Gay Marriage and the End of Christian Civilization

[irishpatrick]

Honestly, you guys with your doom-sayings really freak me out. 21st century Jeremiads.

You should take note that pretty much everything the Church has predicted about these things has come to pass. That is quite a sobering reality if you ask me.

The persecution against the Church is not yet in full force, so many people cannot yet see it, but it is there and it is growing like a horrible evil weed. Consider all the battles lost by the Church, and even the battles so often lost by organizations like the Boy Scouts. It boggles the mind that so few people can see what is going on, yet I suppose that is how persecution happens, it comes in tiny pieces while people look the other way until the day comes when it is at THEIR front door and they have no clue how to respond.

The greatest nation in history, the land of liberty, the last best hope for planet earth, is in dire danger and so few people can see that danger–most think it is about jobs and the economy, yet the loss of jobs and the weak economy are merely symptoms and consequences of the real attack being made on the last best hope for the planet (the USA). If the USA falls, darkness overruns the world.

 

[irishpatrick]

Perhaps, but I’m not.

If you care about the USA or even the world, you should feel deeply disturbed.

 

[irishpatrick]

Please note that with legal gay marriage for the entire country, we will also see the destruction of gender as a meaningful attribute within society.

It is simple logic. If a gay couple is 100% equal to a straight couple, and if it does not matter if kids are raised by two men, two women, or one man and one woman, than the only logical conclusion stemming from that is that gender really means nothing. It does not matter if a child has two fathers, or two mothers, or one father and one mother, none of that matters because gender just becomes and “accident” of birth and really becomes meaningless in the scheme of things. In the view of the left, having a father and a mother is not more valuable than having two mothers or two fathers…so that really does equate to genders becoming meaningless.

I wonder how long until we get rid of men and women bathrooms?

 

[kenofken]

If you care about the USA or even the world, you should feel deeply disturbed.

Sorry, but in my eyes, having to play by the rules when playing with government money doesn’t rate as “oppression.” The rest of us in the workaday adult world have to play by the rules. The church and its subsidiaries can certainly suck it up and do the same. If I accepted diocese funds to be used for pro-life counseling and then instead demanded to use them for a contrary agenda, like planned parenthood, the diocese folsk would rigthly get upset, tear up their check and send me packing. That would not make me an “oppressed minority,” but a fool. Separation of church and state was done as much for the churchs’ protection as the states. If you don’t want to be part of Caesar’s agenda, don’t take his gold.

Somehow the term “oppression” has devolved from its original meaning to include ANY erosion of the church’s hegemonic privilege in the cultural and political arena. For all the supposed oppression of Catholics these days, I’m not aware of any Western/non-Muslim country which has moved to prevent you from practicing your religion, including the many countries which have legalized gay unions. Not getting to impose your will on the whole populace doesn’t count as oppression.

In all of these places, the church continues to enjoy billions of dollars in tax-free assets and revenues, direct tax support in many cases and virtual, if often unofficial, immunity from criminal prosecution. That doesn’t look much like oppresion to me. Some would consider it a nice cushy position of privilege. If you want to see some real oprression, try being a Bahai, or a Catholic, in Iran. If you want something closer to home, try being a member of a true minority faith in this country. Our own people had to fight a 10-year battle and lawsuit to secure the right for veterans of our faith to be buried with proper honors in military cemetaries.

All that’s happening to Catholics these days is a rebalancing of power. You’re being “busted” in rank down to ordinary citizens, with no more, and no less, say than the rest of us. It’s not that bad, trust me. And yes, if you’re going to stand by your principles, it’s going to mean inconvenience from time to time, having to refuse handouts from the government till, having to get out of businesses where the rules no longer allow you to operate in good conscience. As long as we don’t run out of poor people in the world, it seems to me you’ll still have plenty of scope to serve your founder’s mission.

 

[HamletThinks]

“fined”?

Do you mean that he broke a contract and had to return the money? Can you give some details on this? I am curious. I care about the details of legal matters, and enjoy reading them.

She was fined. She operated (or still operates–of that I am not sure) a wedding/special event digital video recording service. She politely declined a request for her to record a same sex union, explaining that as a Christian her conscience would not permit it. I heard no evidence that money changed hands or a contract was signed. I can’t imagine the proprietor’s making any noise about it; since she was business operator, she no doubt hoped to simply move on. But the state brought charges against her at the behest of the parties who were declined, and so the story is public record.

Note: Story reported via interview by Raymond Arroyo of an Ivy League professor (his name slips me). This would have been on the Friday, August 13, 2010 edition of The World Over, EWTN. That very edition of The World Over will indeed be archived in audio form. This will be a site for an audio link when it does make the EWTN archives, which ought to be soon. Wait for it, everyone–it’s terrific.

This EWTN interview of the professor, by the way, is close to 30 minutes long; further, it’s exhaustively pertinent to everyone’s views on this topic, pro, con, and in-between. When the archive appears at the link I indicated, take note: you won’t hear a few sound bites and then move on. Be prepared to invest your time and engage your mind. The format of the interview allowed the professor a refreshingly lengthy time to answer Arroyo’s excellent questions. Highly recommended!

 

[HamletThinks]

Though I am a homosexual myself, I will be making an unofficial vow of celibacy next week to my Spiritual Director. Much exists in my past and in my mind that needs to be confessed once I am baptized, but the grace of the Blessed Lord has almost completely divested me of my wish to act out my lusts.

Excellent response, and beautiful, too. God bless you on your journey. Welcome, future Catholic.

 

[irishpatrick]

Sorry, but in my eyes, having to play by the rules when playing with government money doesn’t rate as “oppression.” The rest of us in the workaday adult world have to play by the rules. The church and its subsidiaries can certainly suck it up and do the same. .

This is a typical modern day myth. The government does not have money…they take our money. It actually comes from us and belongs to US. The constitution is supposed to absolutely protect freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. If you think that it is a good thing that our nation now tells religious bodies what they must follow regarding their own faith teachings, than you are a prime example of why this nation is heading towards authentically hard times filled with real persecution against churches.

Catholic Charites has been in existence for a very long time, well over 100 years in the USA and it was forced out of the adoption ministry because people on the left want to crush the family and crush churches. You might applaud that today, but I wonder, when the state targets YOU, how will you feel then? When the state takes away a freedom you cherish, will you be so plippant and uncaring then?

 

[HamletThinks]

Adoption services don’t marry people.

You are using sophistry, and I suspect you know it, too.

*Congratulations, you really got me there: adoption agencies don’t marry people. You win the entire argument. Everyone, put away your opinions.
*
But hey, I just thought of this. Silly me! Catholic adoption agencies have always striven to place their children into married couples’ homes. And since the Church won’t recognize a civilly sanctioned, so-called gay marriage, the state will press the agencies to place children into gay “married” couples’ care. The services will first be warned to do so by civil rights authorities. The Church will not be able to comply because She can’t without changing its very dogmatic nature. Thus we have Massachusetts where, faced with breaking the law or its own religious conscience, the Church had no choice but to simply shut down the charity entirely. Over a century of doing good–ended by militant proponents of gay “marriage” and the force of state. As this is a matter of civil rights to s.s.m. proponents, the Church and its organs, not being in line with coming civil rights legislation, will have no choice but to quit such pertinent public activities.

You have a gift for debate. You had to know this. For a nonCatholic and an agnostic who has posted over 2,600 times in some fashion in, of all places, an orthodox Catholic forum (over 11 posts per day, according to your site profile data), I admire your staying power.

Yet, like DawnInTexas, I ***do ***wonder why you’re here at all. Let’s be gentlemanly about this. I welcome you to privately contact me via my brief little profile page. Let’s take this out of this venue.

 

[irishpatrick]

I wonder, two points:

1. Do the parents giving their child up for adoption have any moral right to want their child to be placed in a home of one man and one woman? Should they?
2. If they do not have those rights, won’t that simply deter people from giving their kids up for adoption and work to actually increase abortions?

 

[HamletThinks]

In an answer to certain agnostic:

Wow, you are starting to lean towards my point of view.

BTW, after the “state” forces compliance from Catholics, how are you going to feel when the “state” makes you their next target? (funny thing about a “state” that has no controls, it will go after whomever and whatever it wants)

What? Has the state declared that being constantly irritating is a targetable offense?

 

[HamletThinks]

I wonder, two points:

1. Do the parents giving their child up for adoption have any moral right to want their child to be placed in a home of one man and one woman? Should they?

1. If they do not have those rights, won’t that simply deter people from giving their kids up for adoption and work to actually increase abortions?

Oh my gosh. This is more cause for worry, especially question #2.

Very good, if frightening, points to raise.

 

[wisdomseeker]

Honestly, you guys with your doom-sayings really freak me out. 21st century Jeremiads.

why? i thought you dont believe in God or satan. i thought you fear nothing. why should you?

 

[irishpatrick]

Oh my gosh. This is more cause for worry, especially question #2.

Very good, if frightening, points to raise.

I cannot help but think that it will happen at least a few times. It might tip the scales towards abortion or towards a more frequent use of birth control for some people.

 

[wisdomseeker]

I think, Larkin really got scared. where is he?

 

[kenofken]

This is a typical modern day myth. The government does not have money…they take our money. It actually comes from us and belongs to US. The constitution is supposed to absolutely protect freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion. If you think that it is a good thing that our nation now tells religious bodies what they must follow regarding their own faith teachings, than you are a prime example of why this nation is heading towards authentically hard times filled with real persecution against churches.

Catholic Charites has been in existence for a very long time, well over 100 years in the USA and it was forced out of the adoption ministry because people on the left want to crush the family and crush churches. You might applaud that today, but I wonder, when the state targets YOU, how will you feel then? When the state takes away a freedom you cherish, will you be so plippant and uncaring then?

True enough it’s not “the government’s” money but the publics. On the other hand, government priorities are supposed to reflect the majority will (subject to constitutional limits). To the extent they don’t, that’s the fault of we citizens who are supposed to stay involved in the political process, left wing conspiracy or not. Freedom of religion and freedom from an official or semi-official state religion are inseparable. If they were not, Catholicism would quite likely have been an outlaw/officially marginalized faith from day one in this country. The adoption fracas never told the church it had to abandon their beliefs, it merely established that they had no unqualified speical right to pursue those beliefs on the public’s dime.

The state has taken away many of our freedoms in recent decades under the guise of the drug war and national security. The most egregious grabs for Soviet-like powers were not made by liberals of any kind. They were made by an administration which was purportedly as Christian and pro-life as they come.

 

[Mike5575]

THE PROBLEM is not same sex marriage, or even the divorce rate. These are symptoms of a much larger problem. The real issue here is this Country’s lack of respect for marriage. This all started with the acceptance of contraception by evangelical leaders in the 1930’s. Then it moved onto pornography. It’s sad so many people view marriage as just another legal contract. Would same sex marriage even be an issue if people had a greater respect for marriage.

By the way, I don’t like saying gay marriage. There is nothing gay (happy) about it.

 

[Andrew1983]

This has been warned. “Sign of the Times.”

Incredible how many people, even when a Catholic Priest, an Exorcist warns of the damage(s) to come to Society when “Gay Marriage” is defined as “the norm,” still rely upon their own feelings. And argue on behalf of the Culture of Secularism (Godless).

The Catholic Church is Christ’s Body on earth-and the gates of hell will never prevail against her. Christ sent the Paraclete (God the Holy Spirit) to guide us through the Church-and promised we would never be alone. All the schism churches have something missing-they do not have the fullness of Christ’s Church for 2,000 years-they cannot be equal. Cannot be equal to each other, all 40,000 in our Country alone.

Others who do not proclaim to be Catholics are one thing-they do not believe the Church to be true, or they would join. But the Catholics who argue and stand firm with hardened hearts-are another thing. <-This was seen en masse at the last Election, when some Bishops put out the Guidelines for Serious Catholics, they refused to comply-and voted for the most pro-Death (and more) President in our Country’s history. He promised to Fundamentally Transform our Country, and it is happening before our very eyes.

Obama surrounds himself with pro-Abortion “Catholics.” Without the Catholic Vote, he would not have been voted in.

Our Country is losing its soul. We better wake up and smell the coffee.

Gay Marriage will be the final nail in the coffin of Christian Civilization-for our Country.

When/if America falls, the rest of the world will follow.

God Bless.
+Immaculate Heart of Mary, I place all my Trust in You!
Love, Dawn

I’m sorry, but those people are not Catholics. They are HERETICS!

Now, as far as debating the agnostics and atheists on this issue of gay marriage, one has to recall what Bishop Sheen said in the old “Life is Worth Living” radio show about debating Muslims; “You don’t go at him with the Bible, you go at him with the Koran, debate him with what he understands.”

Simply put Agnostics and Atheists aren’t wired to understand Christian thought, or at least not in its entirety. They deify relativism, man’s level of reasoning skills, and materialism whether knowingly or not.

Henceforth, you need to explain things in terms that they understand. But understand, the issue isn’t simply the perversion of marriage, but that of the perversion of sex, which, to be quite honest extends to BOTH homo- AND heterosexuals. Sodomy isn’t simply a sin that will punish you in the next world, it is something that carries punishment in this world.

Merck.com is a great medical research website. While they do argue that homosexuality is caused by genetics which is beyond a person’s scope of control, they do point out the health risks of engaging in such behavior.

 

[DawnInTexas]

She was fined. She operated (or still operates–of that I am not sure) a wedding/special event digital video recording service. She politely declined a request for her to record a same sex union, explaining that as a Christian her conscience would not permit it. I heard no evidence that money changed hands or a contract was signed. I can’t imagine the proprietor’s making any noise about it; since she was business operator, she no doubt hoped to simply move on. But the state brought charges against her at the behest of the parties who were declined, and so the story is public record.

Note: Story reported via interview by Raymond Arroyo of an Ivy League professor (his name slips me). This would have been on the Friday, August 13, 2010 edition of The World Over, EWTN. That very edition of The World Over will indeed be archived in audio form. This will be a site for an audio link when it does make the EWTN archives, which ought to be soon. Wait for it, everyone–it’s terrific.

This EWTN interview of the professor, by the way, is close to 30 minutes long; further, it’s exhaustively pertinent to everyone’s views on this topic, pro, con, and in-between. When the archive appears at the link I indicated, take note: you won’t hear a few sound bites and then move on. Be prepared to invest your time and engage your mind. The format of the interview allowed the professor a refreshingly lengthy time to answer Arroyo’s excellent questions. Highly recommended!

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrreat! I, for one, look forward to it! Thank you!

God Bless.
+Jesus, I Trust In You!
Love, Dawn

 

[Redratfish]

Going to try to do this as best I can, the analogies used in this quote are not as prevelant today, but can represent different things today. Ill talk about how the saying is prevelent today, and a moral timeline to where we are today.

“In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.

**While the US is far from Communist, we have gotten to the point, where many people believe that the government owns our money. The government has never owned our money. We give the government our money, not the other way around. Also, the government is becoming more controlling. As some of the Agnostics pointed out, the Church might, or might not be forced to provide gay marriages. The fact of the matter is NO ONE KNOWS. We can hope we don’t, but by the time we know, as the quote points out, it may already be too late.

The main point I want to put on the moral timeline, is the widespread use of pornography. It started the United States on this downward spiral of morality. **

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.
Today, I see not Jews, but Evangelicals. Once birth control became accpeted by evangelicals, the United States went even further down the pipes. While some Protestants still preach against it, they are few and far between. Birth control gave each person who used it the knowledge that they control their own destiny. God was once again put out of the equation.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist.
The trade unionists in Germany represented the will of the people. In California, the will of the people (prop 8) was overturned by the stroke of a single man who may or may not have had bias towards the way he ruled. I am not suggesting that a straight man had ruled on the case either, as he would have a bias toward or against Prop 8 as well. I am simply saying that for once I think Andrew Jackson was right, "The majority within a population should the the governing body."

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.
**We see this in Massachutsetts with the Catholic Charities closing their doors. We see this in the cases of Represenatives, claming to be Catholic, but not supporting what they stand for. It is indeed a dark day.

I want to point out to anyone who will probably respond to this, I am not suggesting that they vote the way Catholics teach starting today, and shut out the will of the people, simply because they find out they are suppose to. They should however, run for office, and supporting those ideals. If they are elected regardless, the will of the people will be upheld, as will their faith.**

Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.”

The question is, who does this refer to?

 

[wisdomseeker]

Going to try to do this as best I can, the analogies used in this quote are not as prevelant today, but can represent different things today. Ill talk about how the saying is prevelent today, and a moral timeline to where we are today.

“In Germany they first came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Communist.

**While the US is far from Communist, we have gotten to the point, where many people believe that the government owns our money. The government has never owned our money. We give the government our money, not the other way around. Also, the government is becoming more controlling. As some of the Agnostics pointed out, the Church might, or might not be forced to provide gay marriages. The fact of the matter is NO ONE KNOWS. We can hope we don’t, but by the time we know, as the quote points out, it may already be too late.

The main point I want to put on the moral timeline, is the widespread use of pornography. It started the United States on this downward spiral of morality. **

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a Jew.
Today, I see not Jews, but Evangelicals. Once birth control became accpeted by evangelicals, the United States went even further down the pipes. While some Protestants still preach against it, they are few and far between. Birth control gave each person who used it the knowledge that they control their own destiny. God was once again put out of the equation.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn’t speak up because I wasn’t a trade unionist.
The trade unionists in Germany represented the will of the people. In California, the will of the people (prop 8) was overturned by the stroke of a single man who may or may not have had bias towards the way he ruled. I am not suggesting that a straight man had ruled on the case either, as he would have a bias toward or against Prop 8 as well. I am simply saying that for once I think Andrew Jackson was right, "The majority within a population should the the governing body."

Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up because I was a Protestant.
**We see this in Massachutsetts with the Catholic Charities closing their doors. We see this in the cases of Represenatives, claming to be Catholic, but not supporting what they stand for. It is indeed a dark day.

I want to point out to anyone who will probably respond to this, I am not suggesting that they vote the way Catholics teach starting today, and shut out the will of the people, simply because they find out they are suppose to. They should however, run for office, and supporting those ideals. If they are elected regardless, the will of the people will be upheld, as will their faith.**

Then they came for me —
and by that time no one was left to speak up.”

The question is, who does this refer to?

it is a great idea if Catholics begin to run for offices. those who are corageous and faithful and opt for the battle. i think we have enough Catholics to elect these people. we have been electing gays and others who are forward their agenda contrary to Catholic teachings. we see this even inside the Church. the bishops are quiet and letting this happening. the bishops are not doing their job of defending their faith, so the people must take control from here.