Gay marriage a threat to humanity's future: Pope

[Grace_Angel]

Next stop: polygamy.

Polygamy will look “good” I suspect more liberalisations and decriminilisation of perversions of the sexual nature. I read an article where it was written that Switzerlnd is decriminilising incest. I hope i read wrong.

 

[maplebug55]

I support traditional marriage, but certain things such as civil unions for gay couples. Honestly, I’m from New York and I really haven’t notice the fabric of society crumble since gay marriage was legalized .

You will in a few years.

 

[BingoBoy]

You will in a few years.

Do you have proof of this???

 

[rudie]

For every source you link to, I can find several to dispute it. Many of us, unfortunately, are getting first-hand experience in real life situations since the children of gays are becoming more commonplace. Forget the studies - we cannot judge the scientists, nor know their agendas, but we can see for ourselves the harm being done as our children interact with non-traditional families on a day-to-day basis. As Christians, we are to use spiritual gifts, such as discernment and prayer in our search for truth and what is good or not,.

I don’t agree. I think that while it is important to make distinctions between religious truths and secular truths, we should not give up on secular truth altogether. If we lose a sense of truth in the world, we lose an important anchor in terms of religion as well. It’s like when people deny the science of climate change, allowing us to desecrate the world that God made for us. It makes sense to me that, because religious teaching tells us that same sex marriage is wrong, we expect that the outcome of that marriage, and the children that are produced by such marriages will demonstrate that wrongness. But this gives us no excuse to only believe those studies that are detrimental just because it accords with our faith. It’s not a matter of one study vs. another as if they were all the same. Some studies are sponsored by groups with a certain political agenda and their findings are preordained and not done according to commonly accepted scientific principles. What we do when we cite those studies is to promote lies and untruths and I think this is incompatible and destructive to our religious beliefs. A study that is done by scientists without a preset agenda, who follow the rules of basic research and whose findings are consistent and repeatable tells us something about the truth of the world. Even if this study goes against what we want to be true, it doesn’t make it OK–or Christian–to hold to those findings anyway. Religious arguments should be enough; we don’t need to and shouldn’t dabble in junk science just to make our point.

 

[chepner3]

“Your profile indicates Catholic, but are you “Catholic” in the sense as described in the cited Letter by the Pope? Do you belong to such a “Catholic” group that attacks the understanding by society of the nature and rights of the family, instead of defending and promoting the teaching of the Magisterium?”

How sad when a person gets to a point in a debate when they can no longer argue the case but must reduce them-self to making accusations against the other person’s credibility. I feel sincere pity for you.

At the risk of sounding like a character out of “The Golden Compass”, yes, I do question some of the teachings of the Magisterium. Doing so does not make me less Catholic.

 

[maplebug55]

Do you have proof of this???

Yep, GREECE and ROME.

 

[Catherine_S]

Yep, GREECE and ROME.

!!
.
Instead of seeking to impress the world on its own terms, he said, Catholic schools must recapture the* “genius”** that once gave life to Western civilization with** its** harmony **of reason *and faith.
This type of education “refuses to separate intellectual and moral formation because they are inextricably linked.” And while honoring all subjects, “ it gives primacy to the disciplines that guide the formation of a holistic view of reality – philosophy and theology.”
Authentic Catholic learning, he noted, also makes an impact outside the university campus because it “aids in the creation of a Christian culture and explains what this means for human thriving.”
This type of cultural renewal is not a luxury, but an urgent need, Archbishop Chaput stressed.
***Believers, he said, must use all of **the Catholic tradition’s resources **to shape *the future. Otherwise they will find themselves lost in “the ‘next America’ we now see emerging – an America ignorant or cynical toward religion in general and Christianity in particular.”
He noted that believers themselves had fostered this cultural crisis, both by their actions and by things left undone.
“We can blame the mass media, or the academy, or science, or special interest groups for the environment we now face,” Archbishop Chaput said.
***“But we Christians–*including we Catholics–helped create it with our eagerness to fit in, our distractions and overconfidence, and our own lukewarm faith.”
In the next several decades, the archbishop see an America emerging that is “likely to be much less friendly to Christian faith than anything in our country’s past … It’s not a question of when or if it might happen.”
And in that type of cultural environment, colleges and other Catholic institutions could use their freedom meaningfully, or continue losing it, he warned.
“It’s happening today,” he said, citing state pressure on Catholic hospitals and adoption agencies, as well as lawsuits attacking religious liberty, restrictions on the conscience rights of doctors and other professionals, and attacks on religious institutions’ tax-exempt status and hiring rights.
“Freedom of belief and religious practice used to be a concern that Americans had about other countries,” Archbishop Chaput said. “Now it’s a concern in ours.”
http://ccgaction.org/node/1163

 

[BingoBoy]

Yep, GREECE and ROME.

I asked if you had proof that gay marriage would have an impact on society, and your answer was “Greece and Rome??”

Sorry, but this makes no sense. Neither is it any sort of proof.

 

[maplebug55]

While they technically did not have official gay marriage in Greece and Rome, tehy gave themselves over to homosexual ways and their countries collapsed.

that is a FACT.

If america legitimizes gay activity (and yes, sadly, some states already have) this nation
will pay for it until the world ends. Studies have shown the most well adjusted children are from a home where there is a father AND mother present. not TWO fathers or TWO mothers.

Children need role models of their specific gender. How can two men REALLY raise a daughter? How can 2 women REALLY raise a well adjusted son?

This country is already in the toilet. making gay marriage a right will totally destroy it.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

*“Your profile indicates Catholic, but are you “Catholic” in the sense as described in the cited Letter by the Pope? Do you belong to such a “Catholic” group that attacks the understanding by society of the nature and rights of the family, instead of defending and promoting the teaching of the Magisterium?”

How sad when a person gets to a point in a debate when they can no longer argue the case but must reduce them-self to making accusations against the other person’s credibility. I feel sincere pity for you.

At the risk of sounding like a character out of “The Golden Compass”, yes, I do question some of the teachings of the Magisterium. Doing so does not make me less Catholic.*

In a related thread where you defended homosexual marriage, I offered a CAF tract on Gay Marriage where it discusses Catholic arguments for and against gay marriage.

Then in this thread on the Pope’s admonition on gay ‘marriage’ being a threat to humanity’s future, you take an opposite view, providing a refutation of “myths” against gay ‘marriage,’ which again leaves a reader the impression of your undeniable support for this social experiment deemed against the public and social interest of marriage, against Scripture and Tradition, and against natural law principles. Each of what you raised in the canned list are actually found in gay apologetic sites, raised in this forum many times over; you need only to refer to the threads, some of which are recent.

When misinterpretations or dismissal of settled doctrine and authentic teachings are being propagated by members in the forum especially when they claim to be Catholic, no less in a Catholic forum at that, one should not be surprised when one receives challenges or questions on faith identification.

With no animosity or mean spirited intention, I hereby repeat that your views are not Catholic. In fact, they are anti-Catholic. You can run your comments by Father Vincent Serpa or any staff apologist on this site if anything that I indicated herein is false.

Not only is your support for gay ‘marriage’ transparent, but your view on another non negotiable issue of abortion is also suspect, your own words here:

*I also believe one of the reasons homosexual unions are more likely to break-up after a long period of time is because society doesn’t support them staying together. …[snipped portion]…Homosexual couples, without the marriage ceremony, don’t often have that experience and don’t have avenues to create a broad support system during the life of their bonding.

As to body parts being dissimilar, I have to laugh. I must have missed receiving the rule book that says my feet can only be used for walking but not for dancing. That my voice can only be used for speaking love, but not to shout. That my hands must never touch the floor (ah, that is the province of the feet) so certain yoga moves are barred. I understand when people (mostly men) pale at the thought of the dynamics of the homosexual sex act. Of course it is a disturbing thought to anyone who isn’t aroused by such things; just like how children blanch at the idea of their own parents in heterosexual embrace.

But to the more serious topic of “Cafeteria Catholic”. .[snipped portion] …there is no reason to disenfranchise citizens who are in families with two adults of the same gender. Of course, I prefer that the US givernment got out of the ‘business of marriage’ altogether, but I suspect I’ll see female priests first.

As to my beliefs about priests marrying, female priests, abortion, contraception, etc. I have spoken to many learned priest who also pray for a day when there can be female priests, etc. Such a hope doesn’t make one less Catholic. I don’t have to AGREE with every decree from Rome to have faith in the one Holy Catholic Church. I can go to the voting booth with a clear conscious that I want a givernment that does right by all citizens, not just Catholic ones, while also living IN my accordance to what my faith tells me what I must do. I might not get an abortion, but I have no right to stop another woman from seeking a private medical procedure that is carefully considered between her and her doctor. There are so many Catholics all over the world who struggle with less protective governments. I am so blessed to have access to a secret ballot, for instance.*

If in the above quote you are saying you do not agree with the Catholic teachings on abortion and same sex ‘marriage’, and if you support contraception and the formation of female priests, there is a deep chasm between your identified faith and a number of core beliefs.

It is not suprising when a poster who identifies as a Quaker, or one from ELCA, Metropolitan Church, or dissenting groups such as New Ways Ministry or Dignity group that passes for Catholic but are in fact not, come right out to speak for same sex ‘marriage.’ These denominations endorse SS"M" for whatever reason the religious leaders and their followers have come to believe.

You may be a Catholic by baptism as a child or conversion later in life but you hold a set of beliefs that is not in accordance with Catholic teaching. Please don’t waste your ‘sincere’ pity on me. Save it for the future of the children in this country if same sex ‘marriage’ is legalized across the land.
,

 

[GraceSofia]

Do you have proof of this???

I think the burden of proof is on you. Can you show us a nation/empire/culture that thrived that also had homosexual “marriage” as a widespread norm?

 

[GraceSofia]

Dear Friends,
I feel we should look again at what our Holy Father has said:

In addition to a clear goal, that of leading young people to a full knowledge of reality and thus of truth, education needs settings. Among these, pride of place goes to the family, based on the marriage of a man and a woman. This is not a simple social convention, but rather the fundamental cell of every society. Consequently, policies which undermine the family threaten human dignity and the future of humanity itself. The family unit is fundamental for the educational process and for the development both of individuals and States; hence there is a need for policies which promote the family and aid social cohesion and dialogue. It is in the family that we become open to the world and to life and, as I pointed out during my visit to Croatia, “openness to life is a sign of openness to the future”.

Since the sexual revolution of the 60s, we have moved into a period of hedonism and libertinism so great that many have compared it to the last days of the Roman Empire. The results are a breakdown in the family unit and society, and the results are all around us. Homosexual “marriage” is not the beginning of this, but it will introduce changes that will be very hard to recover from and exacerbate the rot.

 

[Tigg]

I don’t agree. I think that while it is important to make distinctions between religious truths and secular truths, we should not give up on secular truth altogether. If we lose a sense of truth in the world, we lose an important anchor in terms of religion as well. It’s like when people deny the science of climate change, allowing us to desecrate the world that God made for us. It makes sense to me that, because religious teaching tells us that same sex marriage is wrong, we expect that the outcome of that marriage, and the children that are produced by such marriages will demonstrate that wrongness. But this gives us no excuse to only believe those studies that are detrimental just because it accords with our faith. It’s not a matter of one study vs. another as if they were all the same. Some studies are sponsored by groups with a certain political agenda and their findings are preordained and not done according to commonly accepted scientific principles. What we do when we cite those studies is to promote lies and untruths and I think this is incompatible and destructive to our religious beliefs. A study that is done by scientists without a preset agenda, who follow the rules of basic research and whose findings are consistent and repeatable tells us something about the truth of the world. Even if this study goes against what we want to be true, it doesn’t make it OK–or Christian–to hold to those findings anyway. Religious arguments should be enough; we don’t need to and shouldn’t dabble in junk science just to make our point.

Perhaps we aren’t really disagreeing here. There is no incompatability between true and proven science and the Church, in fact the Church has supported scientific research over the centuries. That there is hostility between the two is a lie propagated by atheists. And true science is actually advanced when it is acknowledged that there is a Creator who made the natural world in an ordered fashion. In my previous post I was just saying that there are things that are beyond the purview of science - that in our search for knowledge and truth there are questions that it can never answer and we must rely upon faith and supernatural gifts. The average Catholic Christian would most normally have no way of knowing which study is pseudo-science and which authentic so you apparently are saying it is disingenuous to shore up our argument by selecting only those studies which support our belief. I seriously doubt that was the intent in the posted link.

 

[Catherine_S]

Since the sexual revolution of the 60s, we have moved into a period of hedonism and libertinism so great that many have compared it to the last days of the Roman Empire. The results are a breakdown in the family unit and society, and the results are all around us. Homosexual “marriage” is not the beginning of this, but it will introduce changes that will be very hard to recover from and exacerbate the rot.

A weakening of the masculine and the dominance of a false feminine contributes to the downfall of a culture in a huge way! Obama knew this fact and surrounded himself with many of these silly women. Catholic women out in the forfront pushing abortion, gay marriage and so forth. The lessons of Eve’s disobedience and Adams lack of responsibility is very fashionable in our day. *
While in other cultures the reverse is being practiced and women( on the whole) are repressed under a brutal second class citizen kind of thinking which denies them any rights. There is a fear** of women and there capabilities of becoming** distructive** if they are not** kept** in their place** is not without insight.** *
Controled* or** Liberated to Licence are** both** ways of thinking that are** wrong** because they denie the real beauty of womanhood and as such denie the beauty of manhood as well**.** *
Understanding that* equality does not mean sameness, embracing the** roles** that God ordained for** each**, will greatly aid men and women in the healing that must take place if we are to move forward. When ever and where ever we find this lack of understanding of the roles God intended for men and women lived out there becomes a great inbalance, an imbalance that shows itself in the breakdown of marriage and family life** and this eventually leads to** all** forms of discord, separation, and deviance in** any** culture. The culture becomes** easily manipulated** and** quickly loses insight** and it will fall. A House Devided Will Not Stand** for it is built on sand.***
The Church needs the* yes*** of Mary from women and the Yes of Jesus Christ from men** not** the “I am Catholic but living as the secular world lives.” while I try to figure out (without the Church) what is right and what** is wrong. **
Something to think about…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiX-LQBcmDc&feature=player_embedded#!

 

[Grace_Angel]

http://c684645.r45.cf2.rackcdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/kim-kardashian.jpg

And because Kim Kardashin cheapens marriage it gives license to cheapen marriage for ever? is that logic.
Did you ever believe that Kim Kardashin ever married for life or for love her lurvvvv is related to self adulation and $$$$
Marriage is a holy sacrament devised by God for the continuin work of creation. Look at a new infant held lovingly and see God at work.
Using KK as an excuse the tamper with marriage is just as lunacy and her marriage itself.

 

[rotlex]

And because Kim Kardashin cheapens marriage it gives license to cheapen marriage for ever? is that logic.
Did you ever believe that Kim Kardashin ever married for life or for love her lurvvvv is related to self adulation and $$$$
Marriage is a holy sacrament devised by God for the continuin work of creation. Look at a new infant held lovingly and see God at work.
Using KK as an excuse the tamper with marriage is just as lunacy and her marriage itself.

I agree and disagree. (Although the pic and caption do give a good chuckle).

Yes, I am against homosexual marriage. However, do I believe that it affect the institution of marriage more than say all the Kardashin type weddings that seem to happen every day in Hollywood? No way. As much as I HATE to say it, I do know a few homosexuals in a “married” type state. While 110% disagree with it, I must say, they seem more responsible and serious about their “marriage”, than MANY married couples I know.

And again, I am in NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM endorsing gay marriage. It appalls me. But to think that it is the sole thing in this country that is, and has brought the value of marriage down is silly.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

… As much as I HATE to say it, I do know a few homosexuals in a “married” type state. While 110% disagree with it, I must say, they seem more responsible and serious about their “marriage”, than MANY married couples I know.

And again, I am in NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM endorsing gay marriage. It appalls me. But to think that it is the sole thing in this country that is, and has brought the value of marriage down is silly.

That might be from your circle of friends and/or acquaintances, but it would be hard to say especially in your state ¶ where there is no same sex “marriage,” not even same sex civil unions or domestic partnership as of yet.

Anyway, for perspective: In Massachusetts, the first U.S. state that legalized SS"M" in 2004, divorce numbers by same sex ‘married’ couples are coming in, but there is no good data at this time. Accordingly, the divorce rate of married same sex pairs there are hard to tract because they are recorded by the last names of the parties involved, without reference to gender, from this CNN link.

Note that Julie and Hillary Goodridge, first same sex couple in the U.S. who married in Massachusetts divorced two years later.

According to this source, time will tell if gay marriages are more or less successful than heterosexual marriages in the long term, although some data is beginning to emerge. In Great Britain and Denmark gay couples are said to have lower divorce rates than heterosexual couples (I have not found the direct study), though a study found gay couples in Sweden and Norway had higher divorce rates than heterosexual couples. Here is the actual study by Gunnar Anderson, the Demographics of Same Sex Marriages in Norway and Sweden, based on longitudinal information from the population registers of the two countries with a comparison with similar dynamics of heterosexual marriages. The study revealed that the divorce-risk levels are considerably higher in same sex partnerships. The divorce risk in female partnerships is practically double that of the risk in partnerships of men. A higher propensity for divorce in same-sex couples may not be too surprising given this group’s relative noninvolvement in joint parenthood and its lower exposure to normative pressure about the necessity of life-long unions.

Finally, here is an angle focusing on the monogamy in ‘married’ same sex couples (or lack thereof) from a research conducted by a same sex male couple, Blake Spears and Lanz Lowen Beyond Monogamy Lessons from Long-Term Male Couples In Non-Monogamous Relationships.

This NY Times article Many Successful Gay Marriages Share an Open Secret cited the above named study. Said research at San Francisco State University reveals just how common open relationships are among gay men and lesbians in the Bay Area. The Gay Couples Study has followed 556 male couples for three years — about 50 percent of those surveyed have sex outside their relationships, with the knowledge and approval of their partners.

I suppose this could serve as an index of how serious same sex couples are about their “marriages.” Sure, infidelity is known to happen in straight marriages, perhaps the open kind in a very few. But I have yet to hear that it is a common expectation. And negotiated infidelity and pre-nuptial rules by which infidelity is to be conducted? C’mon.

Kim Kardashian did not score points for heterosexual marriage, that is true. But is KK’s making a travesty of marriage a justification for societal acceptance of legalized homosexual marriage? SS"M" is and will not be a part of the solution. In fact, SS"M" is projected to be a huge part of the problem, lowering the bar to the floor. Significantly, as Pope Benedict in effect said, it furthers the separation of marriage from parenthood, the disconnect of children from their mothers and fathers, destroying the fundamental cell of society which is the family. He is right to say that SS"M" poses as a threat to humanity’s future.

Pope Paul VI was also right in his admonitions in Humanae Vitae to the world.

We better pause before throwing in the towel with SS"M."
,

 

[rotlex]

That might be from your circle of friends and/or acquaintances, but it would be hard to say especially in your state ¶ where there is no same sex “marriage,” not even same sex civil unions or domestic partnership as of yet.

Anyway, for perspective: In Massachusetts, the first U.S. state that legalized SS"M" in 2004, divorce numbers by same sex ‘married’ couples are coming in, but there is no good data at this time. Accordingly, the divorce rate of married same sex pairs there are hard to tract because they are recorded by the last names of the parties involved, without reference to gender, from this CNN link.

Note that Julie and Hillary Goodridge, first same sex couple in the U.S. who married in Massachusetts divorced two years later.

According to this source, time will tell if gay marriages are more or less successful than heterosexual marriages in the long term, although some data is beginning to emerge. In Great Britain and Denmark gay couples are said to have lower divorce rates than heterosexual couples (I have not found the direct study), though a study found gay couples in Sweden and Norway had higher divorce rates than heterosexual couples. Here is the actual study by Gunnar Anderson, the Demographics of Same Sex Marriages in Norway and Sweden, based on longitudinal information from the population registers of the two countries with a comparison with similar dynamics of heterosexual marriages. The study revealed that the divorce-risk levels are considerably higher in same sex partnerships. The divorce risk in female partnerships is practically double that of the risk in partnerships of men. A higher propensity for divorce in same-sex couples may not be too surprising given this group’s relative noninvolvement in joint parenthood and its lower exposure to normative pressure about the necessity of life-long unions.

Finally, here is an angle focusing on the monogamy in ‘married’ same sex couples (or lack thereof) from a research conducted by a same sex male couple, Blake Spears and Lanz Lowen Beyond Monogamy Lessons from Long-Term Male Couples In Non-Monogamous Relationships.

This NY Times article Many Successful Gay Marriages Share an Open Secret cited the above named study. Said research at San Francisco State University reveals just how common open relationships are among gay men and lesbians in the Bay Area. The Gay Couples Study has followed 556 male couples for three years — about 50 percent of those surveyed have sex outside their relationships, with the knowledge and approval of their partners.

I suppose this could serve as an index of how serious same sex couples are about their “marriages.” Sure, infidelity is known to happen in straight marriages, perhaps the open kind in a very few. But I have yet to hear that it is a common expectation. And negotiated infidelity and pre-nuptial rules by which infidelity is to be conducted? C’mon.

Kim Kardashian did not score points for heterosexual marriage, that is true. But is KK’s making a travesty of marriage a justification for societal acceptance of legalized homosexual marriage? SS"M" is and will not be a part of the solution. In fact, SS"M" is projected to be a huge part of the problem, lowering the bar to the floor. Significantly, as Pope Benedict in effect said, it furthers the separation of marriage from parenthood, the disconnect of children from their mothers and fathers, destroying the fundamental cell of society which is the family. He is right to say that SS"M" poses as a threat to humanity’s future.

Pope Paul VI was also right in his admonitions in Humanae Vitae to the world.

We better pause before throwing in the towel with SS"M."
,

This is all well and good. Really. Again, against same sex marriage here, and in no way defend it. My main point is that I don’t feel it devalues real marriage, my own marriage, in any way shape or form, more than it’s already been devalued over the past 50 years or so by folks like KK, along with the huge other demographics of the country where divorce runs so rampant.

It just gets rather annoying reading these forums at times, on this subject, and hearing how gay marriage is killing the value of real marriage in the world.

 

[Publisher]

While they technically did not have official gay marriage in Greece and Rome, tehy gave themselves over to homosexual ways and their countries collapsed.

that is a FACT.

If america legitimizes gay activity (and yes, sadly, some states already have) this nation
will pay for it until the world ends. Studies have shown the most well adjusted children are from a home where there is a father AND mother present. not TWO fathers or TWO mothers.

Children need role models of their specific gender. How can two men REALLY raise a daughter? How can 2 women REALLY raise a well adjusted son?

This country is already in the toilet. making gay marriage a right will totally destroy it.

The sexual behaviors of Greece and Rome occured for centuries and was the “norm”…the fall of Rome and Greece DID NOT OCCUR due to it’s acceptance of homosexual behaviors among it’s populace…

 

[GraceSofia]

Something to think about…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SiX-LQBcmDc&feature=player_embedded#!

Thanks, that was interesting.