Gay Civil Marriage, whats the conservative side of things?

  • Thread starter Thread starter TOB_questions
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
T

TOB_questions

Guest
Ok, so of what I understand the whole fight about gay marriage is about gay civil marriage. Meaning, they are fighting about their *legal *right to become married and have that union recognized by the state/federal government. With this recognition there will be an easier transfer of money if one passes, visitation rights in hospitals, easier power of attorney, and numerous other benefits. I’m not married yet, so I can only imagine what all these benefits are.

The legal recognition of it doesn’t seem to be infringing on the sacrament of marriage (filling out on a 1040 that I have a spouse doesn’t seem necessary to verify the love felt with your partner)

They don’t seem to be demanding to have the sacrament recognized in Churches, so why are Christians so upset about it. (Admittedly Catholics are too, but the Vatican’s policy to homosexuals is pretty lenient compared to other religions)

For me, giving them legal rights is perfectly fine by me. They are a minority and, in my mind, this seems pretty similar to the whole equal rights for African Americans. Frankly, I’m sure there are some religous sects out there that are still upset about that…

Ultimately, I’m trying to understand the psychology of why Christians are so upset about giving gays equal legal rights. Thanks!
 
TOB_questions said:
Ok, so of what I understand the whole fight about gay marriage is about gay civil marriage. Meaning, they are fighting about their *legal *right to become married and have that union recognized by the state/federal government. With this recognition there will be an easier transfer of money if one passes, visitation rights in hospitals, easier power of attorney, and numerous other benefits. I’m not married yet, so I can only imagine what all these benefits are.

The legal recognition of it doesn’t seem to be infringing on the sacrament of marriage (filling out on a 1040 that I have a spouse doesn’t seem necessary to verify the love felt with your partner)

They don’t seem to be demanding to have the sacrament recognized in Churches, so why are Christians so upset about it. (Admittedly Catholics are too, but the Vatican’s policy to homosexuals is pretty lenient compared to other religions)

For me, giving them legal rights is perfectly fine by me. They are a minority and, in my mind, this seems pretty similar to the whole equal rights for African Americans. Frankly, I’m sure there are some religous sects out there that are still upset about that…

Ultimately, I’m trying to understand the psychology of why Christians are so upset about giving gays equal legal rights. Thanks!
Click to expand...
ANY LAW IN TRANSGRESSION OF DIVINE LAW IS INVALID! **An unjust law is no law at all! ** Unjust laws are not worth the paper that they are written on. Unjust laws are to be defied because they do not exist. There is no basis for them. A recent example is Spain’s “laws” on marriages and adoptions. ** Pope Benedict has ordered citizens of Spain who work in adoption agencies to defy Spain’s new laws of illicit marriages and adoptions. ** Workers in adoption agencies are to refuse to fill out any paperwork or grant adoption of children to illicit and unnatural marriage unions. Spain’s new law disobeys natural law. NO HUMAN LAW AGAINST NATURAL LAW IS VALID!
 
Meaning, they are fighting about their legal right to become married and have that union recognized by the state/federal government.
Click to expand...
Nope. They can live together and do whatever without “gay marriage”. What it does is make the government sanction it. Would you support sanctioning anything else immoral? Maybe national theft day or national anger day?
 
CPA2 said:
Pope Benedict has ordered citizens of Spain who work in adoption agencies to defy Spain’s new laws of illicit marriages and adoptions
Click to expand...
CPA, I missed that report in the news. Would you have a link where I could learn more about what he said?
 
Dale_M said:
CPA, I missed that report in the news. Would you have a link where I could learn more about what he said?
Click to expand...
I think that happened in 2005. You will have to do as Google search to find the quote.
 
When Ellen Degeneres had John McCain on her show, he spoke of contracts. She insisted on marriage. This isn’t about Catholics being upset. What two people do in the privacy of wherever they live is not the issue. They want the State and Society to put gay marriage on the exact same level as heterosexual marriage. They incorrectly use black civil rights terminology for their cause. Civil unions are not enough. They claim it would be “separate but equal.” They want what they call “marriage equality.”

Gay marriage was never an issue in the United States before. And if courts can create gay marriage then it’s obvious that they can create an irrevocable right to property, visitation and so on for any two people who want it. There is no political angle to this. All laws discriminate between behaviors. We The People make those determinations.

There are natural biological rules for human relationships. A priest on Catholic Radio was talking about golf. He said, basically, you can learn how it’s done and follow the rules or you can do whatever you want. As human beings, just doing whatever we want leads to anarchy in society. For all I know, there are couples living around me who are doing all sorts of things in the privacy of their home but I’m not going to bother them about it. However, if it ends up on a ballot then I’m being asked to make a decision.

Peace,
Ed
 
Technically this is not just about ‘equal rights’.

Married couples in the United States already get special rights and benefits that single people do not.

These special marriage benefits exist not just to allow marriages… but to support and promote them. In my opinion, if you want rights to be completely ‘equal’, then rather than extending these benefits to same-sex couples, you would pull a King Solomon and get rid of them all, entirely.

However, I’m not advocating such a thing.

Regarding the Christian conception of marriage, I agree with the Church that ‘its success or failure has measurable impact on all of society.’ Thus I support special rights and benefits for valid, heterosexual marriages. Same-sex couples are not being discriminated against any more than, say, single heterosexual people who are in platonic domestic relationships. And, as a single heterosexual, I’m just fine with my rights and benefits.
 
CPA2 said:
ANY LAW IN TRANSGRESSION OF DIVINE LAW IS INVALID!
Click to expand...
So you are saying that current US law on the marriage of heterosexuals is invalid since it allows both divorce and for divorced people to remarry, when such divorces and remarriages are against divine law?

rossum
 
Ok, good (name removed by moderator)ut Thanks!

Now, whats the problem if gay marriage becomes accepted in society as equal to straight? You all made that point, so are there any good examples?

The only thing: please don’t say “people will convert to being gay” because we all know (including the Church) its not strictly a choice. Also, don’t be too general such as “society will collapse forever and ever” I want some solid arguments to fully formulate my opinion on this issue ! 🙂
 
rossum said:
So you are saying that current US law on the marriage of heterosexuals is invalid since it allows both divorce and for divorced people to remarry, when such divorces and remarriages are against divine law?

rossum
Click to expand...
Once the government steps outside of civil law, that law is invalid. There is no basis for the law. The government is like King John who thought that his mouth was the law. King John was foolish and so is the government!

I repeat myself again. There is Divine Law, Natural Law and Civil Law, in that order. Man only has control over civil law. Each type of law is separate and you cannot substitute one type of law for another type of law.

The source of the “rule of law” goes back to Divine Law. The Declaration of Independence uses the words, the “equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them.” What do these words really mean?

The ideas of the source of legitimate law were being formulated by the Catholic Church before the Magna Carta. Truth always goes back to the source of truth, which is public revelation, commonly known as the Holy Scriptures.

This gives a short but good review of some current constitutional issues.

youtube.com/watch_popup?v=7n2m-X7OIuY
 
Newsflash, “traditional marriage” is rare and on major decline and has been for a long time, a lot longer before the SSM issue was even thought of. Why not put the blame who started this issue instead of continuing LGBT discrimination that they constantly have to deal with.
 
Jermosh said:
Newsflash, “traditional marriage” is rare and on major decline and has been for a long time, a lot longer before the SSM issue was even thought of. Why not put the blame who started this issue instead of continuing LGBT discrimination that they constantly have to deal with.
Click to expand...
That’s the thing that gets me so annoyed! Straight marriage has fallen apart and the gays are being blamed for the problem even though they had NOTHING to do with it.

Also, that link that was put up on the wall, was discriminatory against gays and made the argument that they are unequal and that they should be hidden from society. THAT immediately has the conservatives lose alot of credibility in my mind.

I’m asking for legitimate proof that gay civil marriage is bad…not biased links. Thanks!
 
Love for homosexuals is one thing. Love of homosexuality is something entirely different.

Christians are to be firm in condemning sin, such as homosexuality. Christians are not to be swayed like branches in the wind. Fasting and prayer is our guiding star. We do not have a gallop-poll mentality. We do not obtain our beliefs from the media. The assumption that Christians need to conform to the rest of society is a clever move. It kills the transformation of society toward love. It encourages division, and even divides families.

Jesus calls us to love, not human love, but God’s love. What is love, if not salvation? One obtains salvation by obedience. Practicing homosexuality is not practicing obedience. Practicing homosexuality does not lead to God’s love. On a biblical level God has a resolute message for settling opinions. WE ARE TO LOVE ALL MEN WITHOUT CONDENSATION, BUT FIRM IN CONDEMNING SIN, SUCH AS HOMOSEXUALITY.

Opinions divide the world. The statement, “You are entitled to your opinion,” is just a continuation of that division. Jesus came to settle opinions and to unite us. Jesus taught us to be “of one mind and one heart.” Jesus’ words settle what opinions we should have about much of life. Word games aimed at division and separation do not make society one.

“Today I will speak to you about what you have forgotten: Dear Children, My name is Love. That I am among you for so much of your time is love, because the Great Love sends me. I am asking the same of you. I am asking for love in your families. I am asking that you recognize love in your brother. Only in this way, through love, will you see the Greatest Love. May fasting and prayer be your guiding star. Open your hearts to love, namely salvation. Thank you. (Our Lady’s message to Mirana on March 2, 2007).”
 
TOB_questions said:
That’s the thing that gets me so annoyed! Straight marriage has fallen apart and the gays are being blamed for the problem even though they had NOTHING to do with it.

I’m asking for legitimate proof that gay civil marriage is bad…not biased links. Thanks!
Click to expand...
When you say that marriage has “fallen apart” are you bemoaning that? And are you then contending that SSM strengthens the institution of marriage?

In point of fact, there is no vocabulary for SSM, since marriage has always been defined as the union of a male and a female. Following from that definition, all types of law has been built up to allow for the holding and transfer of property, the rearing of and care for children and protection of the parties to marriage and their offspring. From those laws spring the tranquility and orderliness of society. When you say that marriage has “fallen apart”, any thoughtful observer would then observe “and society has fallen apart”.

So the SSM movement, in trying to usurp or transform the definition of marriage is actually destroying its meaning. That effects every married couple, who has started and built a life depending on the structure and status of the institution. And in harming them, harms society.
 
Frankly, society has no reason for gay marriage. Gay people seem to have a need, but there is no societal need.

Heterosexual marriage is so important that, in the past, if you lived with someone of the opposite sex for a certain amount of time, you had a common law marriage, because you were, indeed, living as husband and wife. Why care? Offspring. Kids.

Societies have encouraged marriage, forced marriage in the common law case, to provide a stable platform for the raising of the next generation. People have known for generations that it is best for the children for their parents to be married and to be legally responsible for them (the children).

Since gay couples can, in no circumstances, have natural offspring, there is no need for society to create the construct of gay marriage. Society has no reason. However gay people want marriage because it’s another pathetic attempt to convince themselves that they are normal in their same sex attraction.
 
TOB_questions said:
That’s the thing that gets me so annoyed! Straight marriage has fallen apart and the gays are being blamed for the problem even though they had NOTHING to do with it.

Also, that link that was put up on the wall, was discriminatory against gays and made the argument that they are unequal and that they should be hidden from society. THAT immediately has the conservatives lose alot of credibility in my mind.

I’m asking for legitimate proof that gay civil marriage is bad…not biased links. Thanks!
Click to expand...
Show me one source that links homosexuality to the decline of heterosexual marriage.

There is no such thing as liberal and conservative for Catholics. It is obedience or disobedience.

Peace,
Ed
 
A civil marriage between two people is not a sacrament, nor is it under Church jurisdiction. Civil marriage is completley different than the sacrament of marriage…that’s why I included the word in the title.

Now I ask, how is it bad for society to have gay men or women who love each other, have an easier transfer of material wealth (as well as other numerous benefits) recognized by the government?

Another question, why is altering the meaning of civil marriage that bad? I hear that argument all the time, but can’t fathom the underlying reasons. Its not as if straight people are giong to get married to the same gender simply because its legal.

Thanks for the (name removed by moderator)ut! 🙂
 
Now, whats the problem if gay marriage becomes accepted in society as equal to straight? You all made that point, so are there any good examples?
Click to expand...
More acceptance of the sin=more people in hell. It will probably hurt homosexuals and bisexuals the most.
 
TOB_questions said:
A civil marriage between two people is not a sacrament, nor is it under Church jurisdiction. Civil marriage is completley different than the sacrament of marriage…that’s why I included the word in the title.

Now I ask, how is it bad for society to have gay men or women who love each other, have an easier transfer of material wealth (as well as other numerous benefits) recognized by the government?

Another question, why is altering the meaning of civil marriage that bad? I hear that argument all the time, but can’t fathom the underlying reasons. Its not as if straight people are giong to get married to the same gender simply because its legal.

Thanks for the (name removed by moderator)ut! 🙂
Click to expand...
Marriage preexists the law. It is based on a natural condition of complimentary sexes and a natural need arising from that for an orderly society, to procreate and to care for offspring. A law that pretends to change that assumes powers it does not have and divorces itself from the natural. The law itself works against the natural.

Once law has assumed the power to change what it cannot, the law must then take in hand all that derives from the natural. Some of what follows is of a civil nature. As disruptive as those changes might be, one must ask how is “father” and “mother” to be redefined? How is “daughter” and “son”? What are the personal responsibilities to each other in a family where roles have been discarded? What shape do roles take, when they no longer have anything to do with the nature of the people involved? Etc. Etc.

You might say that this does not effect a marriage made in the traditional way, but you would be wrong. The purpose of marriage, the very reason for its being, for enduring the sacrifices of marriage and committing to it have been swept from under the feet. Marriage will have lost its value because it no longer has a meaning. And society will suffer as a result.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top