- Status
O
O.S.Luke
Guest
If my history’s right - it wasn’t until the Council of Trent that you even needed clergy present for a marriage. Before then, you just announced your intentions, and when the marriage was consumated - you were married.
If folks realized that today… perhaps they wouldn’t “consumate” so freely.
[Yes… that was an extremely brief history on Christian marriage.]
If folks realized that today… perhaps they wouldn’t “consumate” so freely.
[Yes… that was an extremely brief history on Christian marriage.]
R
ralphinal
Guest
That is my understanding as well. And we are the ones with the separation of Church and state.
I saw call everything the state recognizes a civil union. THen to be married, you have a church cerimony. You need both to be recognized by both. Then the homosexuals have the same rights and name as the hetero: civil union.
T
teancum79
Guest
It’s an idea, but given the efforts of some judges to alter the laws of this despite the overwhelming number of people who oppose those changes do you really think it will stop there?
I never bet, but I’d almost put money on a law being introduced (if it has not yet) saying that calling homosexual relations a sin is a hate crime.
We can kiss our rights to speak and worship goodbye if things don’t turn around soon.
I never bet, but I’d almost put money on a law being introduced (if it has not yet) saying that calling homosexual relations a sin is a hate crime.
We can kiss our rights to speak and worship goodbye if things don’t turn around soon.
M
Maxply
Guest
Homosexual “marriage” is a bad concept.
it’s being foisted on the public by a self-serving, highly dedicated, highly motivated group. I’m shocked at the power politics involved here; the shameless propaganda, the presentation of harmful and wrong ideas.
It’s defining deviancy down. It’s making wrong behavior right, by slowly knicking away at it.
I’m stunned liberals see this as progress of some kind.
I’m stunned people in 2008 STILL hold to the view that the only way to view a “social engineering” idea is simply by how it affects the individual. . . I’m stunned people don’t realize they are part of larger groups and publics, and have larger responsibilities than to their own conveniences and desires.
it’s being foisted on the public by a self-serving, highly dedicated, highly motivated group. I’m shocked at the power politics involved here; the shameless propaganda, the presentation of harmful and wrong ideas.
It’s defining deviancy down. It’s making wrong behavior right, by slowly knicking away at it.
I’m stunned liberals see this as progress of some kind.
I’m stunned people in 2008 STILL hold to the view that the only way to view a “social engineering” idea is simply by how it affects the individual. . . I’m stunned people don’t realize they are part of larger groups and publics, and have larger responsibilities than to their own conveniences and desires.
R
ralphinal
Guest
That is alrady occuring in some countries. It will here, too.
S
Steadfast
Guest
The West is dying, the US is dying only a little bit more slowly than Europe.
Between Islam and Naturalism the West is in a vice.
It is said that every great civilization that has risen and fallen experienced just such a moral breakdown prior to its failure. I don’t know if this is true, I haven’t studied every great civilization.
I have studied the Romans though. During the Republican era they were very circumspect about such things. They happened but they were never recognized or given approval. Quite the opposite in fact, a reputation for homosexuality could get you removed from the senate. The Romans were, contrary to popular opinion, rather prudish about a great number of things.
Interestingly, during the early imperial era, before the advent of Christianity as a licit religion in the empire, morality was in a general intermittent spiral downward with occasional arrests.
It has been argued that the recognition and eventual adoption of Christianity by the Emperors effected a near total stop to what was becoming something of a free fall in public morality having the effect of giving the Empire a thousand year reprieve in the East and in the West the rise of the Germanic people had the same effect along with the rise of the church.
Just speculation. It would be hard to say that homosexuality causes civilizations to fall but it cannot really be argued that a firm religious and traditional base has a strengthening and preservative effect.
Between Islam and Naturalism the West is in a vice.
It is said that every great civilization that has risen and fallen experienced just such a moral breakdown prior to its failure. I don’t know if this is true, I haven’t studied every great civilization.
I have studied the Romans though. During the Republican era they were very circumspect about such things. They happened but they were never recognized or given approval. Quite the opposite in fact, a reputation for homosexuality could get you removed from the senate. The Romans were, contrary to popular opinion, rather prudish about a great number of things.
Interestingly, during the early imperial era, before the advent of Christianity as a licit religion in the empire, morality was in a general intermittent spiral downward with occasional arrests.
It has been argued that the recognition and eventual adoption of Christianity by the Emperors effected a near total stop to what was becoming something of a free fall in public morality having the effect of giving the Empire a thousand year reprieve in the East and in the West the rise of the Germanic people had the same effect along with the rise of the church.
Just speculation. It would be hard to say that homosexuality causes civilizations to fall but it cannot really be argued that a firm religious and traditional base has a strengthening and preservative effect.
- Status