The Church does not marry people - People marry people the Church actually awards sacraments as the marriage sacrament and acknowledges some marriages.
The ministers of the sacrament of Matrimony are the husband and wife. However, for it to be valid, it must be done with permission of the Catholic Church. Non-sacramental marriages (such as when a Catholic marries a non-baptized person), may be done with a dispensation the Catholic Church and be licit. These marriages are valid, natural, marriages (like the marriages in the old testament), although not sacramental.
BobObob;6855567:
I said that people who look like they may be homosexual are probably discriminated against.
Also, there are a lot of subtle things that can give one the impression that another is homosexual.
?? That is a problem, if the person in question can display some unusual behavior to transmit that information then there is a problem by your admission the issue is visible via decisions of the SSA
I’m not necessarily talking about consciously choosing behavior indicates that one has SSA.
No, issues are being mixed, normalized data cannot be reverted, which is unrelated to population inferences. The core problem here is the inference that homosexuals are discriminated against (they score like busboys) statistics do not prove that. What statistics show is the population are different ( just as busboys ). Homosexuals make less because they choose to. Heterosexuals make more because they have families and work them self to death for extra money which benefits their family but not the man. If the man did not have the family he would also choose to work less, and then his statistics would match homosexual earnings. (same is true for women)
So you’re assuming that homosexuals don’t make as much money as people who are just like them in every way except sexual orientation because they choose not to. Them not having families could make some differences, but it seems a little ridiculous to me to assume that that completely explains away a difference of 16% to 28%.
One could conversely argue that many people who don’t have families often immerse themselves more into work, and become workaholics who may sometimes do nothing but make money. For some people work becomes their life because they don’t have much of a life elsewhere.
Orientation(if there such a thing) means absolutly nothing unless it is acted upon. If, for instance, I am attracted to neighbors wife a I guily of rape even if i dont act on it??? And, of course, “Orientation” is not a protected class.
Sexual orientation simply refers to what gender primarily causes a sexual response. I don’t know how that cannot exist (unless one isn’t sexually attracted to anyone).
Also, sexual orientation can greatly effect a person’s life, regardless of whether or not they ever have sex.
A chaste homosexual has no need to reveal their struggle with anyone. If they do it is to advance the homosexual act.
This is a horrible assumption. It baffles me that you seem to actually think that any person who tells another person that he or she experiences SSA is doing so “to advance the homosexual act.”
I don’t want to go on making a list, but a chaste homosexual may have very good reasons for revealing to another person that he or she experiences SSA. James seems to encourage openness among Christians is a good thing in James 5:16, although it’s talking about sin (and experiencing SSA isn’t a sin).
I’ve seen a chaste Catholic, who experiences SSA, reveal to others that he has SSA when he gave a talk on homosexuality from a Catholic perspective. He was doing this in part so that the audience could further understand how he knows what he’s talking about in this regard. Do you honestly think he did this “to advance the homosexual act?”
