Gay Marriage and the Social Issues Surrounding It

[Julia_Mae]

Culpability varies. Objective sinfulness does not.

I didn’t mention culpability. But I think there’s a thread about that in the Morality forum now.

 

[Bradski]

Then you are bound by nothing at all, Bradski. For if you make the rules, you can change the rules ad lib. In the end, when one is bound by “no one but myself” when it comes to moral authority, it is essentially the same as “I am bound by* nothing.”*

Your example makes it sound like I change my rules at a whim, on a daily basis or whenever it suits me. That’s obviously not the way anyone lives their life, whether they have someone else’s rules to follow or whether they develop their own morality. Do you know anyone at all that lives like that?

You can certainly have some guidelines and I have taken mine from many sources. Religion being one of them. But I am not restricted by them. I can (the horror!) make my own mind up on certain matters such as homosexuality, gay marriage and contraception.

Now this isn’t unheard of because you know of many Catholics who do this as well. They take what the Church teaches and if there is a serious conflict between that and their own conscience, then they have an internal debate and decide, for themselves, what they believe is the right direction. To do this, they assemble the facts, they examine the implications, they talk to family and friends, they listen to other points of view from people they respect and they make what I hope is a honest decision based on all of that.

I won’t say all Catholics do this, but it is certainly a significant majority. I am no different.

If sex is an enjoyable activity that only requires “consenting adults” (provided, they are “free” to consent, as you say), why would anyone NOT be free to enjoy this with anyone (adult) of one’s choice, even if he/she is in a “committed” relationship with someone else?

The answer is highlighted in the question. ‘Consenting adults’ are adults who free to make that consent. If you are in a committed relationship with someone then I don’t believe you are in a position to make that consent with someone else. If you are not, then you are free to have sex with anyone who would agree to it.

 

[Acrossthedesert]

This description means they want to be sociopaths. Because someone doesn’t think something is sinful, and you do, doesn’t mean they are “justifying” themselves. All the non-Catholics using birth control aren’t “justifying” their “sin.” I doubt they give it a thought. This doesn’t mean they don’t have an operating conscience.

We all at some time or another rationalize our behaviour. We all have all had that inner desire to do what we want to do, regardless of what we suspect to be true. **Our society to a certain extent operates on willful ignorance (blindness). ** People that have abortions try not to give a second thought either. People who skim a bit off their taxes try not to think about it. Avoiding moral obligation is a major sport in our modern world.

Also, “Masturbation and Homosexuality are contrary to the will of God” comes from the Catholic Catechism, which existed over a thousand years before I was born. The truth is not “my opinion”. ** The truth is the recognition of reality.**

 

[Acrossthedesert]

Some people, including those who promulgate moral teachings in the Church, think sex between even some married people is sinful. But why would those people think so? They do not. They are justifying nothing, they are living their lives.

CORRECTION: These are moral teachings OF the Holy Catholic Church. I aint making this stuff up; I couldn’t make this stuff up if I tried.

Morality is not a subjective matter? Do you think Eve thought it was a good idea to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil? No. She didn’t think it was wrong. She chose to listen to the lies of the serpent, and believed she had the right to define her own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life. And she was wrong… and paid a horrible price.

I chose to listen to God and His Holy Church. Who do you listen to?

 

[Julia_Mae]

We all at some time or another rationalize our behaviour. We all have all had that inner desire to do what we want to do, regardless of what we suspect to be true. **Our society to a certain extent operates on willful ignorance (blindness). ** People that have abortions try not to give a second thought either. People who skim a bit off their taxes try not to think about it. Avoiding moral obligation is a major sport in our modern world.

Also, “Masturbation and Homosexuality are contrary to the will of God” comes from the Catholic Catechism, which existed over a thousand years before I was born. The truth is not “my opinion”. ** The truth is the recognition of reality.**

If you’re Catholic. Possibly it would help to know that few outside of the Church have any idea what we believe. You can get a very biased view of things from online forums which tend to draw people more educated on the subject of the forums they post in.

Before I converted I knew no one who thought birth control was a moral issue of any kind. I never heard anyone say or suggest birth control itself could be some sort of sin. I wasn’t in denial and no one I knew justified it. It would be like thinking taking aspirin could be a sin. As for denial, well, there are a bunch of Catholic theologians who think the Church is in denial about the reality of same sex attraction being a natural state that cannot be called “disordered.”

So who knows where we will be in 100 years. The earth isn’t the center of the Universe anymore, either.

 

[CopticChristian]

If you’re Catholic. Possibly it would help to know that few outside of the Church have any idea what we believe. You can get a very biased view of things from online forums which tend to draw people more educated on the subject of the forums they post in.

Before I converted I knew no one who thought birth control was a moral issue of any kind. I never heard anyone say or suggest birth control itself could be some sort of sin. I wasn’t in denial and no one I knew justified it. It would be like thinking taking aspirin could be a sin. As for denial, well, there are a** bunch of Catholic theologians who think the Church is in denial about the reality of same sex attraction being a natural state that cannot be called “disordered.” **

So who knows where we will be in 100 years. The earth isn’t the center of the Universe anymore, either.

Julia,

You lean on other than the teaching of the Church and as a Catholic you are suggesting that leaning on a Theologian is acceptable to form your conscience. I pointed this out to you before…there were many Theologians that disagreed with the Church…

Martin Luther
John Calvin
and others…

is this where you are headed believing, teaching and leading as a Catholic away from Church teachings…you are wrong.

 

[PRmerger]

I can (the horror!) make my own mind up on certain matters such as homosexuality, gay marriage and contraception.

Well, not sure what the “horror!” aside is, but what you say is certainly very Catholic.

We are permitted, indeed obligated, to “make our own mind up” on issues.

It’s just, of course, good to "make your own mind up"based on truth.

Just like you can tell your child: you can “make your own mind up” how to spell the word “atheist”. But if you decide to spell it “ephiest” you won’t be consonant with the true spelling.

Or you can tell your banker: you can “make up your own mind” about money, but please make sure your views are consonant with the truth and you don’t decide to “make your own mind up” and move a decimal point over the wrong way.

 

[PRmerger]

Your example makes it sound like I change my rules at a whim, on a daily basis or whenever it suits me.

But you do see how when you make up your own rules you are not bound by them at all, right?

 

[PRmerger]

The answer is highlighted in the question. ‘Consenting adults’ are adults who free to make that consent. If you are in a committed relationship with someone then I don’t believe you are in a position to make that consent with someone else. If you are not, then you are free to have sex with anyone who would agree to it.

But why, Bradski?

Why is sex in a different category than some other pleasurable activity? I wouldn’t begrudge my husband having an enjoyable meal with a co-worker, even though he’s committed to me.

So why does someone need their beloved’s “consent” to have sex with another consenting adult, if sex is just for pleasure?

I mean, really, would you need your wife’s consent if you were going to do some *other *pleasurable activity–even one that you’ve enjoyed with your wife, such as, say, golf?

 

[Bradski]

Well, not sure what the “horror!” aside is, but what you say is certainly very Catholic.

Horror is the usual response I get when I tell a Christian that I make up my own decisions in regard to morality. Generally because they seem to think that this is a form of nihilism and that without someone looking over my shoulder all the time and/or threatening me with eternal damnation I will be free to rape, pillage and torture small puppies as a hobby.

We are permitted, indeed obligated, to “make our own mind up” on issues.

Then, in regard to gay marriage, you could make your own mind up about it and possibly come to a different position to the Church. Unless of course you tell me that the Church always has the truth so how could you not end up agreeing with it.

It’s just, of course, good to "make your own mind up"based on truth.

Indeed. So you are free to make up your own mind but as the Church has the Truth, your personally-arrived-at decisions will always agree with it.

Let me ask you a hypothetical. Let’s say that you woke up one morning and found out that you had temporary amnesia. No need to worry, it’ll return soon enough. But you come across some questions in regard to morality that interest you. The questions ask such things as: Is there anything wrong with homosexuality? Is gay marriage a bad thing? Should women be allowed to have abortions in certain circumstances? Is contraception wrong?

You have no conception of what your previous position was. You don’t have someone telling you that they have the Truth. But you decide to make your own mind up about these matters. You are now in my position. You are free to research the matter and talk to anyone you like. You are free to study religious beliefs (but you don’t know if you follow any of them). You are free to talk to people these matters effect on a personal level. You can investigate to your heart’s content.

How sure are you that what you decide, effectively from ‘first principles’ will match what you believe now? Because I can say, without any shadow of doubt whatsoever, that my decisions will match exactly. Because that is the process I have already gone through. I would simply be repeating it.

But you do see how when you make up your own rules you are not bound by them at all, right?

If I have honestly reached a decision on how I should act in certain circumstances, then I am bound by that decision. But I have nobody watching over my shoulder to make sure I obey the rules. I have to do that myself.

I’m sure we both break our own set of rules occasionally and we both pay penance in our own way. There’s no difference, unless you think that I don’t care about whether the rules should be obeyed and then we’re back to the nihilism and Puppy Torture Monthly.

Why is sex in a different category than some other pleasurable activity? I wouldn’t begrudge my husband having an enjoyable meal with a co-worker, even though he’s committed to me.

I’m not sure why you’re pushing this line of enquiry. Do you want me to say that sex is more than just a simple pleasurable sensation? Seems pretty obvious to me.

Would you mind if your husband’s meal with his good looking co-worker was a romantic style dinner for two with candles and soft music? I think that you may have some reservations. And that’s because there’s an intimacy suggested in that that would be absent in sharing a pizza and a beer at the office watering hole.

 

[SgtSchultz]

Let me ask you a hypothetical. Let’s say that you woke up one morning and found out that you had temporary amnesia. No need to worry, it’ll return soon enough. But you come across some questions in regard to morality that interest you. The questions ask such things as: Is there anything wrong with homosexuality? Is gay marriage a bad thing? Should women be allowed to have abortions in certain circumstances? Is contraception wrong?

You have no conception of what your previous position was. You don’t have someone telling you that they have the Truth. But you decide to make your own mind up about these matters. You are now in my position. You are free to research the matter and talk to anyone you like. You are free to study religious beliefs (but you don’t know if you follow any of them). You are free to talk to people these matters effect on a personal level. You can investigate to your heart’s content.

How sure are you that what you decide, effectively from ‘first principles’ will match what you believe now? Because I can say, without any shadow of doubt whatsoever, that my decisions will match exactly. Because that is the process I have already gone through. I would simply be repeating it.

I find this hypothetical scenario to be quite interesting, because I feel that I would come to completely opposite conclusions from you – meaning I’d believe exactly what I do now. You see, I used to support same-sex marriage, euthanasia, abortion for any reason, and relativism. While I was never an atheist, I certainly wasn’t interested in – or even charitable towards – Christianity. My views on these things started to change starting with the last two. Gradually the others fell into place as well. Later I started feeling a call to Christianity. Then I found that the Church had always taught what I was coming to believe on my own.

It is not necessary to be Catholic or even Christian to come to the same conclusions on morality as the Church.

 

[RobbyS]

Yes. I said that gay folks have been marginalized and forced into an unnatural way of living.

Now. What do most people do in our culture when they marry and have children? They move to the suburbs, and find a good school system. Then they live their lives with other people who are married and have children who go to school wth their children. This is the natural way we do things - some folks want to live in a city, but they also choose family friendly areas commensurate with their incomes and in areas of good schools.

The gay parents were forced into an unnatural life because they were unable to buy hon mes, would have been run out, and were, from suburban neighborhoods, had to live in places far below the standard of living they could afford, sent their kids to bad schools. . To have the other life is to lie about who they are, be subject to gossip anyway and have their children ostracized.

In a couple decades being gay and married and having a family will be accepted widely and they can live m normal lives and then, then we’ll see how their children fared. then we’ll have a standard against which to compare to being raised by heterosexual parents.

The social implications of same sex civil union is: less drug addiction, less violence, less social disruption, more stable families, more children adopted.

People who object like the ones in this thread, are in the minority amongst Catholics, much less the general population.

*… less drug addiction, less violence, less social disruption, more stable families, more children adopted.

And how did you get here from Wonderland? These are claims unsubstantiated by facts. How can this reverse image of a bourgeoisie family possible achieve these results? For at the same time you talk about a normal life, ironically, you make it seem that the “Will and Grace."world was ever anything but a Hollywood fantasy. The fact that the actor who played Will is straight suggests that this is all just make believe, because it goes against the nature of most actual homosexuals, except for those so old that sex is but a distant memory.
*

 

[Acrossthedesert]

If you’re Catholic. Possibly it would help to know that few outside of the Church have any idea what we believe. You can get a very biased view of things from online forums which tend to draw people more educated on the subject of the forums they post in.

Before I converted I knew no one who thought birth control was a moral issue of any kind. I never heard anyone say or suggest birth control itself could be some sort of sin. I wasn’t in denial and no one I knew justified it. It would be like thinking taking aspirin could be a sin. As for denial, well, there are a bunch of Catholic theologians who think the Church is in denial about the reality of same sex attraction being a natural state that cannot be called “disordered.”

So who knows where we will be in 100 years. The earth isn’t the center of the Universe anymore, either.

Julia Mae, most women who have abortions, were using some sort of birth control when they conceived their child. Sin simply leads to further disorder in the soul. I see young kids every day who hunger for Righteousness. Gay marriage, birth ‘control’, abortion, euthanasia, are what the modern world has to offer. What the world offers leads to death…

“A voice cries out: In the desert prepare the way of the Lord.”

I see a great awakening in the people. I see the young throwing off the yoke brought on by sin and the unfaithfulness of their parents. I see the parents repenting and reconciling their lives as they approach death.

I see them following the Lord Jesus Christ. Amen!

Trust in the LORD with all your heart, on your own intelligence rely not;

In all your ways be mindful of him, and he will make straight your paths. Be not wise in your own eyes, fear the LORD and turn away from evil;

 

[RobbyS]

Horror is the usual response I get when I tell a Christian that I make up my own decisions in regard to morality. Generally because they seem to think that this is a form of nihilism and that without someone looking over my shoulder all the time and/or threatening me with eternal damnation I will be free to rape, pillage and torture small puppies as a hobby.

Then, in regard to gay marriage, you could make your own mind up about it and possibly come to a different position to the Church. Unless of course you tell me that the Church always has the truth so how could you not end up agreeing with it.

Indeed. So you are free to make up your own mind but as the Church has the Truth, your personally-arrived-at decisions will always agree with it.

Let me ask you a hypothetical. Let’s say that you woke up one morning and found out that you had temporary amnesia. No need to worry, it’ll return soon enough. But you come across some questions in regard to morality that interest you. The questions ask such things as: Is there anything wrong with homosexuality? Is gay marriage a bad thing? Should women be allowed to have abortions in certain circumstances? Is contraception wrong?

You have no conception of what your previous position was. You don’t have someone telling you that they have the Truth. But you decide to make your own mind up about these matters. You are now in my position. You are free to research the matter and talk to anyone you like. You are free to study religious beliefs (but you don’t know if you follow any of them). You are free to talk to people these matters effect on a personal level. You can investigate to your heart’s content.

How sure are you that what you decide, effectively from ‘first principles’ will match what you believe now? Because I can say, without any shadow of doubt whatsoever, that my decisions will match exactly. Because that is the process I have already gone through. I would simply be repeating it.

If I have honestly reached a decision on how I should act in certain circumstances, then I am bound by that decision. But I have nobody watching over my shoulder to make sure I obey the rules. I have to do that myself.

I’m sure we both break our own set of rules occasionally and we both pay penance in our own way. There’s no difference, unless you think that I don’t care about whether the rules should be obeyed and then we’re back to the nihilism and Puppy Torture Monthly.

I’m not sure why you’re pushing this line of enquiry. Do you want me to say that sex is more than just a simple pleasurable sensation? Seems pretty obvious to me.

Would you mind if your husband’s meal with his good looking co-worker was a romantic style dinner for two with candles and soft music? I think that you may have some reservations. And that’s because there’s an intimacy suggested in that that would be absent in sharing a pizza and a beer at the office watering hole.

No one makes up their own morality, not unless they are someone like the Joker. Like the Christian, the atheist models other people. Usually they model Christian behavior. Or they model some other group. Free-thinkers gravitate in thought and behavior to other free-thinkers, and they end up all doing pretty much the same stuff. Man is a social creature, and hermits are rare.

 

[Bradski]

It is not necessary to be Catholic or even Christian to come to the same conclusions on morality as the Church.

Interesting story. Does that mean you are a Catholic because they specifically match your views? Could it have happened that you might have found another religion that better matched your world view?

I find that most Catholics, indeed most Christians, were born into the faith and therefore follow the teachings of that denomination. It’s almost: I am a Christian, therefore I believe this. It’s rare to find someone who has firstly developed a set of beliefs outside organised religion and can, I presume in your case as well, say: I am a Christian and I believe this.

No one makes up their own morality, not unless they are someone like the Joker. Like the Christian, the atheist models other people. Usually they model Christian behavior. Or they model some other group.

Well, yes, I tend to agree. I think I mentioned earlier developing a moral outlook from ‘first principles’. By that I didn’t mean in isolation without reference to other ways of thinking. One cannot operate in a vacuum.

It’s very rare to have an original thought, so one does eventually find oneself aligned with one group or another. And yes, I’ve taken ideas from Christianity as well as other religions. I was brought up as a Christian (Anglican) and learnt a lot from it. Some I’ve discarded but a lot I’ve kept.

 

[Acrossthedesert]

Let me ask you a hypothetical. Let’s say that you woke up one morning and found out that you had temporary amnesia. No need to worry, it’ll return soon enough. But you come across some questions in regard to morality that interest you. The questions ask such things as: Is there anything wrong with homosexuality? Is gay marriage a bad thing? Should women be allowed to have abortions in certain circumstances? Is contraception wrong?

You have no conception of what your previous position was. You don’t have someone telling you that they have the Truth. But you decide to make your own mind up about these matters. You are now in my position. You are free to research the matter and talk to anyone you like. You are free to study religious beliefs (but you don’t know if you follow any of them). You are free to talk to people these matters effect on a personal level. You can investigate to your heart’s content.

How sure are you that what you decide, effectively from ‘first principles’ will match what you believe now? Because I can say, without any shadow of doubt whatsoever, that my decisions will match exactly. Because that is the process I have already gone through. I would simply be repeating it.

Bradski, philosophy is like “where is Waldo”. You simply need to find Waldo to find the whole in the philosophy. The first principle is “I AM WHO I AM” (1=1) If you miss this beauty, most likely your entire philosophy hinges on those “first principles”. And for a non-believer they are just as mysterious as God Himself.

The fact is that you grew up in a society heavily influenced by Christian beliefs. No you didn’t study the Bible, nor attend Catechism, but those Christian ideas flowed through society and you subconsciously picked them up, just as a child picks up vocabulary without knowing anything about meaning.

You’re deluding yourself. You are a product of our society.

 

[Bradski]

The fact is that you grew up in a society heavily influenced by Christian beliefs.

True.

No you didn’t study the Bible, nor attend Catechism, but those Christian ideas flowed through society and you subconsciously picked them up, just as a child picks up vocabulary without knowing anything about meaning.

Now you’re making assumptions. I was raised an Anglican, I did study the bible and I was baptised and confirmed, so I have taken communion. I was the head choir boy at my church. My family’s life was centred on the church. Depending on how old you are, there’s a strong likelihood that I have spent more time in church than you have.

So I didn’t subconsciously pick up Christian Ideas. They were the ideas that permeated my life in church and out of it. So I have made a conscious decision to accept many of them as a guide to how I should live my life. Is that delusion?

 

[PRmerger]

Then, in regard to gay marriage, you could make your own mind up about it and possibly come to a different position to the Church. Unless of course you tell me that the Church always has the truth so how could you not end up agreeing with it.

Right.

It’s like an Engineering professor telling his students to come up with the right formula for building a structurally sound bridge.

They, of course, have to come up on their own and “make their own mind up” about what’s correct…

but if they decide to go with the wrong formula, then, sadly, the bridge is going to collapse.

 

[PRmerger]

Let me ask you a hypothetical. Let’s say that you woke up one morning and found out that you had temporary amnesia. No need to worry, it’ll return soon enough. But you come across some questions in regard to morality that interest you. The questions ask such things as: Is there anything wrong with homosexuality? Is gay marriage a bad thing? Should women be allowed to have abortions in certain circumstances? Is contraception wrong?

You have no conception of what your previous position was. You don’t have someone telling you that they have the Truth. But you decide to make your own mind up about these matters. You are now in my position. You are free to research the matter and talk to anyone you like. You are free to study religious beliefs (but you don’t know if you follow any of them). You are free to talk to people these matters effect on a personal level. You can investigate to your heart’s content.

This is an interesting hypothetical.

It sounds as if you are proferring a Reason Only paradigm for assessing Moral Truth.

If this is indeed your paradigm than I would respond with the words of the mathematician/philosopher Blaise Pascal. 2 errors: 2 exclude reason; to include only reason.

However, regardless of the errors inherent in discerning Truth based on Reason Alone, I believe that if I assessed the above truths using Reason Alone, I would come to the very same conclusions that I have now. (Much contrary to the claims of Faithdancer.)

 

[Patavium]

Right.

It’s like an Engineering professor telling his students to come up with the right formula for building a structurally sound bridge.

They, of course, have to come up on their own and “make their own mind up” about what’s correct…

but if they decide to go with the wrong formula, then, sadly, the bridge is going to collapse.

:clapping:

I completely agree. Many times murderers, and other individuals that commit horrendous acts believe that they were not doing anything wrong .