For those who want a legal end to Gay Marriage

[mlchance]

Good luck on getting the law to do anything in my favor. Here in Virginia and the DC area in particular I have little to no rights even to exist…

If you spent as much time lobbying legislators and talking to the press as you do recounting your constant victimhood on the Internet, you could probably get things changed. Either that, or you could move. Neither activity involve redefining marriage to be something that it isn’t.

– Mark L. Chance.

 

[bookgirl32]

Good luck on getting the law to do anything in my favor. Here in Virginia and the DC area in particular I have little to no rights even to exist. Virginia has a state DOMA, and it’s stronger than the federal DOMA.

There was a famous case a few years back, a transsexual woman was in a car accident. The EMTs once finding out it was a ‘man with breasts’ while doing CPR actually stepped back and started laughing, while the witnesses to the accident had to jeer and yell at them to get back to actually you know…saving her life.

I was assaulted once, had a broken arm, fractured kneecap and a disorienting head trauma from someone outraged by my mere existence and when I tried to get the cops to arrest him, they LAUGHED at me and mocked me for being what I am instead of doing their civic duty.

I don’t want special rights, I just want to be treated like an actual human being and given at least SOME dignity, and have people judge me on my character and my abilities. That’s apparently too much to ask for from most individuals where I live.

Thankfully I’m at the point now where I can go mostly unseen and unnoticed, but that’s because I have had to learn how to hide, how to blend in, how to not be my normal self, all in attempts to just live without fear. I am always afraid to interact with my coworkers, for fear that I may end up getting fired again if too much is discerned from their conversations with me. It makes me more paranoid than I normally am, and that’s saying something!

You have been treated horribly, and that’s not right, at all. And even the stories that you relayed (car accident, etc.) are not right either. And the Church would in no way defend any of those violent actions that happened to you. I’m sorry they did.

And I’m not arguing that you should not be able to keep complete control over your own power of attorney, or a will, or your partner’s if you are named in control. I think it is a violation of your rights if these are ignored.

But I don’t think that definition of marriage should be changed. I believe that you still have a right to be married, just not to someone of your same sex. Just as I don’t have a right to be married to someone of my same sex. But does that mean I don’t believe you should be able to control who and what have rights to your welfare or belongings, no. That is a part of legal marriage, yes, but not the part that I’m trying to defend. It’s not a question of are you enough of a person to be married, it’s simply a question of what marriage is.

 

[pathia]

If you spent as much time lobbying legislators and talking to the press as you do recounting your constant victimhood on the Internet, you could probably get things changed. Either that, or you could move. Neither activity involve redefining marriage to be something that it isn’t.

– Mark L. Chance.

I spend about 15minutes a day here, not likely. Regardless, I also DO do activism in reality. How do you think I know so many horrible stories of ‘victimhood’ as you say it? It’s not by random chance, let me assure you. Virginia is the closest its been to passing a hate crimes law and my personal stories have gone to my state legislators. A few of them spoken to them aloud in meetings on campus even.

I don’t live in a plastic bubble. In reality I’m busy finishing my education and working two part time jobs. I will be moving to the Seattle area once I get my Master’s degree next month. Most of my horrible ‘victimhood’ things are from the past. I’ve clawed my way out of the pit of homelessness and despair. I intend to make it easier for others to do the same.

 

[SenorSalsa]

So homosexuals were more promiscuous than heterosexuals?

nope but if you notice the name was changed from GRID(gay related immune deficiency) to AIDS(aquired immunodefficiency syndrome) when they realized that it was not related to homosexuality. I dont think theres any arguing, however, that both homo- and heterosexual people were fairly promiscuous in the 60s

 

[LambOfGod]

Gay, homo, transexual or whatever is un-natural and goes against all nature … its a sin just like mastubating is a sin.Gay couples bringing up children in this world and the children walk through life with a messed up out look and lack of morals and the world becomes even worse.

Gay marrige is not the answer … seek Jesus with the help of His blessed mother with a open and honest heart and get healed from sin.

It takes time, through patiance and failures, but you continue to be sorry for your sin and continue to try and those who are sincere will be healed with a new life and direction.

There is absolutely nothing impossible through God as long as your honest. Try it and you will find as life goes on you will not be sorry, and you will endup helping others who have the same problem.

Memorare
Remember, O most gracious Virgin Mary, that never was it known that anyone who fled to they protection, implored they help, or sought thy intercession was left unaided. Inspired with this confidence, I fly unto thee, O Virgin of virgins, my Mother. To thee I come, before thee I stand, sinful and sorrowful. O Mother of the Word Incarnate, despise not my petitions, but in thy mercy hear and answer me. Amen.

 

[pathia]

But I don’t think that definition of marriage should be changed. I believe that you still have a right to be married, just not to someone of your same sex. Just as I don’t have a right to be married to someone of my same sex. But does that mean I don’t believe you should be able to control who and what have rights to your welfare or belongings, no. That is a part of legal marriage, yes, but not the part that I’m trying to defend. It’s not a question of are you enough of a person to be married, it’s simply a question of what marriage is.

I would ask that you define my sex then. Go ahead and try, please? I’m sure that sounds demanding and/or condescending, but I’ve yet to get a definitive answer from any doctor, scientist, priest or bioethicist. If you can, then you’ve just one-upped the entire Church and at least six doctors and countless therapists and nurses that have worked on me over the years. The most solid answer I get from any is literally ‘you are what you feel yourself to be, because we cannot define you’.

It is difficult to define ‘same’ when one is ‘other’ rather than male or female. Legally speaking it is entirely dependent on the state’s laws whether I can marry a man, woman or in say like Oklahoma, I’m fairly certain I couldn’t marry EITHER there, legally. How’s that for strange?

Gay marrige is not the answer … seek Jesus with the help of His blessed mother with a open and honest heart and get healed from sin.

It takes time, through patience and failures, but you continue to be sorry for your sin and continue to try and those who are sincere will be healed with a new life and direction.

.

Or whatever? I guess that applies to me. How do I know what is sinful, when I cannot be defined? Are you speaking to me, or in general? Your post isn’t exactly clear.

I can only rely on the prayers of others, for I have never felt the presence of God in my entire life, no matter how hard I’ve tried. Fasting, self mutilation, hallucinations via drugs, starving, meditation. Endless hours of prayer and reflection, self induced hypnosis. Nothing works, I feel nothing, just an emptiness. I never feel any presence, or glory or love, there is nothing. I only believe in the presence of the creator out of force of habit and the lack of any other logical explanation for existence of life.

 

[Pinkyyy]

The Catholic Church is not fighting for an end to marriages performed outside the Church, but she demands that Catholics, under penalty of excommunication, marry under the auspices of the Church.

Ken

Ken, are you saying all Catholics married outside the church without a priest or deacon present are excommunicated? That must be a lot of members. In fact, I am Lutheran and my dh is catholic - we were civilly married. I have been attending catholic mass for 8 years and know the priest there very well (all of the priests). They know our situation. At our local monastery, several monks know we are not blessed. Also, members of the congregation know. No one has every excommunicated my husband - priest or monks.

I have been through RCIA as well but have not joined the church. My brother in law is a priest. He has never said anything either about being excommunicated.

 

[Pinkyyy]

Gay, homo, transexual or whatever is un-natural and goes against all nature … its a sin just like mastubating is a sin.Gay couples bringing up children in this world and the children walk through life with a messed up out look and lack of morals and the world becomes even worse.

.

Lamb, who is anyone to judge the morals of others - you can’t presume to judge someone. Also, on the other side gay couples do take in as foster parents or through adoption children that “no one else wants”. I thank them for that. Just because they are gay does not mean they are immoral horrible people or that their children will grow up to be either.

They are plenty of children from straight married couples - Catholics even- that grow up to be horribly immoral people - but because these innocent children are children of gays they are still more immoral and screw the world up more than these other messed up children turned adults? I don’t buy that for 1 second.

 

[fix]

Lamb, who is anyone to judge the morals of others - you can’t presume to judge someone.

If we cannot judge actions and beliefs then is that not sociopathy?

 

[bookgirl32]

I would ask that you define my sex then. Go ahead and try, please? I’m sure that sounds demanding and/or condescending, but I’ve yet to get a definitive answer from any doctor, scientist, priest or bioethicist. If you can, then you’ve just one-upped the entire Church and at least six doctors and countless therapists and nurses that have worked on me over the years. The most solid answer I get from any is literally ‘you are what you feel yourself to be, because we cannot define you’.

It is difficult to define ‘same’ when one is ‘other’ rather than male or female. Legally speaking it is entirely dependent on the state’s laws whether I can marry a man, woman or in say like Oklahoma, I’m fairly certain I couldn’t marry EITHER there, legally. How’s that for strange?

Or whatever? I guess that applies to me. How do I know what is sinful, when I cannot be defined? Are you speaking to me, or in general? Your post isn’t exactly clear.

I can only rely on the prayers of others, for I have never felt the presence of God in my entire life, no matter how hard I’ve tried. Fasting, self mutilation, hallucinations via drugs, starving, meditation. Endless hours of prayer and reflection, self induced hypnosis. Nothing works, I feel nothing, just an emptiness. I never feel any presence, or glory or love, there is nothing. I only believe in the presence of the creator out of force of habit and the lack of any other logical explanation for existence of life.

So Pathia, do you have a condition where you have the sex organs of both sexes? I don’t know what the non-offesive term is (I know of one that I think is, so I’m asking to be sure). That would be a much different thread even.

If you’re talking a woman, by definition of the Church as having the biological body of a woman, or a man defined the same way, then this thread does apply.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

You’re begging the question. No one has a constitutional right to get married; therefore, no one is discriminated against if they cannot marry.

– Mark L. Chance.

Actually, not every right is enumerated in the Constitution. That’s why there’s the ninth amendment:

“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

 

[SenorSalsa]

Actually, not every right is enumerated in the Constitution. That’s why there’s the ninth amendment:

“The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.”

yay, i was starting to feel lonely on my side of the fence, and for that matter lonely in knowledge of the Constitution

and as for all the other recent posts,

once again, i do not deny that homosexual acts are mortal sins, nor do i support gay marriage. In fact, i would personally argue against it in any debate i was in. What I am arguing, is that we do not, and should not, live in a Theocracy. For many reasons, not the least of which being we have elected people of all kinds of religions. So laws would drastically change with the coming and going of Presidents

 

[pathia]

So Pathia, do you have a condition where you have the sex organs of both sexes? I don’t know what the non-offesive term is (I know of one that I think is, so I’m asking to be sure). That would be a much different thread even.

If you’re talking a woman, by definition of the Church as having the biological body of a woman, or a man defined the same way, then this thread does apply.

Almost no one has ‘sex organs of both sexes’. That is true hermaphroditism, and when it occurs does not occur very often. It is always incomplete. The proper non-offensive term is intersexual. Due to the constant misunderstandings and pagan/misconceptions behind the word hermaphrodite it’s viewed as rather offensive.

I have sex organs of NEITHER sex is what would be the more proper explanation. I am not neuter, but I am sterile in both male and female fashions and never had any fertility to begin with.

Which marriage is gay to me, and which is straight? It’s somewhat of a mystery.

 

[bookgirl32]

yay, i was starting to feel lonely on my side of the fence, and for that matter lonely in knowledge of the Constitution

and as for all the other recent posts,

once again, i do not deny that homosexual acts are mortal sins, nor do i support gay marriage. In fact, i would personally argue against it in any debate i was in. What I am arguing, is that we do not, and should not, live in a Theocracy. For many reasons, not the least of which being we have elected people of all kinds of religions. So laws would drastically change with the coming and going of Presidents

And I don’t deny anyone’s rights. I don’t deny civil unions, etc. I deny the changing of the definition of marriage, period. I deny a goverment legally saying something is what it isn’t. Let same sex couples have the same legal rights as married couples, just don’t call it a marriage.

 

[bookgirl32]

Almost no one has ‘sex organs of both sexes’. That is true hermaphroditism, and when it occurs does not occur very often. It is always incomplete. The proper non-offensive term is intersexual. Due to the constant misunderstandings and pagan/misconceptions behind the word hermaphrodite it’s viewed as rather offensive.

I have sex organs of NEITHER sex is what would be the more proper explanation. I am not neuter, but I am sterile in both male and female fashions and never had any fertility to begin with.

Which marriage is gay to me, and which is straight? It’s somewhat of a mystery.

Well, then I would say your situation is a different thread than this. And I can honestly say I’m not sure what the Church would say in regards to you personally and marriage. A lot of people are considered clinically sterile, but have the organs that are needed for life to happen, so theologically it is still considered possible (a miracle, but possible), hence the Church would still recognize a marriage. I don’t want to derail the thread, or put you on the spot either. Thanks for your openness though.

 

[pathia]

Well, then I would say your situation is a different thread than this. And I can honestly say I’m not sure what the Church would say in regards to you personally and marriage. A lot of people are considered clinically sterile, but have the organs that are needed for life to happen, so theologically it is still considered possible (a miracle, but possible), hence the Church would still recognize a marriage. I don’t want to derail the thread, or put you on the spot either. Thanks for your openness though.

My state has been discussed to death on other threads more close to the matter.

However, I still state that it is applicapable. If you want to limit the LEGAL word, because the state’s marriage laws have no basis in the biblical way they are merely a legal agreement when government is concerned. You must define ‘male’ and ‘female’ very specifically in law, and that cannot be done because it cannot be done scientifically.

 

[LCMS_No_More]

yay, i was starting to feel lonely on my side of the fence, and for that matter lonely in knowledge of the Constitution

and as for all the other recent posts,

once again, i do not deny that homosexual acts are mortal sins, nor do i support gay marriage. In fact, i would personally argue against it in any debate i was in. What I am arguing, is that we do not, and should not, live in a Theocracy. For many reasons, not the least of which being we have elected people of all kinds of religions. So laws would drastically change with the coming and going of Presidents

Actually, I don’t believe in gay “marriage,” I was just correcting the fallacy that the constitution “grants” rights. It doesn’t, it only enumerates some of the right that were in specific need of mentioning at the time it was written.

 

[SenorSalsa]

Almost no one has ‘sex organs of both sexes’. That is true hermaphroditism, and when it occurs does not occur very often. It is always incomplete. The proper non-offensive term is intersexual. Due to the constant misunderstandings and pagan/misconceptions behind the word hermaphrodite it’s viewed as rather offensive.

I have sex organs of NEITHER sex is what would be the more proper explanation. I am not neuter, but I am sterile in both male and female fashions and never had any fertility to begin with.

Which marriage is gay to me, and which is straight? It’s somewhat of a mystery.

not to be rude, but how rare is your condition? I have never heard of that happening.

 

[pathia]

not to be rude, but how rare is your condition? I have never heard of that happening.

isna.org/faq/frequency

Much more commonly than you might think. 1/1666 births are not XX or XY. 1/1000 receive surgery shortly after birth to hide the ambiguity. There are others on this very forum that have come to me in private. I am just a loud mouth

It’s covered up, stigmatized and most infants are corrected surgically within the first few months of life. It’s just not talked about at all, until recently.

 

[bookgirl32]

My state has been discussed to death on other threads more close to the matter.

However, I still state that it is applicapable. If you want to limit the LEGAL word, because the state’s marriage laws have no basis in the biblical way they are merely a legal agreement when government is concerned. You must define ‘male’ and ‘female’ very specifically in law, and that cannot be done because it cannot be done scientifically.

It can’t ever be done scientifically, or it can’t be done in cases like yours? Or are you saying that since it can’t be done “for all”, it can’t be done at all?