Defending a Higher Law: Why We Must Resist Same-sex “Marriage”

[RyanML]

Grace & Peace!

I think it’s time to really look at some points fundamental to this issue.

1–I’ve mentioned this before and I’ll mention it again–much of what’s at issue here has to do with power: the relationship of gender to power as well as how sex and sexuality perform or demonstrate power. The question ultimately is: what is the in-group and who should be fundamentally disenfranchised so that the in-group can remain powerful?

2–The question of desire–can any good come of desire, or is desire fundamentally corrupt. If we believe, as the Roman Church specifically and the Catholic Church generally has believed for centuries, that nature is wounded but not destroyed, we cannot then believe that our desires are fundamentally corrupt. The poison of sin cannot have totally destroyed our wills, otherwise grace could find no purchase there and we would be incapable even with grace to choose the good.

If our wills are not totally corrupt, we cannot readily assent to a language of objective or intrinsic disorder when speaking of desire. Because if it is possible for desire to be objectively disordered then it is impossible to trust *any *movement of a will so afflicted. An objectively disordered desire must indicate an irreparably broken will. An irreparably broken will is impervious to grace–for such a one, salvation is impossible.

If we insist, therefore, on using such language as objectively disordered to describe desire, we must be surprised to discover when such desire produces, by grace, the good fruit of the Spirit in a person in whom that desire is present.

In short, to say that a homosexual’s desire is objectively disordered is to say that they simply cannot will properly. Which is to say (with OtherEric on this thread, I believe) that any desire a homosexual has is improper. If the Roman Church can agree with this sentiment, then she is being consistent. If not, then she has a problem she must solve.

We can desire wrongly, yes, but our faculty of desire cannot be objectively disordered (see Ryan’s post above)–otherwise, we could not desire rightly.

3–I think a study of the Roman Church’s laws regarding concubinage would be useful here when we discuss the reality of marriage today. Before Trent, a man was permitted a concubine or a wife–which is to say that the Roman Church allowed a man and woman to have sex who were not husband and wife. Why? The issue was largely social and/or romantic. A free man could not marry a slave, but he could have her as his concubine, for instance. What does this have to do with marriage? It re-enforces the point that marriage has, until recently, been a socially-oriented institution. Marriage was for the creation of dynasties, legacies, the maintenance and strengthening of inheritances. It was not so much for the breeding and care of children as much as it was for the maintenance of a legacy through those children. You could have a concubine and have children too, but those children inherited nothing. They were considered little more than bastards. But with a concubine, you could at least be with the one with whom you were in love, or at least to whom you were greatly attracted. Rarely did one marry for love or romance.

We cannot, therefore, claim with the same certainty of our ancestors that we know what traditional marriage is. We do not. A true defense of traditional marriage would be largely seen as appalling to most who, today, claim to defend it. I know an Anglican priest who would basically chuckle when candidates for marriage spoke to him about exchanging rings. Why, he would wonder, would a man in a traditional marriage accept a ring from his wife? The symbolism is all wrong–in traditional marriage, the ring is a reminder that the wife is the property of the man–the woman cannot claim her husband in the same way.

Which brings all of this back to the issue of power and gender–the issue that I continue to believe is at the heart of all of this.

Under the Mercy,
Mark

All is grace and mercy! Deo Gratias!

Very well said!

 

[mkingdomlvr]

Fraternal Correction from Matthews Gospel:

15 But if thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between thee and him alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother. 16 And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more: that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. 17 And if he will not hear them: tell the church. And if he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican. 18 Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven: and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven. 1

Fraternal Correction

Even the Devil can quote scripture…or so I’ve read.

You’ve got this habit of throwing links and quotes up instead of answering questions in your own words. Everyone else here can formulate responses in their own words, why do you hide behind the words of others to defend what you believe?

How would you want a brother or sister in Christ to approach you in order to offer fraternal correction? Would you respond positively to a person who started the conversation by telling you that because of the way you were born you are destined to a life of misery, drug abuse, alcoholism, and sexually transmitted diseases? Would you respond well to a conversation that began with a description of the evil agenda you and others like you are trying to foist upon the world?

Fraternal correction starts with treating others the way you would want to be treated. It starts with treating people as children of God, the same as yourself.

Are you really interested in the immortal souls of gay people or is it just fun to have an “other” that’s more sinful than you?

 

[Sailor_Kenshin]

Actually I don’t think that at all. I think that there are far more Catholics and other religious parents who would disown their gay children than those who would change their opinion on gay marriage.

Disown? Or wish to save their souls.

NO ONE can convince me that it is loving or charitable to wish your homosexual child into Satan’s hands just so he can ‘feel good about himself.’

God’s Truth is not a matter of debate or opinion. You serve Him or you serve Satan. It really is that simple.

 

[RyanML]

God’s Truth is not a matter of debate or opinion. You serve Him or you serve Satan. It really is that simple.

So anyone who disagrees with you or has a different interpretation than the Church is serving Satan? What nonsense! A person may be wrong about something but still seek after God with a loving and sincere heart.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Would you respond positively to a person who started the conversation by telling you that ***because of the way you were born ***you are destined to a life of misery, drug abuse, alcoholism, and sexually transmitted diseases?

Again with the non-scientific premises. You are not “born” with a sexuality. You are born with a gender (most of the time – not in all cases, such as biological aberrations). The sexuality of that gender is not defined in infancy or your very early years. It is shaped by your very early (pre-memory) experiences, which then are futher shaped, encouraged, discouraged, neglected, supported, affirmed, taken refuge in, settled in by default, influenced by culture/peers/other relationships, etc. as the years pass. You wind up with a sexuality you assume was “always you” but in fact was in process & at one point, quite fluid. Because any orientation (including non-sexual) seems lifelong, and & includes some level of non-conscious formation, does not mean you were “born” and “destined” and “determined” and “permanently” that way. Many, many of our preferences & orientations are complex & based on multiple factors. Sexuality is one of the must multi-variant and complex aspects of being human.

In cultures and subcultures which approve (or do not disapprove) of homosexual behavior, it occurs in high percentages (for example, among very liberal Jews; for example, among certain tribal cultures). In cultures & subcultures which disapprove of it, its occurence is dramatically less. (No, it doesn’t just “go underground” in those cultures.)

 

[mkingdomlvr]

Disown? Or wish to save their souls.

NO ONE can convince me that it is loving or charitable to wish your homosexual child into Satan’s hands just so he can ‘feel good about himself.’

God’s Truth is not a matter of debate or opinion. You serve Him or you serve Satan. It really is that simple.

I’m sure that attitude will make them completely receptive to what you’re saying. All that understanding and compassion for them will certainly make them see how wonderful it is to follow God.

I’m not suggesting that the teaching of the Church be watered down, and I’ve said that SEVERAL times on this thread. What I AM saying is that gay people are not going to come to an understanding of that teaching if the first thing they hear is that they “serve Satan”.

 

[buffalo]

I’m sure that attitude will make them completely receptive to what you’re saying. All that understanding and compassion for them will certainly make them see how wonderful it is to follow God.

I’m not suggesting that the teaching of the Church be watered down, and I’ve said that SEVERAL times on this thread. What I AM saying is that gay people are not going to come to an understanding of that teaching if the first thing they hear is that they “serve Satan”.

…nor will an alcoholic, a drug abuser, any sinner in general this is pain to their ears. The truth doesn’t matter to them until they fall further.

I would also say people are different. We often do not know what words make it through. Some respond to the hard line approach other to the softer approach.

 

[mkingdomlvr]

Again with the non-scientific premises. You are not “born” with a sexuality. You are born with a gender (most of the time – not in all cases, such as biological aberrations). The sexuality of that gender is not defined in infancy or your very early years. It is shaped by your very early (pre-memory) experiences, which then are futher shaped, encouraged, discouraged, neglected, supported, affirmed, taken refuge in, settled in by default, influenced by culture/peers/other relationships, etc. as the years pass. You wind up with a sexuality you assume was “always you” but in fact was in process & at one point, quite fluid. Because any orientation (including non-sexual) seems lifelong, and & includes some level of non-conscious formation, does not mean you were “born” and “destined” and “determined” and “permanently” that way. Many, many of our preferences & orientations are complex & based on multiple factors. Sexuality is one of the must multi-variant and complex aspects of being human.

In cultures and subcultures which approve (or do not disapprove) of homosexual behavior, it occurs in high percentages (for example, among very liberal Jews; for example, among certain tribal cultures). In cultures & subcultures which disapprove of it, its occurence is dramatically less. (No, it doesn’t just “go underground” in those cultures.)

Where is your science? Other than the Catholic Medical Association-who we all know as no reason at all to be biased…

I don’t recall you ever explaining how you chose your orientation. Since you’re so convinced that I chose mine, the converse must also be true and you should be able to describe that process.

Of course it goes underground in places like Iran and Iraq-people get KILLED for being gay over there. It doesn’t stop them from being gay, they simply hide to stay alive. Until Stonewall, gay people were pretty good at hiding in the US too.

 

[mkingdomlvr]

…nor will an alcoholic, a drug abuser, any sinner in general this is pain to their ears. The truth doesn’t matter to them until they fall further.

I would also say people are different. We often do not know what words make it through. Some respond to the hard line approach other to the softer approach.

I suppose that’s true, but I’ve met so many people who have ended contact with family and have left the church because of the anger and hostility that they have experienced from Christians. I know in my own case, I stay in the Church despite the things that I hear. I chose to stay because of the example of Christians in my life who seem to have a peace about them that I wanted.

As the old saying goes, “you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar”

 

[EvolvedAtheist]

Doesn’t Jesus command you to obey the law of the land?

My second question is that clearly since you MUST feel that your sexuality is a choice (because if you didn’t then you would be punishing people for their very nature if they were gay) then you must have made a choice to be heterosexual as well.

In order to make a choice, you must consider the options from an unbiased point of view (because to do otherwise isn’t a choice) and you must have been a-sexual before that.

Can someone describe for me the process of considering the same gender for sexual relations that they went through before deciding not to opt for that sexuality?

What made you choose the opposite sex? Was it to be accepted?

If you chose then that means that you could STILL choose to be gay if you wished to try something different.

I am always fascinated by those who feel sexuality is a choice. You didn’t have a choice when you first looked at a desireable person of the opposite gender and felt attraction for the very first time, and neither do gay people. Do you honestly think that gays look at the opposite sex and think to themselves “WOW, that person is really sexy, but I would rather be reviled, discriminated against, shunned, denied basic human rights, fight with my family over this, and lose some friends than actually interact with that sexy person. I think that I will just go have sex with this other person of the same sex to whom I am not attracted to. I will make that choice, it seems healthy”

Come on people. It isn’t a choice for anyone.

It is an old testament command from god and we all know that catholics do not obey the old testement. So why pick and choose this edict to adhere to?

On the non religious side, why do people think that gay marriage is wrong, or even that being gay is wrong if not merely for religion?

If you DO believe it is wrong merely for religions sake, then I suppose that you believe that slavery, rape, murder, warmongering, the death penalty for non believers, witches, adulterers and blasphemers is also right? They are all OT laws, you can’t have it both ways.

SO, either find demonstrable evidence that homosexuality is harmful, or leave them alone to live their own lives with the same rights as everyone else, free to love, free to lose, free to visit their partners in hospitals, free to receive family benefits and free from the hatred and judgment of others.

peace

 

[buffalo]

I suppose that’s true, but I’ve met so many people who have ended contact with family and have left the church because of the anger and hostility that they have experienced from Christians. I know in my own case, I stay in the Church despite the things that I hear. I chose to stay because of the example of Christians in my life who seem to have a peace about them that I wanted.

As the old saying goes, “you catch more flies with honey than you do with vinegar”

The Bishops Guide noted that the need for friendship is human. Isolation is not good.

Love is the best approach always.

Truth with love

not

Truth without love

or

Love without truth.

This does not only effect the homosexual. It affects the family also very deeply.

Parents are hurt when they teach their children the truth and they turn away from it. When they decide to not go to Mass, when they live together before marriage, do drugs, be promiscuous, when they do all sorts of other things that they were taught were wrong.

SSA is one thing. Parents and family will be surely disappointed. They are devastated when their child decides to “live the lifetstyle” if you will. They know in their hearts that it is not good. When this occurs parents have to assess the damage to younger siblings to their family health. Bottom-line - as long as you continue to do _____________ you are not welcome in this house. This goes for many other behaviors too.

If my child was SSA and lived a chaste lifestyle I would be proud of his self mastery.

 

[buffalo]

Doesn’t Jesus command you to obey the law of the land?

My second question is that clearly since you MUST feel that your sexuality is a choice (because if you didn’t then you would be punishing people for their very nature if they were gay) then you must have made a choice to be heterosexual as well.

In order to make a choice, you must consider the options from an unbiased point of view (because to do otherwise isn’t a choice) and you must have been a-sexual before that.

Can someone describe for me the process of considering the same gender for sexual relations that they went through before deciding not to opt for that sexuality?

What made you choose the opposite sex? Was it to be accepted?

If you chose then that means that you could STILL choose to be gay if you wished to try something different.

I am always fascinated by those who feel sexuality is a choice. You didn’t have a choice when you first looked at a desireable person of the opposite gender and felt attraction for the very first time, and neither do gay people. Do you honestly think that gays look at the opposite sex and think to themselves “WOW, that person is really sexy, but I would rather be reviled, discriminated against, shunned, denied basic human rights, fight with my family over this, and lose some friends than actually interact with that sexy person. I think that I will just go have sex with this other person of the same sex to whom I am not attracted to. I will make that choice, it seems healthy”

Come on people. It isn’t a choice for anyone.

It is an old testament command from god and we all know that catholics do not obey the old testement. So why pick and choose this edict to adhere to?

On the non religious side, why do people think that gay marriage is wrong, or even that being gay is wrong if not merely for religion?

If you DO believe it is wrong merely for religions sake, then I suppose that you believe that slavery, rape, murder, warmongering, the death penalty for non believers, witches, adulterers and blasphemers is also right? They are all OT laws, you can’t have it both ways.

SO, either find demonstrable evidence that homosexuality is harmful, or leave them alone to live their own lives with the same rights as everyone else, free to love, free to lose, free to visit their partners in hospitals, free to receive family benefits and free from the hatred and judgment of others.

peace

Give to Caesar what is Caesars, give to God what is God’s.

The Divine law always trumps man-made law. The Catholic Church teaches that we should influence the public square and vote. Vote our conscience.

 

[EvolvedAtheist]

Again with the non-scientific premises. You are not “born” with a sexuality. You are born with a gender (most of the time – not in all cases, such as biological aberrations). The sexuality of that gender is not defined in infancy or your very early years. It is shaped by your very early (pre-memory) experiences, which then are futher shaped, encouraged, discouraged, neglected, supported, affirmed, taken refuge in, settled in by default, influenced by culture/peers/other relationships, etc. as the years pass. You wind up with a sexuality you assume was “always you” but in fact was in process & at one point, quite fluid. Because any orientation (including non-sexual) seems lifelong, and & includes some level of non-conscious formation, does not mean you were “born” and “destined” and “determined” and “permanently” that way. Many, many of our preferences & orientations are complex & based on multiple factors. Sexuality is one of the must multi-variant and complex aspects of being human.

In cultures and subcultures which approve (or do not disapprove) of homosexual behavior, it occurs in high percentages (for example, among very liberal Jews; for example, among certain tribal cultures). In cultures & subcultures which disapprove of it, its occurence is dramatically less. (No, it doesn’t just “go underground” in those cultures.)

Where is your scientific study and evidence to back up your claims? Sexuality is an evolutionary trait that ensures our survival. Sexual likes and dislikes may in fact be determined as you say they are, but gender preference, according to most scientists, is not. The concensus from teh scientific community ist that something that is inborn. Even if it isn’t (and all science suggests that it is), it certainly isn’t a choice. No one would choose to turn away from their sexuality. If they could choose that, then you assume that you can choose your own as well.

Where is your evidence for saying that they homosexuality does not “go underground”?
There are MANY studies that would suggest that it does in fact. There are many testimonies that suggest that very same thing.

It is a legitamate sexuality and they feel love just as we do, so what is the impetus for us to deny them the rights for loving couples that belong to everyone else?

What is the harm in homosexuality? If there is no harm in their love, then any denial that you place on it, is based solely on judgement and not on any “good for society”.

Peace

 

[buffalo]

Doesn’t Jesus command you to obey the law of the land?

My second question is that clearly since you MUST feel that your sexuality is a choice (because if you didn’t then you would be punishing people for their very nature if they were gay) then you must have made a choice to be heterosexual as well.

In order to make a choice, you must consider the options from an unbiased point of view (because to do otherwise isn’t a choice) and you must have been a-sexual before that.

Can someone describe for me the process of considering the same gender for sexual relations that they went through before deciding not to opt for that sexuality?

What made you choose the opposite sex? Was it to be accepted?

If you chose then that means that you could STILL choose to be gay if you wished to try something different.

I am always fascinated by those who feel sexuality is a choice. You didn’t have a choice when you first looked at a desireable person of the opposite gender and felt attraction for the very first time, and neither do gay people. Do you honestly think that gays look at the opposite sex and think to themselves “WOW, that person is really sexy, but I would rather be reviled, discriminated against, shunned, denied basic human rights, fight with my family over this, and lose some friends than actually interact with that sexy person. I think that I will just go have sex with this other person of the same sex to whom I am not attracted to. I will make that choice, it seems healthy”

Come on people. It isn’t a choice for anyone.

It is an old testament command from god and we all know that catholics do not obey the old testement. So why pick and choose this edict to adhere to?

On the non religious side, why do people think that gay marriage is wrong, or even that being gay is wrong if not merely for religion?

If you DO believe it is wrong merely for religions sake, then I suppose that you believe that slavery, rape, murder, warmongering, the death penalty for non believers, witches, adulterers and blasphemers is also right? They are all OT laws, you can’t have it both ways.

SO, either find demonstrable evidence that homosexuality is harmful, or leave them alone to live their own lives with the same rights as everyone else, free to love, free to lose, free to visit their partners in hospitals, free to receive family benefits and free from the hatred and judgment of others.

peace

In a way you are correct. It was found that homosexuality occurs 7 times more in men than in women. Researchers asked why. They noted that we are basically female and men develop masculinity in their early childhood through the interaction with their father after about age 1. Before that the mother bonds the child and the child doesn’t have much use for the father. Then the boy emulates his father and “learns” how to be male.

In fatherless households there is an unusual bond between mother and son that is unhealthy.

 

[WillieWonka]

Again with the non-scientific premises. **You are not “born” with a sexuality. ** You are born with a gender (most of the time – not in all cases, such as biological aberrations). The sexuality of that gender is not defined in infancy or your very early years. It is shaped by your very early (pre-memory) experiences, which then are futher shaped, encouraged, discouraged, neglected, supported, affirmed, taken refuge in, settled in by default, influenced by culture/peers/other relationships, etc. as the years pass.

Again with the non-scientific premises?

 

[EvolvedAtheist]

Give to Caesar what is Caesars, give to God what is God’s.

The Divine law always trumps man-made law. The Catholic Church teaches that we should influence the public square and vote. Vote our conscience.

I can see that you would think that is true. But if you believe in that law fromt he OT, then why not all the other ones? Why not stone adulterers, why not kill unbelievers, why not murder blasphemers?

You can’t have it both ways, either the old testement is not followed, or it is.

Peace

 

[EvolvedAtheist]

In a way you are correct. It was found that homosexuality occurs 7 times more in men than in women. Researchers asked why. They noted that we are basically female and men develop masculinity in their early childhood through the interaction with their father after about age 1. Before that the mother bonds the child and the child doesn’t have much use for the father. Then the boy emulates his father and “learns” how to be male.

In fatherless households there is an unusual bond between mother and son that is unhealthy.

Name your source. There is no evidence suggesting that there is an unhealthy bond between a single mother and a male child. You seem to be suggesting that gay people come from single mother relationships.

That is pure speculation.

Peace

 

[WillieWonka]

Give to Caesar what is Caesars, give to God what is God’s.

The Divine law always trumps man-made law. The Catholic Church teaches that we should influence the public square and vote. Vote our conscience.

Of course you should.

And increasing numbers of Catholics are indeed followng their consciences and voting for gay marriage.

 

[EvolvedAtheist]

I’m sure that attitude will make them completely receptive to what you’re saying. All that understanding and compassion for them will certainly make them see how wonderful it is to follow God.

I’m not suggesting that the teaching of the Church be watered down, and I’ve said that SEVERAL times on this thread. What I AM saying is that gay people are not going to come to an understanding of that teaching if the first thing they hear is that they “serve Satan”.

So what happens when gay people come to an “understanding”? Will they fake their sexuality for the rest of their lives? Will they live in sexless and loveless marriages for that understanding? Will they forsake the partner that they love for it?

That is terrible to assume or to even ask.

Lets just leave them alone.

Peace

 

[WillieWonka]

I can see that you would think that is true. But if you believe in that law fromt he OT, then why not all the other ones? Why not stone adulterers, why not kill unbelievers, why not murder blasphemers?

You can’t have it both ways, either the old testement is not followed, or it is.

Peace

Mainly because the rest of us would shoot them down. Self-interest always trumps faith.