Changing the definition of marriage devalues my marriage!

[Odell]

Legal recognition of homosexual unions would obscure certain basic moral values and cause a devaluation of the institution of marriage. It would value marriage between only those whom love each other. But love as emotion can be fickle what happens when emotionally you feel that the love is no longer there? Society would tell you to leave. But there is something much deeper to marriage than what society can offer. Redefining marriage would only further make children a curse than a blessing.

An institution devoid of essential reference to factors linked to heterosexuality; for example, procreation and raising children. the concept of marriage would undergo a radical transformation, with grave detriment to the common good.

Not even in a remote analogous sense do homosexual unions fulfil the purpose for which marriage and family deserve specific categorical recognition. On the contrary, there are good reasons for holding that such unions are harmful to the proper development of human society, especially if their impact on society were to increase. And to redefine marriage would only devalue what I have. When society already does a married couple with four kids. Must be catholic!

My family is the one being attacked and they want to play the victim.

 

[Houguy82]

So what about baren women ? They can’t make babies, so they can’t get married either ?

I mean that would devalue your marriage as you said because then all they would have is love, and you can’t marry someone just because you love them you gotta makes lots of babies too.

 

[Odell]

So what about baren women ? They can’t make babies, so they can’t get married either ?

I mean that would devalue your marriage as you said because then all they would have is love, and you can’t marry someone just because you love them you gotta makes lots of babies too.

Would a baren woman consider children a curse or a blessing?

 

[Houguy82]

Doesn’t matter she can’t have children therefore she has to adopt which meand that the procreative bond between her / her spouse is not there which simply makes it a marriage based on love, and the child. You said love isn’t enough, and the child will become a burden.

I’m not allowed to marry because people whom have never known me don’t like me, and even though I’ve been in a loving monogomous relashionsip for 8 years, and at a few months shy of my 30th birthday I’m starting to remind myself how no event in my life would compare to that of the love I would have for my children; but those same people that say I’m not allowed to marry because I’m evil also say that I’m such a horrible person that I the last thing I should ever be allowed to do is know what it feels like to walk your child to their first day of kindergarten and kiss them goodnight, to teach them to drive, to have the silly little arguments that teens have with their parents, to watch them graduate from school, to help them move into their dorm, to walk my daughter down the aisle.

I’m not saying that my opinions on the catholic faith’s teachings are any more correct than anyone elses’ I’m just hoping that maybe one person at a time I can get people to understand how hatefull these posts are, how much they literally tear at the fibres of my soul to hear a perfect stranger tell me I’m not human enough to marry, and raise a child.

 

[Odell]

Doesn’t matter she can’t have children therefore she has to adopt which meand that the procreative bond between her / her spouse is not there which simply makes it a marriage based on love, and the child. You said love isn’t enough, and the child will become a burden.

I’m not allowed to marry because people whom have never known me don’t like me, and even though I’ve been in a loving monogomous relashionsip for 8 years, and at a few months shy of my 30th birthday I’m starting to remind myself how no event in my life would compare to that of the love I would have for my children; but those same people that say I’m not allowed to marry because I’m evil also say that I’m such a horrible person that I the last thing I should ever be allowed to do is know what it feels like to walk your child to their first day of kindergarten and kiss them goodnight, to teach them to drive, to have the silly little arguments that teens have with their parents, to watch them graduate from school, to help them move into their dorm, to walk my daughter down the aisle.

I’m not saying that my opinions on the catholic faith’s teachings are any more correct than anyone elses’ I’m just hoping that maybe one person at a time I can get people to understand how hatefull these posts are, how much they literally tear at the fibres of my soul to hear a perfect stranger tell me I’m not human enough to marry, and raise a child.

Your no less human than me brother. Honest question why I’m the world would you want someone to recognize it as marriage when we are so set against it? Why do you need our approval?
Bottom line the Church is going to defend the family. And the breakdown of the family is caused by our over sexualized culture. Wouldn’t you agree?

 

[Dan_Daly]

Doesn’t matter she can’t have children therefore she has to adopt which meand that the procreative bond between her / her spouse is not there which simply makes it a marriage based on love, and the child. You said love isn’t enough, and the child will become a burden.

I’m not allowed to marry because people whom have never known me don’t like me, and even though I’ve been in a loving monogomous relashionsip for 8 years, and at a few months shy of my 30th birthday I’m starting to remind myself how no event in my life would compare to that of the love I would have for my children; but those same people that say I’m not allowed to marry because I’m evil also say that I’m such a horrible person that I the last thing I should ever be allowed to do is know what it feels like to walk your child to their first day of kindergarten and kiss them goodnight, to teach them to drive, to have the silly little arguments that teens have with their parents, to watch them graduate from school, to help them move into their dorm, to walk my daughter down the aisle.

I’m not saying that my opinions on the catholic faith’s teachings are any more correct than anyone elses’ I’m just hoping that maybe one person at a time I can get people to understand how hatefull these posts are, how much they literally tear at the fibres of my soul to hear a perfect stranger tell me I’m not human enough to marry, and raise a child.

There are many barren women who have had children. Sarah for one. The mother of Samson for another. Elizabeth yet another.

Pax

 

[kmuestwin]

Doesn’t matter she can’t have children therefore she has to adopt which meand that the procreative bond between her / her spouse is not there which simply makes it a marriage based on love, and the child. You said love isn’t enough, and the child will become a burden.

I’m not allowed to marry because people whom have never known me don’t like me, and even though I’ve been in a loving monogomous relashionsip for 8 years, and at a few months shy of my 30th birthday I’m starting to remind myself how no event in my life would compare to that of the love I would have for my children; but those same people that say** I’m not allowed to marry because I’m evil** also say that I’m such a horrible person that I the last thing I should ever be allowed to do is know what it feels like to walk your child to their first day of kindergarten and kiss them goodnight, to teach them to drive, to have the silly little arguments that teens have with their parents, to watch them graduate from school, to help them move into their dorm, to walk my daughter down the aisle.

I’m not saying that my opinions on the catholic faith’s teachings are any more correct than anyone elses’ I’m just hoping that maybe one person at a time I can get people to understand how hatefull these posts are, how much they literally tear at the fibres of my soul to hear a perfect stranger tell me I’m not human enough to marry, and raise a child.

It’s not about you being a better person or a worse person. Homosexuals and heterosexuals have the same ability to do good in the world. The fact is that a homosexual union of any kind is just not possible in the Catholic faith. Just as with any two unmarried persons, homosexuals are called to be chaste. That means no sex outside of marriage and that means no sex. That’s a huge cross to bear but as Christians, we are called to bear our crosses with love and humility.

Everyone sins. Every mortal sin weighs the same and has the same ability to condemn a person. You are not evil because you sin. Being evil is not the same as falling short of saintliness. Evil is when you inspire others to fall short of saintliness. My favorite quote from my priest is that sin is anything that damages another person’s relationship with God.

 

[John21652]

Doesn’t matter she can’t have children therefore she has to adopt which meand that the procreative bond between her / her spouse is not there which simply makes it a marriage based on love, and the child. You said love isn’t enough, and the child will become a burden.

Houguy, you have been on other threads, trying to push your gay agenda wheelbarrow. The wheels fell off your argument long ago.

Go back and read Odell’s first post and read it carefully before you go hitting the keys in response. She wrote, and I quote - "An institution devoid of essential reference to factors linked to heterosexuality; for example, procreation and raising children. the concept of marriage would undergo a radical transformation, with grave detriment to the common good." Notice how she used the phrase “for example”, when she was writing of the “essential reference factors linked to heterosexuality”. She didn’t give an exhaustive list, by any means, but you hooked onto just one of the examples she gave. To base your argument on just one of the “essential references to factors linked to heterosexuality” wont work. It wont work because all those esential factors are linked together. If one is not present, others must be.

I’m not allowed to marry because people whom have never known me don’t like me

Well, this is indeed the victim card. How can anyone who hasn’t met you say they don’t like you? Or is it the case that lawmakers have decreed, with the support of society at large, that what you do is not liked? You tell us, because there is a great big difference. After all, crooks are not put in jail because they are disliked. They are put in jail because society does not like what they do. If your argument held true, likeable crooks would be set free!

and even though I’ve been in a loving monogomous relashionsip for 8 years, and at a few months shy of my 30th birthday I’m starting to remind myself how no event in my life would compare to that of the love I would have for my children;

Well, what is it exactly that is stopping you from having children? Oh, don’t tell me, it’s your own choices?!!

but those same people that say I’m not allowed to marry because I’m evil also say that I’m such a horrible person that I the last thing I should ever be allowed to do is know what it feels like to walk your child to their first day of kindergarten and kiss them goodnight, to teach them to drive, to have the silly little arguments that teens have with their parents, to watch them graduate from school, to help them move into their dorm, to walk my daughter down the aisle.

If I am reading you correctly, you are trying to tell us that you are prevented from having children because someone thinks you are evil. Is that correct? That’s weird, because lots of people who have turned out to be evil have been married. Hitler got married. So too did Josef Stalin and they were really evil dudes. Some of society’s most evil murderers have turned out to be married. So what other reason is preventing you from having kids and eventually walking your daughter down the aisle? Oh please, do tell us what is causing you so much heartbreak.

I’m not saying that my opinions on the catholic faith’s teachings are any more correct than anyone elses’ I’m just hoping that maybe one person at a time I can get people to understand how hatefull these posts are, how much they literally tear at the fibres of my soul to hear a perfect stranger tell me I’m not human enough to marry, and raise a child.

You have ‘Catholic’ listed as your religion. If you are truly a Catholic, then there can be no interpretation of basic Catholic doctrines to suit yourself. As for perfect strangers telling you are not human enough to marry and have a child, well, that doesn’t make sense either. After all, a perfect stranger wouldn’t know anything about you.So, why would anyone tell you you aren’t human enough to marry and have a child? While you are at it, please show us the hateful posts you wrote of. maybe we can do something about them.

 

[Odell]

There are many reasons why people get married…social, cultural, financial, family, companionship. love, friendship, business, religion…please accept the fact that everyone cannot be just like you and cannot do things exactly the way you do them.
And please…don’t try to stop people who love each other from getting married.

“God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.”

You don’t have to let what other people are doing, in love, “devalue” your own actions.

No I would never devalue my own marriage. But society as a whole has and it will continue to get worse the more we alow. I already get bad looks with four kids as if marriage is just between two people who love each other? That is about the shallowest definition of marriage by the way.

 

[Conor7]

Legal recognition of homosexual unions would obscure certain basic moral values and cause a devaluation of the institution of marriage. It would value marriage between only those whom love each other. But love as emotion can be fickle what happens when emotionally you feel that the love is no longer there? Society would tell you to leave. But there is something much deeper to marriage than what society can offer. Redefining marriage would only further make children a curse than a blessing.

An institution devoid of essential reference to factors linked to heterosexuality; for example, procreation and raising children. the concept of marriage would undergo a radical transformation, with grave detriment to the common good.

Not even in a remote analogous sense do homosexual unions fulfil the purpose for which marriage and family deserve specific categorical recognition. On the contrary, there are good reasons for holding that such unions are harmful to the proper development of human society, especially if their impact on society were to increase. And to redefine marriage would only devalue what I have. When society already does a married couple with four kids. Must be catholic!

My family is the one being attacked and they want to play the victim.

Hello Odell - I’m not sure that I’m necessarily arguing against you, but feel it is important to make a few points. In an effort for full disclosure, I support same-sex marriage.

The institution of marriage has been evolving since its very formation. It’s no longer common-practice for a man to have more than one wife, thusly redefining marriage between one man and one woman.

Marriage has long been legal contract that essentially made women the property of their husbands. It wasn’t until the Victorian era that marriage was redefined as a relationship based on mutual love, which continues to this day.

What I think cheapens marriage is the prevalence of divorce. Interestingly, the state with the lowest rates of divorce, Massachusetts, was the first to legally recognize same-sex unions. The trend continues as the states with lowest rates of divorce continue to legalize same-sex marriage.

Even more interesting, those states that have made constitutional amendments defining marriage as between one man and one woman have not only the highest divorce rates, but the highest percentages of people who self-identify as Christian.

What proponents of same-sex marriage are seeking is the same legal recognition to protect their families, not destroy families. Ask yourself: If these same-sex couples did not see the value in familial bonds, why would they be fervently seeking admittance into the institution?

Furthermore, I assume you entered in to Holy Matrimony in your church. Same-sex couples are not asking to get married in your Catholic parish. They are asking for a civil marriage. The Catholic Church does not recognize those marriages performed outside of the church as valid, therefore a civil same-sex marriage is not the same as your marriage. How is that a threat to your marriage? Most Americans don’t have the same marriage as you have. In what way would a same-sex marriage change your bond with your family?

If your outrage was over the increasing divorce rates, I could understand. Furthermore, where is the outcry over shows like The Bachelor that treat marriage like a game show?

 

[Alindawyl]

Marriage has long been legal contract that essentially made women the property of their husbands. It wasn’t until the Victorian era that marriage was redefined as a relationship based on mutual love, which continues to this day.

Ephesians 5:21-33, which in a very dramatic fashion describes marriage as mutual love, was written LONG before the Victorian era…

What I think cheapens marriage is the prevalence of divorce.

No fault divorce is certainly one of the things which cheapens marriage.

What proponents of same-sex marriage are seeking is the same legal recognition to protect their families, not destroy families. Ask yourself: If these same-sex couples did not see the value in familial bonds, why would they be fervently seeking admittance into the institution?

Because they want societal acceptance of their chosen lifestyle. What better way get it than recognized legal status? It worked for no fault divorce…

The Catholic Church does not recognize those marriages performed outside of the church as valid

Incorrect. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Church assumes just about any marriage is valid if it’s performed in accord with the religious rites particular to the man and woman who are married. If the man and woman are not members of any religion, then according to whatever civil rite is proper to the state. In this country, that civil rite would be an exchange of vows witnessed by a justice of the peace.

 

[Conor7]

Ephesians 5:21-33, which in a very dramatic fashion describes marriage as mutual love, was written LONG before the Victorian era…

No fault divorce is certainly one of the things which cheapens marriage.

Because they want societal acceptance of their chosen lifestyle. What better way get it than recognized legal status? It worked for no fault divorce…

Incorrect. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the Church assumes just about any marriage is valid if it’s performed in accord with the religious rites particular to the man and woman who are married. If the man and woman are not members of any religion, then according to whatever civil rite is proper to the state. In this country, that civil rite would be an exchange of vows witnessed by a justice of the peace.

The above is not true. Many a Catholic couple married outside of the Church have been dutifully informed that there marriage is not considered valid unless performed by the Church. In fact, my dear friend is currently battling with his parish priest over baptizing his daughter citing the fact that his marriage was performed outside of the Church and therefore not recgnized. The child is a bastard in the Church’s eyes, and although both parents are Catholic, they are presumed to be unmarried and cohabitating.

You’ve negated your own point per your comment on Ephesians: “It would value marriage between only those whom love each other. But love as emotion can be fickle what happens when emotionally you feel that the love is no longer there? Society would tell you to leave.”

I’m curious why you ignored the points I made regarding the prevalence of divorce and the correlation between legalizing same-sex marriage and rates of self-identifying Christians.

 

[Odell]

Hello Odell - I’m not sure that I’m necessarily arguing against you, but feel it is important to make a few points. In an effort for full disclosure, I support same-sex marriage.

The institution of marriage has been evolving since its very formation. It’s no longer common-practice for a man to have more than one wife, thusly redefining marriage between one man and one woman.

Marriage has long been legal contract that essentially made women the property of their husbands. It wasn’t until the Victorian era that marriage was redefined as a relationship based on mutual love, which continues to this day.

What I think cheapens marriage is the prevalence of divorce. Interestingly, the state with the lowest rates of divorce, Massachusetts, was the first to legally recognize same-sex unions. The trend continues as the states with lowest rates of divorce continue to legalize same-sex marriage.

Even more interesting, those states that have made constitutional amendments defining marriage as between one man and one woman have not only the highest divorce rates, but the highest percentages of people who self-identify as Christian.

What proponents of same-sex marriage are seeking is the same legal recognition to protect their families, not destroy families. Ask yourself: If these same-sex couples did not see the value in familial bonds, why would they be fervently seeking admittance into the institution?

But how would legalizing their marriage protect their family?

Furthermore, I assume you entered in to Holy Matrimony in your church. Same-sex couples are not asking to get married in your Catholic parish. They are asking for a civil marriage. The Catholic Church does not recognize those marriages performed outside of the church as valid, therefore a civil same-sex marriage is not the same as your marriage. How is that a threat to your marriage? Most Americans don’t have the same marriage as you have. In what way would a same-sex marriage change your bond with your family?

It’s not the fact that my marriage to me is devalued but to society as a whole devalues my marriage and to me this is to the detrament to the family.

[QUOTEIf your outrage was over the increasing divorce rates, I could understand. Furthermore, where is the outcry over shows like The Bachelor that treat marriage like a game show?
[/QUOTE]

Agreed. But I think they all add up. We might. It come to agreement on this but I would like to thank you for your charity thus far!

 

[TheTrueCentrist]

Ephesians 5:21-33, which in a very dramatic fashion describes marriage as mutual love, was written LONG before the Victorian era…

Sure, it tells the husband to love his wife as himself, but the wife is supposed to submit to the husband. Ephesians goes on to give similar advice to masters and slaves:

Ephesians 6:5-9

5 Slaves, obey your earthly masters with respect and fear, and with sincerity of heart, just as you would obey Christ. 6 Obey them not only to win their favor when their eye is on you, but as slaves of Christ, doing the will of God from your heart. 7 Serve wholeheartedly, as if you were serving the Lord, not people, 8 because you know that the Lord will reward each one for whatever good they do, whether they are slave or free.
9 And masters, treat your slaves in the same way. Do not threaten them, since you know that he who is both their Master and yours is in heaven, and there is no favoritism with him.

 

[Odell]

Sure, it tells the husband to love his wife as himself, but the wife is supposed to submit to the husband. Ephesians goes on to give similar advice to masters and slaves:

Ephesians 6:5-9

Submit to you husband who he given himself as Christ gave himself to the Chruch. This is the same submission that the Church the bride is under her groom Jesus. It’s not a submission as to lord it over your wife. That is the result of sin and our culture who violates women’s basic rights as human beings and are objectified by men.

Notice masters are not to mistreat their slaves. This is not slavery as we have known slavery in our recent history.

 

[Boulder257]

Houguy, you list your religion as Catholic. I am curious how you justify your arguments against the clear teachings of the Catholic Church? Please know, I am not trying to be sarcastic or anything like that. I am truly curious how you would explain the idea that we can pick and choose what the Church requires us to believe.

Pax

 

[Boulder257]

Submit to you husband who he given himself as Christ gave himself to the Chruch. This is the same submission that the Church the bride is under her groom Jesus. It’s not a submission as to lord it over your wife. That is the result of sin and our culture who violates women’s basic rights as human beings and are objectified by men.

Notice masters are not to mistreat their slaves. This is not slavery as we have known slavery in our recent history.

Exactly right Odell. This is certainly not what we consider when we think of “modern” slavery. This is a perfect example of how people can twist the words of the bible to meet thier own agenda. And, a perfect example of why we need Tradition and Mother Church as much as we need the Bible.

 

[Conor7]

But how would legalizing their marriage protect their family?

Agreed. But I think they all add up. We might. It come to agreement on this but I would like to thank you for your charity thus far!

I understand your points, Odel. For a moment, try to put yourself in the position of a same-sex couple.

Reason off the top of my head why marriage equality would protect these families:

Health benefits. One partner could place the other on his/her insurance. Marriage is about assuming the responsibility for the care of another human being. I find this completely consistent whether an opposite-sex couple, or a same-sex couple. In fact, let’s just lump all insurance and social services into this category, like accidental death and dismemberment, pension benefits, social security benefits. Marriage would ensure that these people are cared for in the event of their partner’s death. How well would survive if you (God forbid) lost your spouse?

You could also lump inheritance rights into the above.

Don’t you think your spouse should have the legal right to make important decisions on your behalf should you not be able to make them for yourself? Same-sex couples want the same benefit. If you were in a coma, would you want your sibling to decide whether to pull the plug? No, your spouse knows you better than anyone else and you would trust him/her to know and comply with your wishes. What about consenting to a life-saving operation if you were in a bad accident? Wouldn’t you want your spouse to make that decision on your behalf if you couldn’t? What about visitation rights in the hospital? Same-sex couples don’t have that right. Can you imagine the one person who loves you and knows you better than anyone being banned from your bedside? How can you legally sanction that?

What about the tax breaks you receive from being married? What about the lowered cost in insurance you receive from being married? Religion aside, should we constitutionally bar people from these benefits because we find love between two consenting adults somehow abhorrent? Do we have the right to make that choice?

Like it or not, gay couples adopt babies. Babies, I might add who are in much need of loving homes- homes where they’ll find love and be provided for. Something these children would not receive otherwise. Allowing same-sex marriage would only further ensure the protection of these children and these families for the same reasons cited above.

The list goes on…

 

[Alindawyl]

The above is not true. Many a Catholic couple married outside of the Church have been dutifully informed that there marriage is not considered valid unless performed by the Church. In fact, my dear friend is currently battling with his parish priest over baptizing his daughter citing the fact that his marriage was performed outside of the Church and therefore not recgnized. The child is a bastard in the Church’s eyes, and although both parents are Catholic, they are presumed to be unmarried and cohabitating.

Your example for how what I said is supposedly not true, is a man and woman who are both Catholic and yet did NOT marry according to the religious rite particular to the Catholic religion?

Really?

Should we expect the state to treat people as married who don’t fill out the necessary paperwork, or don’t have it properly witnessed and notarized?

When something is not done in the way called for by any authority, it should surprise no one when that authority does not consider it valid.

You’ve negated your own point per your comment on Ephesians: “It would value marriage between only those whom love each other. But love as emotion can be fickle what happens when emotionally you feel that the love is no longer there? Society would tell you to leave.”

Love is an act of the will. It’s not simply an emotion.

My wife and I don’t always like each other. What we always do is choose to love each other. Even on days when we’ve annoyed each other and that warm fuzzy feeling isn’t present, we still love each other. That’s why we’re still married after over 17 years. If our marriage was based on an emotion, we’d have gotten divorced years ago when we had our first big fight.

I’m curious why you ignored the points I made regarding the prevalence of divorce and the correlation between legalizing same-sex marriage and rates of self-identifying Christians.

Because those statistics are irrelevant. Homosexual acts (NOT homosexual urges; only acts) are intrinsically evil. We cannot do evil with the excuse that good will come from it. If we can, then anything from the tiniest lie to mass murder is justified if we claim good intentions.

 

[Conor7]

Your example for how what I said is supposedly not true, is a man and woman who are both Catholic and yet did NOT marry according to the religious rite particular to the Catholic religion?

Really?

Should we expect the state to treat people as married who don’t fill out the necessary paperwork, or don’t have it properly witnessed and notarized?

When something is not done in the way called for by any authority, it should surprise no one when that authority does not consider it valid.

Love is an act of the will. It’s not simply an emotion.

My wife and I don’t always like each other. What we always do is choose to love each other. Even on days when we’ve annoyed each other and that warm fuzzy feeling isn’t present, we still love each other. That’s why we’re still married after over 17 years. If our marriage was based on an emotion, we’d have gotten divorced years ago when we had our first big fight.

Because those statistics are irrelevant. Homosexual acts (NOT homosexual urges; only acts) are intrinsically evil. We cannot do evil with the excuse that good will come from it. If we can, then anything from the tiniest lie to mass murder is justified if we claim good intentions.

I fail to see your point, sadly. The OPs original point was that same-sex marriage would devalue his/her marriage.

You write: “Homosexual acts (NOT homosexual urges; only acts) are intrinsically evil. We cannot do evil with the excuse that good will come from it. If we can, then anything from the tiniest lie to mass murder is justified if we claim good intentions.”

If you lie, it doesn’t devalue my thruthfulness.

Furthermore, our country does not live in a theocracy. You cannot legally discriminate in this country. To my original point, the question should then be, does same-sex marriage devalue my Catholic marriage? No. It doesn’t. At least no more than a secular marriage between an opposite-sex couple who uses birth control. Therefore, my question to you is: Why would you choose a battle that innately hurts others, and not go after liers or any number of other sinners. It seems you have something specifically against homosexuals, which seems extraordinarily anti-Christian to me.

Why is your righteous indignation specifically target toward a small segment of the population unless you specifically want to damage people?