California Catholics

  • Thread starter Thread starter convert_2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No thanks.

I would not be supporting Prop 8 even if I was in California.
 
I am not a Californian, but a person cannot be Catholic and be against this proposed law. Such a position is not compatible with being Catholic. If a person is opposed to this law yet claims to be a Catholic, they are lying. They may be lying only to themselves and God, but they are lying nonetheless.
 
rpp said:
I am not a Californian, but a person cannot be Catholic and be against this proposed law.
Click to expand...
You are overstating your case. It is entirely possible to be Catholic and yet not be fully in tune with Church positions.

However, yes, the Church is against same-sex marriage, just as it is against same-sex civil unions.
 
Hey, this post is getting hijacked!

This IS a good website and an effort very vital to support! I was actually thinking yesterday about how I might help out our confused sister state to the west.

So give it a shot, take a look: CatholicsforProtectMarriage.com
 
I’m a California voter and would like to support this, but I don’t understand it and had trouble getting more info from that website. It says:
Prop 8 reads: ***“Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” ***
Click to expand...
Prop 8 restores *the same words *that were adopted by 61% of the voters in 2000 and were nullified by the California Supreme Court.
Click to expand...
{emphasis mine}

So if it’s using the same words wouldn’t the California Supreme Court just nullify it again?
 
RachelsAlumni said:
I’m a California voter and would like to support this, but I don’t understand it and had trouble getting more info from that website. It says:

{emphasis mine}

So if it’s using the same words wouldn’t the California Supreme Court just nullify it again?
Click to expand...
No, because this is a constitutional amendment. The other was just a law that was found to be unconstitutional by the California Supreme Court using logic even more twisted than Rube Goldberg alarm clock.
 
RachelsAlumni said:
I’m a California voter and would like to support this, but I don’t understand it and had trouble getting more info from that website. It says:

{emphasis mine}

So if it’s using the same words wouldn’t the California Supreme Court just nullify it again?
Click to expand...
The first one was a law passed through the proposition process that had a large majority. It said a marriage can only be between a man and a woman. The California Supreme Court, in a 4-3 decision, said it was unconstitutional. In other words, one activist judge negated the will of the majority of the people in California. Proposition 8 would amend the State Constitution so it could not be declared unconstitutional. Jerry Brown (yes, Governor Moonbeam is now the California State Attorney General) has replaced the language used for this ballot proposition.

The original wording of the summary for Proposition 8 said it would amend “the California Constitution to provide that only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” Brown, however, recently changed the initiative’s title from “Limit on Marriage Constitutional Amendment” to “Eliminates Right of Same-sex Couples to Marry,” and the summary now reads: “Changes California Constitution to eliminate right of same-sex couples to marry. Provides that only a marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”

In the new language, it starts with “eliminates” - something negative. Then it says “the right” - most people are not for eliminating “rights.” When did it become a right for homosexuals to get married?

This is a real left-wing assault on the family, on the very institution of marriage itself. The response from the Catholic Church in California has been lukewarm at best. Various evangelical groups are leading the charge on this issue, while in regard to the Catholic Church, the silence is deafening.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top