Catholic opponents of same-sex marriage - would you ban all marriage not recognised by the Church?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hokomai
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
livingwordunity said:
Homosexuality was common in Sodom and Gomorrah, but it was never called marriage. And you are reading into Scripture what it doesn’t say.
Click to expand...
Scripture never endorses homosexual marriage, but it does command compassion for homosexuals. You might do well to heed it.
 
JimG said:
There is something on the internet hypothesizing that when Jesus cured the servant of the centurion, that it was really the centurion’s homosexual partner; thus Jesus blessed this union by curing the partner. Of course, in 2,000 years of biblical exegesis no one has discovered this interpretation until now.
Click to expand...
This has been well known for millenia, it is only recently that bigots within the church have felt the need to obfuscate the plain meaning of the text.
 
Why on earth would anyone do mental gymnastics to deny the fact that we as Christians owe compassion to homosexuals, following the example of our Lord?
 
stanczyk said:
Scripture never endorses homosexual marriage, but it does command compassion for homosexuals. You might do well to heed it.
Click to expand...
Compassion doesn’t mean lying to them. I want them to have a chance to get to Heaven. But they don’t have a chance as long as they are lost to the lies of the devil, calling evil good and good evil.
 
stanczyk said:
Why on earth would anyone do mental gymnastics to deny the fact that we as Christians owe compassion to homosexuals, following the example of our Lord?
Click to expand...
Compassion does not require agreeing with what someone thinks. Nor does it require lying to make others feel good.
 
stanczyk said:
On the contrary, there had been a falsification of the translation to sanitize the passage in question for Victorian sensibilities, but, again, if you read the Bible in Greek there is no serious question as to what the word pais means.
Click to expand...
Isn’t it amazing that all the Biblical scholars and Church fathers throughout the centuries couldn’t read Greek as well as you can?
 
stanczyk said:
Quite the contrary, homosexuality was common in the Roman legions, there is nothing extraordinary about reading the Bible in its proper historical context. There can be no doubt that the centurion who asked Jesus to heal his sick boyfriend was a homosexual.
Click to expand...
OK. Even assuming arguendo that the centurion was “gay” and the servant was actually his “life partner” there is nothing in the text that shows Jesus said this behavior was acceptable. Jesus was constantly interacting with sinners of all sorts. Again, this is no argument for so-called “gay marriage.” Jesus didn’t bless their *alleged *sexual union. He healed a sinner. ALL of the people Jesus healed were sinners.

Further, there’s no evidence that this alleged gay couple did not repent and become chaste followers of Jesus because of his healing. In no way could the event be seen as any kind of endorsement of homosexual relations.

Peace,
Robert
 
stanczyk said:
Why on earth would anyone do mental gymnastics to deny the fact that we as Christians owe compassion to homosexuals, following the example of our Lord?
Click to expand...
Why would anyone do the mental gymnastics required to conclude that not buying into this lie of yours is due to a lack of compassion? Is anyone in this thread saying that homosexuals are subhumans who don’t deserve happiness? The question of whether or not a homosexual relationships is the same as a marriage has nothing to do with treating homosexuals with compassion.
 
livingwordunity said:
Compassion doesn’t mean lying to them. I want them to have a chance to get to Heaven. But they don’t have a chance as long as they are lost to the lies of the devil, calling evil good and good evil.
Click to expand...
Compassion means respecting their legitimate claims for equal recognition under the law.

By all means, go out there and minister to them, and tell them of Christ. Hint: it will be much easier if you don’t spend the whole time ranting about how they shouldn’t be able to get married.
 
Robert_in_SD said:
OK. Even assuming arguendo that the centurion was “gay” and the servant was actually his “life partner”
Click to expand...
Assuming arguendo. My, how big of you to assume arguendo something for which there is overwhelming historical evidence, and no serious scholar disputes. Yes, let us assume it arguendo, since it is arguendo.
Robert_in_SD said:
there is nothing in the text that shows Jesus said this behavior was acceptable.
Click to expand...
I never said it does. You are committing what is called a “straw man fallacy.”
Robert_in_SD said:
Further, there’s no evidence that this alleged gay couple did not repent and become chaste followers of Jesus because of his healing. In no way could the event be seen as any kind of endorsement of homosexual relations.
Click to expand...
Matthew 8:10 “Truly I tell you, I have not found anyone in Israel with such great faith [as this gay couple].”

It is what it is.
 
stanczyk said:
Compassion means respecting their legitimate claims for equal recognition under the law.

By all means, go out there and minister to them, and tell them of Christ. Hint: it will be much easier if you don’t spend the whole time ranting about how they shouldn’t be able to get married.
Click to expand...
Jesus had compassion for adulterers, for fornicators, for all who came to him. There is no evidence that he recommended the social approval of adultery or fornication. Thus, even though he had great compassion for the woman caught in adultery. He advised the crowd ‘let he who is without sin be the first to cast a stone.’ And yet, He did not suggest that adultery henceforth be approved by the Rabbi’s and Teachers as equally normative to marriage.

He also had compassion for the woman at the well in Samaria. Yet he did not advise her that extramarital cohabitation should henceforth be approved as acceptable for all Jews.
 
JimG said:
Jesus had compassion for adulterers, for fornicators, for all who came to him. There is no evidence that he recommended the social approval of adultery or fornication. Thus, even though he had great compassion for the woman caught in adultery. He advised the crowd ‘let he who is without sin be the first to cast a stone.’ And yet, He did not suggest that adultery henceforth be approved by the Rabbi’s and Teachers as equally normative to marriage.

He also had compassion for the woman at the well in Samaria. Yet he did not advise her that extramarital cohabitation should henceforth be approved as acceptable for all Jews.
Click to expand...
Precisely. I don’t hear anybody arguing that adultery should be outlawed. Same goes for fornication and cohabiting unwed couples. These behaviors are just as sinful as homosexuality. Yet I only see Catholics up in arms about homosexuals, and turning a blind eye to rampant adultery and fornication in our society. Hypocrisy?
 
stanczyk said:
Precisely. I don’t hear anybody arguing that adultery should be outlawed. Same goes for fornication and cohabiting unwed couples. These behaviors are just as sinful as homosexuality. Yet I only see Catholics up in arms about homosexuals, and turning a blind eye to rampant adultery and fornication in our society. Hypocrisy?
Click to expand...
Nor do you see fornication being pushed as equivalent to marriage, or adultery. The difference seems to be that gays are seeking moral approval of society, adulterers and fornicators, not so much. They don’t demand adultery pride days and fornication pride days.
 
stanczyk said:
Precisely. I don’t hear anybody arguing that adultery should be outlawed. Same goes for fornication and cohabiting unwed couples. These behaviors are just as sinful as homosexuality. Yet I only see Catholics up in arms about homosexuals, and turning a blind eye to rampant adultery and fornication in our society. Hypocrisy?
Click to expand...
Of course it is hypocrisy. I have yet to hear a good explanation for it though. The argument always goes back to those other things don’t “redefine marriage.”
 
JimG said:
Nor do you see fornication being pushed as equivalent to marriage, or adultery. The difference seems to be that gays are seeking moral approval of society, adulterers and fornicators, not so much. They don’t demand adultery pride days and fornication pride days.
Click to expand...
Are you kidding? Cohabiting couples are doing precisely that. They live and raise children together, get partner benefits etc.

As for adultery and fornication pride days, they have those too. Or have you never been to New Orleans, Las Vegas, Key West, etc?
 
interestedman said:
Of course it is hypocrisy. I have yet to hear a good explanation for it though. The argument always goes back to those other things don’t “redefine marriage.”
Click to expand...
Nah, it’s just plain old hypocrisy.

Ironic, since hypocrisy is the only sin that Jesus truly got angry about.
 
stanczyk said:
Precisely. I don’t hear anybody arguing that adultery should be outlawed. Same goes for fornication and cohabiting unwed couples. These behaviors are just as sinful as homosexuality. Yet I only see Catholics up in arms about homosexuals, and turning a blind eye to rampant adultery and fornication in our society. Hypocrisy?
Click to expand...
From the 'nose bleed seats"…it’s because the “sins” you listed affect THEM all too often…and their families…brothers…sisters…mothers…fathers…but homosexuality and same sex marriage is an “easy target”…doesn’t really effect them with any life changing results.🤷
 
It’s hypocritical for liberals to criticize the Catholic Church for limiting the definition of marriage when liberals are placing their own limits on it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top