Church fights same-sex 'marriage' in Spain

[Werner]

fix:

Two people who want to publicly claim they are married when they are not is no virture and does harm our society.

Hello?
What planet are you living on? There are millions of people out there, they are your neighbors, co-workers, mayors, senators and congressmen who “publicly claim they are married when they are not”, and not one of them is homosexual!

Where is your outcry?

Werner

 

[Werner]

fix:

I do not know that the apology said the inquistions were evil in every case. He may have apologized for the way certain people acted, but that does not mean the entire enterprise was wrong. BTW, the Roman inquisition exists to this day under a different name. Ratzinger heads it.

And why do you think it got a different name?
Because nobody wanted to see that unholy heritage continued.
So today it has a different name and a different way to work, thanks to God.

Werner

 

[Werner]

Trelow:

I’m awake, are you?

Starving to death, suffering from AIDS, and being killed in a war or state of unrest will not send you to hell.
BEING A SODOMITE CAN.

What’s more important:
State of your eternal soul, or state of your temporal body?

Let me take care of my soul, and take you care of yours.
I don’t want anybody to legislate my soul.

Werner

 

[Werner]

fix:

The Church recognizes it is necessary in certain cases. She does not ignore it. To be investigated for a decree of nullity one usually needs to be divorced for one year. A civil divorce is not prohibited in any Church law as far as I know.

The church does not and nowhere recognize a divorce. Never!
For an anullification a divorce is neither neccessary nor helpful.
Just ask your local priest!

fix:

Yes, we all agree with that.

So you contradict your first point, don’t you see?

fix:

Because it is not a fair comparison.

and what exactly is unfair with it?

fix:

This is not accuarate. A civil divorce does not end a marriage.

That is what i have stated. So?

fix:

Yes, they can read that and the entire bible and ALL the teachings of the Church. Christ founded a Church, not a book.

Oh, so what Christ himself said is irrelevant for you? Hmm, that is a strange oppinion for a Catholic…

Werner

 

[fix]

Werner:

Hello?
What planet are you living on? There are millions of people out there, they are your neighbors, co-workers, mayors, senators and congressmen who “publicly claim they are married when they are not”, and not one of them is homosexual!

Where is your outcry?

Werner

I have denounced all that many times. This is a straw man argument.

 

[fix]

Werner:

And why do you think it got a different name?
Because nobody wanted to see that unholy heritage continued.
So today it has a different name and a different way to work, thanks to God.

Werner

Which inquistion was unholy? What history are you reading?

 

[fix]

Werner:

The church does not and nowhere recognize a divorce. Never!
For an anullification a divorce is neither neccessary nor helpful.
Just ask your local priest!

It is not about recognizing it. It is not sinful in every case. This has nothing to do with homosexual unions.

So you contradict your first point, don’t you see?

and what exactly is unfair with it?

That is what i have stated. So?

We are going in circles. A civil divorce does not end a sacramental marriage. The Church does not prohibit a civil divorce, but I think canon law says the couple should get a decree from the bishop before they get a civil divorce. The Church leaders have been lax in enforcing this. That is no reason they should be lax with proscribing homosexual unions.

Oh, so what Christ himself said is irrelevant for you? Hmm, that is a strange oppinion for a Catholic…

No, but context is. We accept what the Church teaches. We are not Protestants.

 

[Trelow]

Werner:

Let me take care of my soul, and take you care of yours.
I don’t want anybody to legislate my soul.

Werner

But the legislators are responsible for souls that go astray if they pass laws condoning immoral behavior.

It’s our responsibility to worry about protecting and saving each others souls from the fires of hell.

I’m afraid your thinking is hedonistic, not christian.

 

[Werner]

Trelow:

But the legislators are responsible for souls that go astray if they pass laws condoning immoral behavior.

It’s our responsibility to worry about protecting and saving each others souls from the fires of hell.

I’m afraid your thinking is hedonistic, not christian.

No legislater has to worry about my soul, nor is he responsible for my soul.
It is me who is responsible for my soul.
I don’t want anybody to impose religious laws on me, and in the US you should be against that more than elsewhere because if done so those laws wouldn’t be Catholic ones, that is for sure!

Werner

 

[Werner]

fix:

We are going in circles.

Yes we do.
So forget about divorce ant look at all the million sthat are re-married. Where is the outcry?

Werner

 

[Trelow]

Werner:

No legislater has to worry about my soul, nor is he responsible for my soul.
It is me who is responsible for my soul.
I don’t want anybody to impose religious laws on me, and in the US you should be against that more than elsewhere because if done so those laws wouldn’t be Catholic ones, that is for sure!

Werner

Not allowing gay “marriage” is no different than not allowing people to murder.
No different at all.

And yes, if you tell someone they can live in sin, your soul will pay the price.

 

[fix]

Werner:

Yes we do.
So forget about divorce ant look at all the million sthat are re-married. Where is the outcry?

Werner

Good question. Ask the lukewarm Shepherds who follow secular culture rather than Church teaching. I never hear a homily about contraception and that is the root of all these problems today. I have said in many posts that bishops and priests have neglected their duties.

Now they have a chance to reem themselves. You should agree that the Church needs to evangelize all. That means preaching the truth. The truth is marriage is ONLY between one man and one womam for life. Our civil laws need to reflect this. It is not only a religious teaching of the Church founded by Christ, but is part of the natural law that all know.

 

[fix]

Werner:

No legislater has to worry about my soul, nor is he responsible for my soul.
It is me who is responsible for my soul.
I don’t want anybody to impose religious laws on me, and in the US you should be against that more than elsewhere because if done so those laws wouldn’t be Catholic ones, that is for sure!

Werner

All legitimate laws come from Christ. The state has the authority from the creator to regulate society and instill good order.

 

[mlchance]

Werner:

So forget about divorce ant look at all the millions that are re-married. Where is the outcry?

I wonder that myself.

Of course, the lack of outrage against one sin is not ground for a lack of outrage against another sin. Homosexual marriage doesn’t get a pass simply because Christians have been too lax about other sexual matters.

That point aside, opposition to homosexual marriage need not once mention religion.

1. Homosexuality results from aberrant psychology. It is a mental disorder. Homosexual people need therapy, not approval.
2. Homosexual people account for no more than 3% of the population. It is ludicrous to redefine one of the foundational relationships responsible for transmitting culture in order to appease such a small group.
3. It is a myth that homosexuals are disadvantaged minority. By the two most common measures of social disadvantage - education and income - research shows that homosexuals have higher levels of educational attainment than the general public and the findings on income are, at worst, mixed.
4. Homosexual behavior is a significant public health risk. There is no reason to believe that legalizing homosexual marriage will change these self-destructive behaviors.
5. Along with the higher risks to physical health presented by homosexual behavior, and reinforcing the fact that homosexuality is an aberrant mental condition, is the fact that homosexuals suffer from significantly higher rates of compulsive behavior, alcohol and drug abuse, and mental health problems such as depression. Homosexuals face much greater risks of suicide, and life expectancy of homosexual men is up to 20 years less than that for all men.
6. Legalized gay marriage necessarily leads to increases in gay couples adopting or otherwise raising children (as well as reinforces the horrible idea so prevalent in America that having children is a right). Such an environment is destructive to the health and well-being of children.
7. Homosexuals are significantly more promiscuous than heterosexuals. This is especially true of gay men, who comprise the majority of homosexuals. This holds true even in instances where homosexuals claim to be in “committed” relationships, indicating that the word “committed” means something different to most homosexuals.
8. There is a higher rate of domestic violence among homosexual couples. Given the higher incidence of mental problems among homsexuals, children raised by homosexual couples face greater risk of exposure to the terrible things that depression, suicide, and drug and alcohol abuse bring with them.
9. It has been demonstrated that children raised by homosexual couples have significantly lower levels of educational achievement.
10. The risk of sexual identity confusion is increased in children raised by homosexual couples.
11. There is a greater incidence of incest in homosexual parent families. Given the statistically higher incidence of child sexual abuse by homosexuals and the glorification of pederasty in homosexual “culture,” this should hardly be surprising.
12. Marriage is not a corporate right. IOW, it doesn’t reside in couples. It resides in individuals, and the right to marriage is the same for heterosexuals as it is for homosexuals. If a man wants to get married, he can marry a woman. If a woman wants to get married, she can marry a man.

Considering everything above, there is no reason to believe that permitting gay marriages will have anything but a negative impact on the institution of marriage and wreak very real physical and/or psychological harm on the children who find themselves “drafted” into this most pernicious example of social experimentation.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[Werner]

fix:

You should agree that the Church needs to evangelize all.

I agree on that

Our civil laws need to reflect this. It is not only a religious teaching of the Church founded by Christ, but is part of the natural law that all know.

I strongly disagree with that. First it is nothing the “everybody knows” and there is nothing such like a “natural law” that is the same for everybody, in fact everybody sees something else as the “natural law”
And no civil law “needs” to reflect a religious law. That leads into a theocracy and will re-light the stakes.

Werner

 

[Werner]

mlchance:

I wonder that myself.

Of course, the lack of outrage against one sin is not ground for a lack of outrage against another sin.
(…)

– Mark L. Chance.

I don’t want to address any of your points, i don’t have the time now.

My main point is, as long as the church only makes much ado about one topic, but doesn’t say anything about the other one, the church is simply not authentic.

You cannot tell people the civilization will end when one thing will become law when you don’t say a word about another thing that already is law, and that the Lord himself called sinfull, as a difference to the one the church is now so very upset about.

Werner

 

[Trelow]

Werner:

I don’t want to address any of your points, i don’t have the time now.

My main point is, as long as the church only makes much ado about one topic, but doesn’t say anything about the other one, the church is simply not authentic.

You cannot tell people the civilization will end when one thing will become law when you don’t say a word about another thing that already is law, and that the Lord himself called sinfull, as a difference to the one the church is now so very upset about.

Werner

So if one of my kids were to color on the wall and not get punished, then if I punished the other one for sticking scissors in the outlet, my parenting wouldn’t be “authentic”?

 

[Werner]

Trelow:

So if one of my kids were to color on the wall and not get punished, then if I punished the other one for sticking scissors in the outlet, my parenting wouldn’t be “authentic”?

Yes indeed. I don’t know if authentic is the right word here as English isn’t my mother tongue, but your example is very good.

What do you think will the punished kid think when it sees that the other one is not punished?
What do you think will the kid think about your education?
For sure it will think you are unjust and don’t treat everyboding accordingly.
As a consequence the kid will turn away from you.
At the very least the second kid will go and color the wall as well.
The only thing that isn’t appropriate with your example is that one kid does something relatively harmless, while the other one does something very dangerous.
I really don’t understand you guys how you can play down re-marriage so much compared to homosexuality!
The Lord himself called it a sin, he never ever said one single word about homosexuality, how can you say re-marriage is less a sin than homosexuality?

Werner

 

[Trelow]

Werner:

Yes indeed. I don’t know if authentic is the right word here as English isn’t my mother tongue, but your example is very good.

What do you think will the punished kid think when it sees that the other one is not punished?
What do you think will the kid think about your education?
For sure it will think you are unjust and don’t treat everyboding accordingly.
As a consequence the kid will turn away from you.
At the very least the second kid will go and color the wall as well.
The only thing that isn’t appropriate with your example is that one kid does something relatively harmless, while the other one does something very dangerous.
I really don’t understand you guys how you can play down re-marriage so much compared to homosexuality!
The Lord himself called it a sin, he never ever said one single word about homosexuality, how can you say re-marriage is less a sin than homosexuality?

Werner

I don’t give a rip what the kid thinks. I don’t want the little bugger to die. And if he were to turn away form me for showing him an act of love, then obviously he doesn’t love me.

We are not playing down remarriage compared to homosexuality! Both are wrong!
Just because Joe and Suzy are living in sin doesn’t mean that Fred and George have a right to.

My head hurts. I don’t know how you reason this out. you don’t adjust the truth to fit how you feel, you adjust how you feel to fit the truth.

 

[mlchance]

Werner:

I don’t want to address any of your points, i don’t have the time now.

If it’ll save you time later, yes, I can back up each and every point with documentation from social science journals and related publications.

Werner:

My main point is, as long as the church only makes much ado about one topic, but doesn’t say anything about the other one, the church is simply not authentic.

I don’t see anyone disputing this. But, as I’ve already noted, the lack of outrage against one sin is not ground for a lack of outrage against another sin. Homosexual marriage doesn’t get a pass simply because Christians have been too lax about other sexual matters.

– Mark L. Chance.