SSA on the rest of society as a valid viable option is part of the neurotic behavior portrayed by such people with every intention of being “accepted” by everyone. Part of it is that they mental illness among such folks is so high that they have convinced themeselves, at the expense of society, that “acceptance” - even thought not freely rendered - will help them gain their self-esteem. It’s really a mental health issue that is being shoved upon society. This passive methodology used by many Christians today never worked and never will. One must freely choose such evil. Even though most of society may choose to accept it, my hopes is for strength among clergy to stand firm against it and for the laity to have enough sense to stand up against it.
It’s scary. But I’ve seen several rainbows on vehicles at our parish. I’ve been tempted to do something humorous about it. But then I just blow it off our of fear of being persecuted for my sense of humor. I know many people afflicted with SSA. Some live in sin, and others do not. Looks like we’re going down under… underground again.
It’s scary. But I’ve seen several rainbows on vehicles at our parish. I’ve been tempted to do something humorous about it. But then I just blow it off our of fear of being persecuted for my sense of humor. I know many people afflicted with SSA. Some live in sin, and others do not. Looks like we’re going down under… underground again.
D
Dale_M
Guest
A part of life, yes. A part of Catholic religious practice, no. What religious rituals are part of the adoption process?
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
What is worse is that we have weaked politicians who sucumbe to these sick ideas.
W
wisdomseeker
Guest
You are kidding me.
G
GodLovesTheSpek
Guest
“Warns”?
“The line in the sand” was drawn millennia ago. Given this age of word-smithing and relativism, “warns” can give one the impression of: that the line hasn’t been fully crossed but are only approaching it, maybe just a little tiny bit over the line or assuming the line has width so that there is a little wiggle room for “tolerance”, “love”, “acceptance” and “welcoming”. The attacks and agenda, sadly, will probably continue.
“Further redefinition”?
Marriage and Matrimony was never ours to define to begin with let alone redefine. Despite what some Deceived people might attempt to think and do, Marriage and Matrimony have not been redefined and whatever results from this “union” is a Lie and a mirage.
“The line in the sand” was drawn millennia ago. Given this age of word-smithing and relativism, “warns” can give one the impression of: that the line hasn’t been fully crossed but are only approaching it, maybe just a little tiny bit over the line or assuming the line has width so that there is a little wiggle room for “tolerance”, “love”, “acceptance” and “welcoming”. The attacks and agenda, sadly, will probably continue.
“Further redefinition”?
Marriage and Matrimony was never ours to define to begin with let alone redefine. Despite what some Deceived people might attempt to think and do, Marriage and Matrimony have not been redefined and whatever results from this “union” is a Lie and a mirage.
- Status