Gay Marriage (A Different Perspective)

[Jermosh]

I think the biggest issue is children. Children have a right to be raised by a mother and a father and many studies show they do best when in a household with a mother and father. The state has an interest in promoting real marriage because it results in children that do well in society. Due to death, divorce, out of wedlock pregnancies, etc., it’s not always possible to ensure children are raised in a home with a mother and father. But gay “marriage” allows children to be put in homes without a mother and father by default.

Once the state equivocates gay “marriage” with real marriage then they must treat the adoption of children the same as well, and institutions that do adoptions will be forced to allow gay couples to adopt – such as the case in Massachusetts where Catholic Charities can no longer do adoptions.

So what about the 100,000s that have no parants at all. If that is the case, then we should outlaw all sex outside of marriage. Good luck with that.

 

[franpax]

I am a Catholic. And I believe that Gay Marriage, as a civil institution, should be legal in the United States of America.

It is abundantly clear that secular society has a view of marriage that is vastly different than the Church. God is not brought into many marriages. People marry and divorce at will. People carry infidelity in their minds and bodies.

Marriage, as a civil institution, is a contract. It is no different than a contract between a labor union and employer. In other words, it often holds absolutely no spiritual value. God is rarely present. God is not required to be present.

In this context, it is discriminatory to not allow homosexuals to take part in this institution.

I support the Churches teaching on homosexuality. Even more so, I support the Churches teaching on marriage.

However, if same sex couples want to have a civil marriage that is their right. The Church should not concern itself.

The Church teaches that our sexuality is a beautiful gift from God. However, we do not own our sexuality. Sexuality is something that attracts a man to a woman and vv. Eventually one of the friendship might lead to marriage. Only then does the male and female couple have the right to exercise their marital rights and with the intention of meet both of the ends of the Sacrament. Really, it is civil law that should have nothin g to do with marriage. Marriage is a matter of religious belief.

People with same sex attraction are not asked for anything more than what every unmarried heterosexual is obliged to observe. The difference between gay activists and the Catholic Church is that the activist does not believe the person with SSA can be pure, chaste and celibate–whereas the Church does believe in people with SSA and their ability to be pure. Certainly they need the help of God’s grace and could well use the support of Courage…couragerc.com I believe.

The Church has to concern itself with behavior that has been clearly revealed as very sinful and disordered. We do not give up on homosexuals nor heterosexuals who are not married and need to be celibate until they are married.

 

[TracyJ]

Civil unions already give them legalized cohabitation. I know, without the other rights of marriage, but the definition of marriage is “one man, one woman”, sorry to inform you.

Why are you sorry about that?
If that’s the definition that’s the definition.
If rights are denied a fellow citizen due to a definition then Americans should do something
that would restore those rights.

 

[Jermosh]

I’m saying that’s how it spread in the U.S. which doesn’t give much light to the healthiness of homosexual sex even though heterosexuals can transmit it also, it started in this way because of the unnaturalness of its state. That is my point, it was spread because of unhealthy sex, not in spite of it.

Ah, but someday, like what’s going on in Europe where incest is on the table to be legalized, it will be the same in the U.S. also along with who knows what else.

Or it could have been because that was the 1st group that it attacked. Noone know why it spread 1st though, most think it was a crossover from another primate.
Your point is moot as it does not really state anything against the manner at hand.

 

[jean8]

Yes, it is my decision to make whenever they put it on the ballot.

And yes, gay sex, when legalized, leads to State run schools forcing little kids to read gay propaganda and “It is not a parental notification issue.”

davidparkerfund.org/html/lawsuit.html

Peace,
Ed

Ed,
A sign of the End Times.
Sinners do not want to know what God has said in his word. They will reap what they sow, so says the Lord.

Pray for them. Pray for our country. We are no longer a christian nation.
Gays are free to live in sin and some states are leagalizing the process.
God is watching the entire scene.
Did someone say they don’t want to discuss what the Bible teaches?
"The eyes of the Lord are everywhere, keeping watch on the wicked and the good.? Prov.15:3

jean

 

[Jermosh]

Jermosh, it’s a mistake to think that I’m not opposed to adultery, to divorce, or to the cultural trends that favor casual sex, no-fault divorce and serial marriages. In fact, you could say that being a child of post-sexual revolution I, like many of us here I’m sure, am a victim of a broken home.

Look at adultery, divorce, re-marriage, primacy of adults’ sense of fulfillment over the needs of children. Are they components of marriage? No.

Are they consistent with fostering healthy marriages? No.

Are they beneficial for a culture that strives to promote healthy marriages? No.

Now, throw the redefinitons of marriage required by gay marriage into that mix and where does that leave us with regard to the health of the marriage?

It leaves us in the same situation as we are already in. In fact it may repair the Traditional Marriage because it will hightlight it some and some may take it more serios.
Allowing SSM to be legal is in no way going to affect your marriage or anyone elses. If it does, then that marriage was doomed from the begining. My Marriage is from God, not a city clerk.

 

[Jermosh]

Civil unions already give them legalized cohabitation. I know, without the other rights of marriage, but the definition of marriage is “one man, one woman”, sorry to inform you.

There are only a few states with Civil Unions.

 

[mystagogia]

Okay, but can you explain to me HOW the institution of marriage is threatened by allowing a Gay couple their civil rights to legalized cohabitation?
Of all the things that threaten marriage I just don’t understand how Gay marriages threaten
one.

Gay marriage does not threaten the institution of marriage, it obliterates it. Gay marriage introduces an arbitrariness into the composition of marriage, and hence the basic family unit, that cannot be rationally denied to any group. Marriage becomes a variety of relationship contracts, with various numbers of participants. Gay marriage opponents say that civil unions are unsatisfying, do they realize that gay marriage means civil unions for all?

With arbitrariness in, the sense of permanence erodes. Divorce and re-marriage becomes commonplace where marriages occur, which is less frequently. Now a mere relationship contract of reduced value to all sides, why bother with the committment? Gay marriage has been a dagger in the hearts of marriage rates wherever it’s been tried.

Gay marriage deforms gender relations, and to the cost of women most drastically as it erodes the value of motherhood, an enormous component of women’s identities.

Out-of-wedlock births skyrocket where gay marriage has been introduced and the value of marriage erodes. Children pay the highest cost.

Look at what gay marriage has done to societies which are farther along this path than we:

The End of Marriage in Scandinavia

Don’t think we’re immune.

 

[edwest2]

Ed,
A sign of the End Times.
Sinners do not want to know what God has said in his word. They will reap what they sow, so says the Lord.

Pray for them. Pray for our country. We are no longer a christian nation.
Gays are free to live in sin and some states are leagalizing the process.
God is watching the entire scene.
Did someone say they don’t want to discuss what the Bible teaches?
"The eyes of the Lord are everywhere, keeping watch on the wicked and the good.? Prov.15:3

jean

Sinners are no longer interested in sound doctrine. I know. Having itching ears, they have heaped up for themselves teachers. And they are consoling themselves with the words of self-proclaimed experts who weave tales of exceptions to every rule and who are asking them to be part of the new and what’s next. The Bible tells us that if we sow to the flesh we sow corruption.

I pray that the Holy Spirit of God will touch their hearts.

And we are Christians in a nation that can repent and can turn back to God. If we help even one person to repent we are told there is great rejoicing in heaven.

Peace,
Ed

 

[mystagogia]

It leaves us in the same situation as we are already in. In fact it may repair the Traditional Marriage because it will hightlight it some and some may take it more serios.

You argue “the conservative case” for gay marriage. That’s a wild hope which contradicts the experience of Northern Europe since gay marriage has become legalized there. Rather, the drastic weakening and decline that’s happened there since gay marriage is openly celibrated by some Eurpoean activists who consider marriage to be an instrument of patriarchal oppression. Marriage’s wounds are cheered.

Allowing SSM to be legal is in no way going to affect your marriage or anyone elses. If it does, then that marriage was doomed from the begining. My Marriage is from God, not a city clerk.

We’re talking about politics, about how social policy affects our society. Yes, whatever happens in this arena has no bearing on the sacramental nature of Catholic marriage, given from God. It does have a bearing on the kind of society we live in and, more importantly, the kind of society our kids grow up inside and are bequeathed.

 

[the_7th_one]

First off, if you support Catholic teaching on marriage, then you should want that view to be incouraged and spread through out society. That means no Gay Marriage, because making something legal, creates acceptance and growth of it.
Secound, you seem to have (please correct me if I am in error) a common misconception that religion and faith are pure private matters. Nothing could be further from the truth. If our faith has no impact on how we vote, how are laws are crafted, how we act in the public forum, than what good is it?
This is diffrent from the question of being tolerent of people who have Homosexual orientation. You love the sinner and hate the sin. To do so, you do not ake it easyer for folks to sin.

 

[edwest2]

You argue “the conservative case” for gay marriage. That’s a wild hope which contradicts the experience of Northern Europe since gay marriage has become legalized there. Rather, the drastic weakening and decline that’s happened there since gay marriage is openly celibrated by some Eurpoean activists who consider marriage to be an instrument of patriarchal oppression. Marriage’s wounds are cheered.

We’re talking about politics, about how social policy affects our society. Yes, whatever happens in this arena has no bearing on the sacramental nature of Catholic marriage, given from God. It does have a bearing on the kind of society we live in and, more importantly, the kind of society our kids grow up inside and are bequeathed.

A “wild hope”? That is the core the Christiam message. Jesus said, I have overcome the world.

Each one of us chooses to live for Christ daily. We are to pick up our cross daily and carry it.

Politics is run by men. The Bible speaks of some powerful men of the time who did not act when they desired to partly because “they feared the people.” I’m not suggesting that governments start fearing people but they should know that they will face some consequences when they cross the line.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Elizabeth502]

You argue “the conservative case” for gay marriage. That’s a wild hope which contradicts the experience of Northern Europe since gay marriage has become legalized there. Rather, the drastic weakening and decline that’s happened there since gay marriage is openly celibrated by some Eurpoean activists who consider marriage to be an instrument of patriarchal oppression. Marriage’s wounds are cheered.

^^ Talk about the work of the devil (in Europe)! We have the corruption of language and the opportunistic reappropriation of traditional institutions. Up is down, down is up.

Another great post, mystagogia.
Spot on.

Sweden, the Netherlands, even France – all seem to be losing their centers. Continuity of a culture is so, so important. It is not that culture cannot be subject to change. Cultures change naturally, over time, in that they evolve: retaining what is best, what is distilled & assimilating what new concepts harmoniously fit into the old. But the process of that change, to be healthy, is one that involves consensus & orderly development. There is no “revolution” called for in Northern Europe, political or cultural.

I worry about the world our children will inherit. Larger cultural identities affect one’s sense of personal identity. “Anything goes” is not a culture. It’s a synonym for anarchy. “My rights” is not a community. It’s a label for an isolated kingdom where Ego triumphs.

 

[AmyBrownEyes]

Just one thing. Homesexuality in itself is no sin. One’s attractions to people of the same or oppose sex are morally neutral. A married woman might for example be attracted to someone who is not her husband. That could be an attraction that is hard to overcome. In any case, it is the action of doing something wrong that is sinfiul, not one’s feelings either way.

I see well I feel much better now. Thank you Jim for clearing things up for me. So what you’re saying is that if I had a girlfriend and was attracted to another woman that would be sinful or engaging in intercourse with that woman? Both would be sinful right? I am glad you replied to my post you are very encouraging.

Amy

 

[AmyBrownEyes]

Or it could have been because that was the 1st group that it attacked. Noone know why it spread 1st though, most think it was a crossover from another primate.
Your point is moot as it does not really state anything against the manner at hand.

I am assuming you are talking about sexual transmitted diseases? Well lesbians have a low percent rate of transmitting STDs. That is what I have heard. Which seems like it may be true because if you’re gay it isn’t just about the sex. It is about the bond, love, and friendship you have for someone. I am a lesbian and I never had a boyfriend or even had a girlfriend yet. I plan to wait and have sex until I find that one woman in my life.

 

[edwest2]

French Revolution anyone?

Let’s review the most recent one in North America and Western Europe.

1968 Sexual revolution! Why? The Pope issues Humanae Generis warning Catholics not to use artificial birth control. The Pope presents it all quite frankly, pointing out that if people follow that road then they will be more unlikely to be faithful to the love of their life.

Send in the colorfully dressed Hippies. Free love! (Sex with anyone.) Down with the Establishment! (Abolish what mom, dad, priests and nuns have told you - they don’t know anything.) Off the pigs! (Kill the police.) And as one Hippie friend of mine told me, "I don’t need no piece of paper to live with my old lady. So marriage is right out.

Smoke dope! Drop acid! (LSD, a powerful hallucinogen.) Oh yes, that will clear your thinking right up.

The sale of millions of birth control pills was at stake.

1970s Graphic prostitution is legalized and Adult Bookstores open everywhere. Very little reading is actually involved. Topless Go-Go bars open.

1973 Please! Please! Have mercy on poor young women who will die in back alley abortions. And what about victims of rape and incest? It will be used in case of emergency only. A little later, a little girl tells my mother that her mom won’t be having another baby after all.

Homosexuality is removed from the list of psychiatric disorders by force. (See the book: A Freedom Too Far.)

1978 “Sisters! Throw off the chains of your oppression!” The National Organization for Women convinces too many women that the men in the lives are or soon will harm them, emotionally, financially and/or physically. Men are labeled the eternal enemy.

This was the perfect propaganda campaign to raise the fear level of women that what came next was no surprise.

1980s No-Fault Divorce. No kids? $75 and you’re out. Call 800-DIVORCE.

I could go on, but in the background, the media kept ramping up the suggestive sexual scenes and dialogue and brought them to a more graphic level. Too many “comedians” today can’t stop saying f*** and describing graphic sexual situations.

The goal was clear: sell millions of birth control pills, separate sex from love, and make any mix and match sexual relationsip “normal.”

God forbid.

Peace,
Ed

 

[Elizabeth502]

I don’t know to whom post 314 is directed, but it doesn’t seem to follow from the discussion that most posters have been sustaining on this thread: which is SSM, not SSA.

 

[Jermosh]

I am assuming you are talking about sexual transmitted diseases? Well lesbians have a low percent rate of transmitting STDs. That is what I have heard. Which seems like it may be true because if you’re gay it isn’t just about the sex. It is about the bond, love, and friendship you have for someone. I am a lesbian and I never had a boyfriend or even had a girlfriend yet. I plan to wait and have sex until I find that one woman in my life.

Yes very good point, most really think it is all about sex.

 

[Jermosh]

You argue “the conservative case” for gay marriage. That’s a wild hope which contradicts the experience of Northern Europe since gay marriage has become legalized there. Rather, the drastic weakening and decline that’s happened there since gay marriage is openly celibrated by some Eurpoean activists who consider marriage to be an instrument of patriarchal oppression. Marriage’s wounds are cheered.

There are a lot of things that happened to Northern Europe marriage issues, it was on serios decline well before Gay Marriage ever came into play. In fact both the heterosexual marriage birth rates have been on the rise since 1989. slate.com/id/2100884/
micpohling.wordpress.com/2008/08/01/total-fertility-rate-denmark-1970-2007/

We’re talking about politics, about how social policy affects our society. Yes, whatever happens in this arena has no bearing on the sacramental nature of Catholic marriage, given from God. It does have a bearing on the kind of society we live in and, more importantly, the kind of society our kids grow up inside and are bequeathed.

If anything the correct plans will only make it harder for our Children to make moral decisions, they will constantly be told what is right or wrong in society because there is always moral turmoil. If that moral turmoil is removed, then I have an actual chance to teach my children about morals and ethics.

 

[Jermosh]

Actually in their very diverse opinions they basically upheld catholic teaching. The majority found that marriage predates the Constitution and the 14 amendment prevents separating some from marriage. The primary case was a dilequant child support dad being denied a marriage license. The eariler citation was a prisoner marrying in prison.

But the Court went on to hold that the laws arbitrarily deprived the couple of a fundamental liberty protected by the Due Process Clause, the freedom to marry. The Court’s language on the latter point bears repeating:

“The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.”

"Marriage is one of the ‘basic civil rights of man,’ fundamental to our very existence and survival."…

…at 125 U. S. 205, and as “the foundation of the family and of society, without which there would be neither civilization nor progress,”

supreme.justia.com/us/434/374/case.html

So they should only be allowed to marry if they will have children, dont see that anywhere mentioned, in fact thats not even Church Doctrine.

The fact is that in the US, marriage is a Right that has been defended in our Courts. It is perfectly clear with absolute certainity, but we are all allowed to attempt to change that ruling though.