Gay Marriage Debate

[adrianbcp]

I was raised Catholic and I am still practicing, and try to follow all of the Church’s teachings. When I was younger, I was influenced by homophobic material and was quite homophobic myself. I eventually came to the realization that no matter gay or straight, God made us equal, and everyone should be treated as such.

In recent years, the Catholic Church has become more open to gays, and that’s what Jesus would want us to do. However, the debate over gay marriage is still going strong, and it seems the majority of Catholics are against gay marriage. But this debate is useless.

As Christians, our model in everything should be Christ. When Christ came, he preached about caring for the poor and the oppressed above all else. So why do we Catholics waste our time discussing this issue when instead we should be following Christ’s call to serve? The point I’m trying to make is that if homosexuals want truly love each other, they should be able to get married just like anyone else.

 

[sw85]

I was raised Catholic and I am still practicing, and try to follow all of the Church’s teachings. When I was younger, I was influenced by homophobic material and was quite homophobic myself. I eventually came to the realization that no matter gay or straight, God made us equal, and everyone should be treated as such.

OK, but be careful. The Church does not use “equality” the way the world uses “equality.” For us, all men are equal in that we have been made in the image and likeness of God. That means we are all free, rational, willing, choosing moral agents, capable of choosing to do right and choosing to do wrong. It does not mean, as the world wants you to believe, that we are all equally entitled to do whatever we want so long as we don’t harm anyone.

In recent years, the Catholic Church has become more open to gays …

How do you figure? Seems to me the Church’s official “openness” to “gays” is exactly as it’s been for every other sinner. Full communion in the Church is now and has always been available to any sinner who repents and converts and believes, with all that that entails.

… and that’s what Jesus would want us to do. However, the debate over gay marriage is still going strong, and it seems the majority of Catholics are against gay marriage. But this debate is useless.

(A) In America at least, no, the majority of Catholics are not opposed.

(B) Jesus told us what he wanted to do: “Go forth and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them … and teaching them whatsoever I have taught you.” He taught us about marriage. Hence it is safe to assume that Jesus wants us to uphold marriage according to his institution of it as a Sacrament and his definitive teaching on it, which is recorded in all four of the Gospels.

(C) It is “useless” in the sense that anything done by merely human power can turn things around. Yet ultimate victory over evil is reserved, not to man, but to God alone.

As Christians, our model in everything should be Christ. When Christ came, he preached about caring for the poor and the oppressed above all else.

No, that is emphatically not true. Certainly they are a sizable part of his teachings but they are not set out “above all else.” They are not even the largest part of his teaching.

Christ spoke often, and aggressively, and in very vivid imagery, about the need to repent and believe and the consequences of failing to do so – Hell.

He was above all else a savior, not a social worker.

So why do we Catholics waste our time discussing this issue when instead we should be following Christ’s call to serve? The point I’m trying to make is that if homosexuals want truly love each other, they should be able to get married just like anyone else.

Then you are altogether at odds with the teachings of Christ as revealed and transmitted unfailingly by the Church through 2000 years ago.

 

[po18guy]

Let me understand your point. It is futile and meaningless to debate this, so you open a thread to debate it? If you are promoting an agenda, that is a violation of forum rules.

If you want to violate God’s revealed truth, you are free to do so. Why are we male and female? Are you smarter than God? Are you calling God wrong on sexual matters?

Do not fall prey to the Zeitgeist. Think for yourself.

 

[Petaro]

I was raised Catholic and I am still practicing, and try to follow all of the Church’s teachings. When I was younger, I was influenced by homophobic material and was quite homophobic myself. I eventually came to the realization that no matter gay or straight, God made us equal, and everyone should be treated as such.

In recent years, the Catholic Church has become more open to gays, and that’s what Jesus would want us to do. However, the debate over gay marriage is still going strong, and it seems the majority of Catholics are against gay marriage. But this debate is useless.

As Christians, our model in everything should be Christ. When Christ came, he preached about caring for the poor and the oppressed above all else. So why do we Catholics waste our time discussing this issue when instead we should be following Christ’s call to serve? The point I’m trying to make is that if homosexuals want truly love each other, they should be able to get married just like anyone else.

You, like so many good young Catholics, have been poorly instructed in your faith through no fault of your own. You substitute the view that everything is good in the name of love if it is not hurting anyone else. OK as far as it goes. But you fail to understand the qualities, procreative and naturally unifying that ,makes marriage a sacrament of the Church and holy before God; and by this very nature available only between a man and a woman.

I would suggest that a deeper reading of the position of the Church on marriage as rational, natural and liberating in its accord with our human nature and our openness to new life.You use the term marriage in the civil sense of only being a contract when it is so much more. Study more before so youthfully substituting your own feelings as a solution to a debate which is simply much deeper. God bless you for your change of heart away from homophobia and towards acceptance of all man’s right to search for, and be loved by God within the limitations of his own circumstances.

 

[Cathoholic]

Adrianbcp. You said (with parenthetical addition and bold mine):

QUOTE:
. . . . he (Jesus) preached about caring for the poor and the oppressed above all else.

What would constitute “the poor” for you? Is this reduced down to “bucks”? Is it only to aid people who are “poor” in terms of MONEY?

Is THAT where you see riches or “poorness” ONLY?

What about people who lack truth? Should they be “fed” with truth too (so at least they can decide to accept or reject it instead of never having known truth) or just give them “money” (or some other alternative)?

If sodomy is “disordered” as the Church teaches, (you said you “try to follow all of the Church’s teachings”) doesn’t a relationship defined by sodomy qualify as being in an “oppressed” situation?

QUOTE:
. . . . he (Jesus) preached about caring for the poor and the oppressed above all else.

If you answer the above questions in conformity with the Catholic Church teachings, you will have answered your own questions.

Let’s look at the CCC (with bold mine) as again you stated you “try to follow all of the Church’s teachings” (which is good because they are God’s teachings. Jesus speaks timeless truth through His Church even in this day and age–not just via the Bible 2000 years ago).

CCC 2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity,141 tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered."142 They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

Now you will probably answer the above saying nobody should undergo “unjust discrimination” concerning marriage (“unjust discrimination in their [the homosexual individual] regard should be avoided.” As CCC 2358 states).

The problem with that is, marriage is by nature (not by persons necessarily but by nature) fruitful.

Redefining marriage destroys one of the essential aspects of marriage.

Therefore not recognizing a homosexual couple (or threesome, or a woman and her dog, or a boy and his grandmother, or a person and a corpse, or some other deviant “marriage” practice) as “married” is not “unjust”.

But nobody is advocating “unjust” anything here. Not letting blind people pilot planes is not “unjust” either. It just recognizes conformity with nature.

People pretending they have power to re-define nature does not make it true.

QUOTE (bold mine):
. . . .” “But he hasn’t got anything on!” the whole town cried out at last.

The Emperor shivered, for he suspected they were right. But he thought, “This procession has got to go on.” So he walked more proudly than ever, as his noblemen held high the train that wasn’t there at all.

See the whole story here).

Jesus tells us what to do in Matthew 28 (bold and ul mine) . . . .

MATTHEW 28:18-20 18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the close of the age.”

God bless.

Cathoholic

CCC 2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues of self-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.

 

[Nacho45]

There is no debate. Homosexual unions are wrong. Marriage is a sacrament.

 

[Demetra2]

I agree that there will be no debate in the Catholic Church about the future of gay marriage as it pertains to a sacramental marriage. We are called to be kind to everyone including and especially gay people and giving them a sacramental marriage would not help them in their journey to Christ.

 

[mountee]

You are saying things that I regularly hear from all kinds of people regarding SS relationships and marriage. It has become politically correct to accept this and not be discriminatory towards SS individuals. The Church welcomes people who have SSA and loves them as God’s creations. But, the doctrine regarding SS sexual behavior is very clear and if you have not read it you really should. If you would spend some time attempting to understand the Church’s position on this you will be better prepared to understand that your position is not in line with Catholic teaching.

 

[Rau]

The point I’m trying to make is that if homosexuals want truly love each other, they should be able to get married just like anyone else.

Two people loving each other is not a sufficient basis for marriage.

For what purpose would you understand that two persons of the same sex would engage in sex acts - essentially acts of mutual masturbation? Such would seem to depart dramatically from the teachings of your Church. What are your views about when such sex acts are moral?

 

[AggieCatholic86]

So basically what you’re saying is that the Church founded by Jesus Christ himself, guided by the Holy Spirit for 2k years, witness and preserver of countless Saints and miracles, the Church of Padre Pio who slapped a priest in confession for simply NOT PRAYING TO HIS GUARDIAN ANGEL,should change every stance on sex marriage procreation contraception so we can make the sin lobby feel good about itself? Outstanding
In fact, I think the Church should change its’ stance on porn too, I’m sure 90% of Catholic men would rejoice that they’re no longer in “grave sin.” Oy veh.

The simple reality is that people with SSA are the exception not the rule, and that no matter how many times a SS couple has sex, no life will EVER be produced from that union. Life can never come forth from such a union, and they end up buying children or taking them away from “marriages,” as in divorce, and they use them to validate their lifestyles. Why would you think that Almighty God, Creator of the Universe, would bestow a Holy Sacramental blessing on SS couples who could never create new life?

 

[frobert]

I was raised Catholic and I am still practicing, and try to follow all of the Church’s teachings. When I was younger, I was influenced by homophobic material and was quite homophobic myself. I eventually came to the realization that no matter gay or straight, God made us equal, and everyone should be treated as such.

In recent years, the Catholic Church has become more open to gays, and that’s what Jesus would want us to do. However, the debate over gay marriage is still going strong, and it seems the majority of Catholics are against gay marriage. But this debate is useless.

As Christians, our model in everything should be Christ. When Christ came, he preached about caring for the poor and the oppressed above all else. So why do we Catholics waste our time discussing this issue when instead we should be following Christ’s call to serve? The point I’m trying to make is that if homosexuals want truly love each other, they should be able to get married just like anyone else.

I know that this may be an oversimplification but take, for example, divorced Catholics who remarry, they are not considered married by the CC.In a similar, but not identical, manner those in a same sex marriage are not considered married by the CC. In both cases love has no bearing on the doctrines.

The latest surveys show that over 50% of Catholics support SSM but their opinions have no influence on the CC which states than in no way can same sex acts be approved.

 

[TheSurvivor]

Please watch this entire video.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=eBTpsVFhPPw

May God lead you to Truth

 

[Petersmate]

Let me understand your point. It is futile and meaningless to debate this, so you open a thread to debate it? If you are promoting an agenda, that is a violation of forum rules.

Isn’t it concerning that someone posting for the second time, starts a debate on an issue they don’t want to debate.

 

[Thinking10]

My view on homosexuality: Homosexuality is not something that should be supported or promoted, but homosexuals should not be treated with disrespect. Homosexuality cannot replace heterosexuality, and so should not be considered an equal alternative to heterosexuality. If homosexuals want to live as homosexuals, that is their choice, but they should keep their choice low key and out of the public’s concern. The best option in my view is to let them live that lifestyle quietly, and be quiet about it in return. It is entirely a personal matter and should be left as a personal matter.

There is a difference between outlawing homosexual relationships and persecuting homosexuals, and a society where homosexual relationships are not singled out as a legally recognized relationship, such as a marriage or civil union. I agree that we should not deny homosexuals the ability to have relationships if that is what they feel they need. However, when we are talking about granting these relationships official social status similar or equivalent to marriage, we need to ask what place homosexuality has in society, and for what reason our society should recognize homosexual relationships. We are talking about taking a private matter, a relationship between people, and making it a public matter.

Why should homosexuality become a concern of the public? Legally recognizing homosexual relationships isn’t about grant or denying anything to homosexuals. It is about what homosexuality can do for society. Granting a relationship legal status isn’t a gift to that relationship as much as it is an investment. With heterosexual marriage, it is understood that benefits given to those marriages will yield a return on the investment in the form of new children. What return on investment can homosexuality provide? The negative results can be seen through statistics such as STD rates among homosexual men and other statistics.

 

[shelby_sun]

My view on homosexuality: Homosexuality is not something that should be supported or promoted, but homosexuals should not be treated with disrespect. Homosexuality cannot replace heterosexuality, and so should not be considered an equal alternative to heterosexuality. If homosexuals want to live as homosexuals, that is their choice, but they should keep their choice low key and out of the public’s concern. The best option in my view is to let them live that lifestyle quietly, and be quiet about it in return. It is entirely a personal matter and should be left as a personal matter.

There is a difference between outlawing homosexual relationships and persecuting homosexuals, and a society where homosexual relationships are not singled out as a legally recognized relationship, such as a marriage or civil union. I agree that we should not deny homosexuals the ability to have relationships if that is what they feel they need. However, when we are talking about granting these relationships official social status similar or equivalent to marriage, we need to ask what place homosexuality has in society, and for what reason our society should recognize homosexual relationships. We are talking about taking a private matter, a relationship between people, and making it a public matter.

Why should homosexuality become a concern of the public? Legally recognizing homosexual relationships isn’t about grant or denying anything to homosexuals. It is about what homosexuality can do for society. Granting a relationship legal status isn’t a gift to that relationship as much as it is an investment. With heterosexual marriage, it is understood that benefits given to those marriages will yield a return on the investment in the form of new children. What return on investment can homosexuality provide? The negative results can be seen through statistics such as STD rates among homosexual men and other statistics.

Well with that line of reasoning, why shouldn’t people who have strong religious belief have to live their live in quite and not out in the public. Not all religions agree so which ones should have to live has you say gays should live? Who gets to decide that?

I know of more than a few gay couples raising unwanted children and doing an absolutely wonderful job at it. For those who say that we should all be open to having children, this too is a way of having children, to the most needy children. Do we need new children when we don’t have enough parents for many children out their. Heterosexual people giving away and killing their babies. Yes they are much better people than homosexuals. Really!

 

[Thinking10]

Well with that line of reasoning, why shouldn’t people who have strong religious belief have to live their live in quite and not out in the public. Not all religions agree so which ones should have to live has you say gays should live? Who gets to decide that?

I know of more than a few gay couples raising unwanted children and doing an absolutely wonderful job at it. For those who say that we should all be open to having children, this too is a way of having children, to the most needy children. Do we need new children when we don’t have enough parents for many children out their. Heterosexual people giving away and killing their babies. Yes they are much better people than homosexuals. Really!

Homosexuality is a deviation from the norm of a husband and wife producing children and raising a family. A society with only traditional marriage is self sustaining, and can continue itself without end. Marriage between a husband and wife is singled out as an ideal relationship because of the merits of those relationships. They permit reproduction and raising of children with both their parents, a male and a female, who can complement each other strengths and weakness. Men and women are different in more ways than anatomical differences. The each can give their children something unique that the other cannot give.

A society with only homosexuality will be extinct in one generation. You talk about homosexuals raising children, but they rely on heterosexual couples to give them those children. There is no scientific or logical basis to single out homosexuality as an ideal relationship as there is with monogamous marriage.

 

[frobert]

My view on homosexuality: Homosexuality is not something that should be supported or promoted, but homosexuals should not be treated with disrespect. Homosexuality cannot replace heterosexuality, and so should not be considered an equal alternative to heterosexuality.

That sounds like outright discrimination. You are assuming that because homosexuality and heterosexuality are different you have a right to discriminate.

If homosexuals want to live as homosexuals, that is their choice, but they should keep their choice low key and out of the public’s concern. The best option in my view is to let them live that lifestyle quietly, and be quiet about it in return. It is entirely a personal matter and should be left as a personal matter.

****There are over one thousand federal laws in which marriage status is a factor. These laws confer rights, protections, and benefits to married couples – from Social Security survivor benefits to federal tax benefits to federal employee health and retirement benefits. Let’s think about that.

Some of the federal benefits that same-sex married couples may now receive

• Social Security Benefits
• Married couples get a big financial boost from certain Social Security benefit programs that have not historically applied to same-sex couples.
• Spousal survivor benefit. A surviving spouse of a worker entitled to Social Security retirement or disability benefits may be entitled to receive retirement benefits based on the deceased spouse’s earning record.
• Spousal retirement benefit. For retired married couples, a person whose calculated Social Security benefit is lower than that of his or her spouse may take half of his or her spouse’s higher benefit, rather than receive the amount calculated from his own earnings.
• Lump-sum death benefit. A surviving spouse gets $255 from the federal government to help pay for funeral arrangements.

There is a difference between outlawing homosexual relationships and persecuting homosexuals, and a society where homosexual relationships are not singled out as a legally recognized relationship, such as a marriage or civil union.

That horse has already left the barn. SSM is legal in 19 states and discrimination based on sex continues to be successfully challenged in states that discriminate.

I agree that we should not deny homosexuals the ability to have relationships if that is what they feel they need. However, when we are talking about granting these relationships official social status similar or equivalent to marriage, we need to ask what place homosexuality has in society, and for what reason our society should recognize homosexual relationships. We are talking about taking a private matter, a relationship between people, and making it a public matter.Why should homosexuality become a concern of the public?

Do you really think that it is truthful or relevant to say that? If you haven’t figured it out yet, homosexuals are citizens an with citizenship comes civil rights.

Legally recognizing homosexual relationships isn’t about grant or denying anything to homosexuals. It is about what homosexuality can do for society.

What would you say if I asked “what would civilization be like without the [”]contributions from known homosexuals ]("Google[/url)throughout the centries? Let’s think about that,

Granting a relationship legal status isn’t a gift to that relationship as much as it is an investment.
With heterosexual marriage, it is understood that benefits given to those marriages will yield a return on the investment in the form of new children.

What ROI do non childless marriage provide that SS marriages can not provide?

I can answer that.

There are many contributions married people gay or straight make to their communities other than children. Depending on your perspective there are economic and family benefits. One ROI that is well known is that SS couples adopt many hard to place children. Let’s think about that.

What return on investment can homosexuality provide? The negative results can be seen through statistics such as STD rates among homosexual men and other statistics.

What does that have to do with gay men who what the opportunity to live in monogamous marriage?

Regardless, let’s think about STD rates.

cdc.gov/std/stats12/minorities.htm"]Source: CDC

The highest overall rates of are correlated with social and economic conditions. Why aren’t we talking about that? Let’s think about that.

We had this same discussion on another thread which I challenged and you failed to respond to the challenge, perhaps you will respond on here.

 

[Thinking10]

We had this same discussion on another thread which I challenged and you failed to respond to the challenge, perhaps you will respond on here.

Are homosexuals more likely to belong to different economic classes than heterosexuals? If there isn’t a difference between the economic conditions of homo and heterosexuals, you can’t use that reason to explain their high STD rates. Assume that you are studying STD prevalence among a group of 100 homosexual men and 100 heterosexual men. Assume that all 200 people belong to the same economic class. Based on known STD data, which group would you expect to have a higher STD rate?

Scenario 2: Assume that 100 couples are divided into two groups of 50 couples. Group 1 is made of only heterosexual couples. Group 2 is made of only homosexual couples. Isolate these two groups into two separate geographic areas. What should you expect to find in 200 years in the area each group was sent to?

 

[frobert]

Are homosexuals more likely to belong to different economic classes than heterosexuals? If there isn’t a difference between the economic conditions of homo and heterosexuals, you can’t use that reason to explain their high STD rates.

My mistake I should have said overall numbers rather than overall rate. Do a little research in why gay men are at higher risk for particular STD’s.

One of the top recommendations is:
Be in a long-term, mutually monogamous sexual relationship with a partner you know has the same HIV status as you.

Why aren’t you sounding the alarm about minorities, whether gay or straight, that have the largest numbers. You talk about ROI well wouldn’t their be better ROI with interventions where there is more incidence of STD’s? And yes gay youth should be included.

You partially responded to one of my challenges. Are you up to the others? 1 down 6 to go.

 

[Thinking10]

My mistake I should have said overall numbers rather than overall rate. Do a little research in why gay men are at higher risk for particular STD’s.

Why aren’t you sounding the alarm about minorities, whether gay or straight, that have the largest numbers. You talk about ROI well wouldn’t their be better ROI with interventions where there is more incidence of STD’s? And yes gay youth should be included.

You partially responded to one of my challenges. Are you up to the others? 1 down 6 to go.

Ok, I will respond to the rest. I made a couple of my own that I would like you to respond to.

Scenario 1: STD Rates (An argument in favor of the position that homosexuality is unhealthy. I can’t think of any positive results of homosexual acts, but negative results are evident.)

Are homosexuals more likely to belong to different economic classes than heterosexuals? If there isn’t a difference between the economic conditions of homo and heterosexuals, you can’t use that reason to explain their high STD rates. Assume that you are studying STD prevalence among a group of 100 homosexual men and 100 heterosexual men. Assume that all 200 people belong to the same economic class. Based on known STD data, which group would you expect to have a higher STD rate?

Scenario 2: (On procreation)

Assume that 100 couples are divided into two groups of 50 couples. Group 1 is made of only heterosexual couples. Group 2 is made of only homosexual couples. Isolate these two groups into two separate geographic areas. What should you expect to find in 200 years in the area each group was sent to?