Do you think that the church will ever accept gay marriage?

  • Thread starter Thread starter hellopeople
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
PAboy57 said:
Love the sinner but hate the sin. I feel for these people but it goes against the natural order. A homosexual society would cease to exist in a short period of time. We must be open to life to conform to natural law and God’s law. As Fr. Corapi says “they are called to celibacy just like him”
Click to expand...
Well said! 🙂
 
Mannyfit75 said:
That reminded me of some news I read that took place in Dec 09. Uganda was planning to pass a legistration that would “criminalized” homosexuals. The Vatican issued a statement and denounced any violence against homosexuals. For a while, the GLBT community praised the Vatican for it.
Click to expand...
I think that bill is about to come up for discussion and vote very soon. There is a large Christian majority and a Catholic plurality in Uganda, so we will see if the Pope’s words have any effect.
 
stcalixtus said:
my personal opinion, fornication is as sinful as gay sex.My rationale as explained to my wifes Bay area gay friend was explained as such, when he first met me he assumed I hated gays because I am Catholic and that we are hypocrites for being more accepting of fornication and other sins.So I clarified my position and assured him we couild be friends however I cannot accept his relationship with his “husband”, we get along fine now, is he typical of gay people? I think so, gay sex has the “ick” factor asociated with it and it is hard to put aside…I must do so as I do feel heterosexuals shacking up together is counterproductive to the ideal of holy matrimony, both gay and straights that sin in regards to sex are on par in my opinion.We further the gay rights cause by being hypocrites? in general we should all strive to follow the catechism.
Click to expand...
my personal opinion, fornication is as sinful as gay sex
This seems to be the consensus here, but it is an opinion that alienates potential allies in the fight against gay marriage. In ten or twenty years, when gay marriage is seen as normal and natural, you’ll all be saying “Sugar was right about this.” Consider an example: You take your kid to the park and you see a man and woman hugging and kissing. You don’t know if they’re married or not. Your kid doesn’t know either. Maybe they’re not married, but living together and having sex. Still, your kid doesn’t know that. What your kid sees is a normal expression of affection. But how about if you see two men hugging and kissing? Is that something you want your kid to see? Is it okay if the two men are married? How will you explain it to your kid. Imagine the “birds and bees” talk you’ll have to give your kid.

Maybe the Church will refuse to accept gay marraige, but you can’t totally shelter your kid or yourself from society. Already gay couples are all over TV and movies. Posters and billboards in public show homosexual couples being physically affectionate.

My point is that coitus is a natural act. Even if the man and woman aren’t married, even if they’re using ABC it’s a natural act. (I know someone here will interject that ABC isn’t natural. I can’t say exactly what I mean by “act” without being explicit, but you should know what I mean.) So you can call it sinful; but it’s still natural for men and women to do that. It’s not natural for two men or two women to do whatever it is they do. The parts don’t fit.

I’m beginning to think that holding on to the idea that masturbation, premartial sex, and contraception are equally as wrong as homosexuality is more important to many people than fighting the gay agenda. This is a serious mistake. Once gay marriage is legal, there will be more perversions of marriage. The next step will be marraiges of three: a straight man and 2 bisexual women, or a straight woman and 2 bisexual men. After that it will be polyamorous marriage. (There are already people living the polyamorous lifestyle and no doubt they’ll want to enjoy the benefits of marraige too.) And all this will be regarded as normal and natural.

Unless there is a compelling secular argument against gay marriage, the gays will win.
 
Charlemagne_II said:
Nec5

*The Church remains impotent as it has for decades now. I hear no strong religious voice arguing with fire on the news against these sins. *

I see what you see and fear what you fear.

Where is the great Catholic voice that is carried across the land? Instead, we have good preachers on EWTN preaching to the choir. Those outside the Church never hear them. We used to have a G.K. Chesterton or a Bishop Fulton Sheen widely read or heard by non-Catholics. Now we have mostly wimpish abstract statements issued by the bishops and read by very few Catholics, but not by others.

The Church has given up the militant approach and now lies supine before the barbarians. But this has happened before in history. The Church survived. The Church sometimes must be the anvil upon which the hammer will strike, but eventually spend its force. The anvil never breaks, but the hammer does … God willing.
Click to expand...
verywell said…thank you:)
 
*Unless there is a compelling secular argument against gay marriage, the gays will win. *
There is a compelling secular argument: the parts don’t fit. Even atheists can’t dispute that. 👍
 
stcalixtus said:
bizarre post:shrug: so you are not a practicing Catholic?
Click to expand...
Yes, I am a practicing Catholic. I was responding to a post that was criticizing the Catholic Church for claiming to know what it is talking about, and to believe in its own teachings.

Why would I want to join a church (ie: a nice, inoffensive Protestant organization that is falling all over itself to be accepting of homosexuals, fornicators, masturbators, and the like) that claims not to know what it is talking about, nor to actually believe its own teachings? I’d rather be Catholic - just because its claims seem “arrogant” doesn’t mean that they aren’t true.
 
Mannyfit75 said:
I hope you aren’t serious that you don’t need the Church.
Click to expand...
I need the Catholic Church, together with its “arrogance” of knowing the difference between sin and virtue.

What I don’t need is a non-Catholic church that doesn’t claim to know anything about what sin is, because that would be “judgmental.”
 
Charlemagne_II said:
*Unless there is a compelling secular argument against gay marriage, the gays will win. *
There is a compelling secular argument: the parts don’t fit. Even atheists can’t dispute that. 👍
Click to expand...
Erm… Then why don’t men have two appropriately sized indentations in their chests? 😃

rossum
 
Hypatia said:
absolutely; I don’t think I have ever made any secret of that. As you said, all someone has to do is browse my numerous posts on the topic to see where I stand.

And I can agree with a good bit of that. In Muslim-majority countries where homosexuality is illegal (e.g., parts of Arabia and, as you mention, Iran), the punishments handed down are often brutal, inhumane and lethal, comparable to the punishments handed out for zina generally. This is one of just many issues, with respect to basic human dignity, that would like to see addressed in Iran and elsewhere.
Click to expand...
I pray that someday a just society rises up in Iran and many other countries that will uphold basic human right and I as an ex military for fourteen years would have fought for those rights, our government has various unsavory reasons for having a presense in the region however I believe adressing human rights for Christians,homosexuals or any other opressed minority is noble...does that make me a crusader:knight1: for freedom? I do not support the sin of a gay lifestyle or for that matter fornication ect.Gay citizens should NOT be executed for simply being gay.
 
SugarMagnolia said:
my personal opinion, fornication is as sinful as gay sex
This seems to be the consensus here, but it is an opinion that alienates potential allies in the fight against gay marriage. In ten or twenty years, when gay marriage is seen as normal and natural, you’ll all be saying “Sugar was right about this.” Consider an example: You take your kid to the park and you see a man and woman hugging and kissing. You don’t know if they’re married or not. Your kid doesn’t know either. Maybe they’re not married, but living together and having sex. Still, your kid doesn’t know that. What your kid sees is a normal expression of affection. But how about if you see two men hugging and kissing? Is that something you want your kid to see? Is it okay if the two men are married? How will you explain it to your kid. Imagine the “birds and bees” talk you’ll have to give your kid.

Maybe the Church will refuse to accept gay marraige, but you can’t totally shelter your kid or yourself from society. Already gay couples are all over TV and movies. Posters and billboards in public show homosexual couples being physically affectionate.

My point is that coitus is a natural act. Even if the man and woman aren’t married, even if they’re using ABC it’s a natural act. (I know someone here will interject that ABC isn’t natural. I can’t say exactly what I mean by “act” without being explicit, but you should know what I mean.) So you can call it sinful; but it’s still natural for men and women to do that. It’s not natural for two men or two women to do whatever it is they do. The parts don’t fit.

I’m beginning to think that holding on to the idea that masturbation, premartial sex, and contraception are equally as wrong as homosexuality is more important to many people than fighting the gay agenda. This is a serious mistake. Once gay marriage is legal, there will be more perversions of marriage. The next step will be marraiges of three: a straight man and 2 bisexual women, or a straight woman and 2 bisexual men. After that it will be polyamorous marriage. (There are already people living the polyamorous lifestyle and no doubt they’ll want to enjoy the benefits of marraige too.) And all this will be regarded as normal and natural.

Unless there is a compelling secular argument against gay marriage, the gays will win.
Click to expand...
sooooo, after consulying my handy catechism book the fact seems to be that gay love and fornication seem to be equally sinful? the fight against gay marriage will be lost for many reasons, I believe because a growing majority of citizens do not believe in God, they really have no respect for the bible, they think you and I are naive simpletons.I will continue to be morally and politically opposed to "gay rights" and feel I am being a hypocrite by not thinking fornication ect is as much of a sin.I look at my young heterosexual neighbors living in sin and my neighbors on the other side..a gay couple and see no difference in their sin, unrepentent thus far, hypocrisy is a huge problem?
 
Do you think that the church will ever accept gay marriage?

The Church can never accept what was condemned in the New Testament. :bible1:

Romans 1:18-28
18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness,
19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.
20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities–his eternal power and divine nature–have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.
22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools
23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.
24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another.
25 They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator–who is forever praised. Amen.
26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones.
27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion.
28 Furthermore, since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done.

:amen:
 
rossum

*Erm… Then why don’t men have two appropriately sized indentations in their chests? *

Because female breasts were made for feeding … you know, the indentation in your mouth. 👍

Whew!
 
Charlemagne_II said:
rossum

*Erm… Then why don’t men have two appropriately sized indentations in their chests? *

Because female breasts were made for feeding … you know, the indentation in your mouth. 👍

Whew!
Click to expand...
So where is my second mouth, or am I seeing double? 🙂

rossum
 
rossum

So where is my second mouth, or am I seeing double?

Ever heard of twins? Double duty? Ain’t nature grand? 👍
 
Charlemagne_II said:
Nec5

*The Church remains impotent as it has for decades now. I hear no strong religious voice arguing with fire on the news against these sins. *

I see what you see and fear what you fear.

Where is the great Catholic voice that is carried across the land? Instead, we have good preachers on EWTN preaching to the choir. Those outside the Church never hear them. We used to have a G.K. Chesterton or a Bishop Fulton Sheen widely read or heard by non-Catholics. Now we have mostly wimpish abstract statements issued by the bishops and read by very few Catholics, but not by others.

The Church has given up the militant approach and now lies supine before the barbarians. But this has happened before in history. The Church survived. The Church sometimes must be the anvil upon which the hammer will strike, but eventually spend its force. The anvil never breaks, but the hammer does … God willing.
Click to expand...
I think you underestimate the ignorance of man and the intelligence of the devil. The entire West is lost for good barring a Mad Max type of scenario
(where canned corn becomes the new gold:D).

I also view the Church as a union of God with priests/laymen. If the laymen, the regular folks, bail out followed by impotent church leaders, then the Church has become what? It loses its purpose if it does not defend the faith. I might go so far as to argue that is has lost its purpose.

I hear all these defenders of the previous Pope and the current one. What have they done? During the last Pope’s tenure, Europe left the Church in its entirety. The US began to quickly follow suit. There was no outcry. There is none today. It’s no wonder that Church attendance is down for Christians; what is the point if truth is neither proclaimed or defended?

And, of course, whenever I make a statement about homosexuals or divorce, or abortion, I’m told that Christ said “Do not judge”, which is the perfect example of taking something out of context.
 
Perhaps the pro-homosexual-marriage anti-Catholic crowd can lay out for the rest of us what their ‘utopia’ will be like.
 
Nec5

I think you underestimate the ignorance of man and the intelligence of the devil.

Possibly … and possibly the end days are upon us. Who can say?

But I expect that when Paul and Peter were martyred in Rome, the Christians there must have been tempted to believe the jig was up.

And when Alexander VI purchased the papacy, those were dark days, especially for Savonarola.

But the devil is too smart for his own good.

Evil holds the hammer, but the Church is the anvil. Sooner or later the hammer will break on the anvil.
 
Sailor Kenshin

Perhaps the pro-homosexual-marriage anti-Catholic crowd can lay out for the rest of us what their ‘utopia’ will be like.

Sodoms and Gomorrahs, I expect. Flee and don’t look back.
 
SugarMagnolia said:
I think extremism begets extremism. The rules of the Church are so strict that people who can’t live up to them swing to the opposite extreme of hedonism. I think a little tolerance for nonprocreative sex among married heterosexuals will go a long way.
Click to expand...
This statement displays a fundamental - albeit common - misconception about what the Church is. The “rules of the Church” are not the Church’s rules: they are God’s rules. If they weren’t - or if we believed otherwise - then it would make absolutely no sense to belong to the Church in the first place, and since the Church didn’t make them up she has no authority to change them.

Ender
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top