Gay Marriage in America

  • Thread starter Thread starter Glennonite
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
qui_est_ce said:
Don’t put too much stock in what people like that say. People get accused of that all the time, from both sides of the fence. Glad to see the good bishop acted pastorally.
Click to expand...
Bishop Carlos Sevilla – he is a fine man, just retired.
 
StAnastasia said:
Not until this sort of travesty of justice is definitely put to rest.
Click to expand...
No, no, no. you are backing off your original premise. now you’ve included travesty against the elderly, which is all you’ve proven. there was NO travesty unique to GLBT couples that I did not address. You see that I said that the elderly scenario would be the same, and in fact, I see it in my line of work frequently, REGARDLESS of sexual orientation, gender or marital status.

THEREFORE, I have lived up to my end of the bargain and you are reneging. :tsktsk:

You said: “If you can show me how LGBT people can be protected from such travesties, I will gladly relinquish my defense of civil unions”

and I have done so.
 
michelleds said:
No, no, no. you are backing off your original premise. …
Click to expand...
You should have seen it coming. “Not until this sort of travesty of justice is definitely put to rest” is meaningless, like most of her statements. Has any “travesty of justice” ever been “put to rest” in the whole history of the world?
“Previous generations of social experimenters have caused unimaginable misery for millions of people. None of these people has ever been held accountable.”
 
tm30 said:
Satan is merely a symbol.
Click to expand...
Satan is a symbol, no but I am not sure the Church would agree that Satan is “merely” a symbol. Did StAnastasia use the word “merely”? Even if she did, I’m mot sure that statment would be heretical.
Hell is a superstition.
Click to expand...
I think the statement was that it is superstition to say that changing religions condemns one to Hell. Superstition is not the word I would use, but I agree that it is a wrong belief.
God is a “She”.
Click to expand...
No heresy here - God is neither man nor woman, but the ideal for both, and there is nothing wrong with referring to God as either He or She. That is not only Orthodox, its Scriptural.
The infallible Magisterium is bigoted (i.e., unjust).
Click to expand...
One can agree or disagree with this statement, but its not a theological statement and not heresy. I think its hard to deny that the Magisterium discriminates against certain types and classes of persons - the only question is whether that discrimination is justified or not. I think some is, but most is not. That is an opinion that can’t be said to be heretical or orthodox - those terms don’t apply to this kind of opinion.
 
tm30 said:
Adoption into a SS household does spiritual violence to the children. The Church is clear on its opposition to SS adoption and marriage. Catholic Charities isn’t out of the adoption business for the heck of it.
Click to expand...
I don’t agree with your first premise - certainly growing up without parents is not good for children and I don’t believe having gay parents instead of no parents is harmful to children. As to Catholic Charities, my understanding is that Catholic Charities is out of the adoption business only in states where it was working for the state and using state funds, because the state has a right to require its contractors to follow its rules. I agree that the Church is against SSM, and that the Church advocates for children to be raised by opposite sex married couples. I am not so sure that the Church is so very clear that it is always and everywhere opposed to same sex couples adopting, anymore than the Church is always and everywhere opposed to single people adopting.
 
StAnastasia said:
… I am opposed to SSM. …
Click to expand...
But you are in favor of SS “civil unions”. That’s nothing but back-door approval of SS"M" since the only difference is what you call it.
“Previous generations of social experimenters have caused unimaginable misery for millions of people. None of these people has ever been held accountable.”
 
sedonaman said:
Yes. Adoption is an unfortunate necessity in some cases, but it is child-centered. Its purpose is to give children the parents they need; it does not exist to give people the children they say they want.
Click to expand...
And sometimes it exists because cute little boys and girls are worth a lot of money.

Which would make it “love of money-centered.”
 
TMC said:
I don’t agree with your first premise - certainly growing up without parents is not good for children and I don’t believe having gay parents instead of no parents is harmful to children. As to Catholic Charities, my understanding is that Catholic Charities is out of the adoption business only in states where it was working for the state and using state funds, because the state has a right to require its contractors to follow its rules. I agree that the Church is against SSM, and that the Church advocates for children to be raised by opposite sex married couples. I am not so sure that the Church is so very clear that it is always and everywhere opposed to same sex couples adopting, anymore than the Church is always and everywhere opposed to single people adopting.
Click to expand...
Children who grow up with gay parents are harmed spiritually. Children who grow up with no parents are harmed spiritually. I don’t know which children are harmed more but neither situation is ideal.
 
Glennonite said:
I have been reading a lot about the Catholic viewpoint that defense of the family is the real issue regarding gay marriage. I’m on board with that. In any Catholic group, institution, college, parish, etc. we have the right to call it as we see it.

How do I transfer that viewpoint to others in the USA? In other words, in the U.S. there is an expectation or view which holds that as long as one doesn’t harm another, he/she is allowed the freedom to do as they like. “It’s a free country.” Why should I try to enact a law that is restrictive of ANY behavior that doesn’t cause direct, obvious harm to another?

While I don’t think homosexual behavior is morally correct, why should I try try to interfere with people who choose live that way? How does that behavior become my concern? Isn’t it the right of everyone in America to think, believe, and act as they choose as long as they don’t harm others? As a Catholic-American, do I have a duty to try to prevent legal gay-marriage?

Can anyone help me on this question?

Glennonite
Click to expand...
Gay marriage has been going on for a while now. There are many thousands of marriages in the US - Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont and New Hampshire. In addition, a number of gay marriages are still valid in California.

Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, South Africa, Canada, Argentina, Portugal, Iceland and soon Nepal, all have gay marriage.

Yet nobody can point to any actual harm from any gay marriage in any of these places. There is no point in speculation any more. The talk here theorizing potential harm can be compared to actual data.

So, the answer to your question is already here. There is no need to theorize about some imagined harm.
 
FormerWarrior said:
Gay marriage has been going on for a while now. There are many thousands of marriages in the US - Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont and New Hampshire. In addition, a number of gay marriages are still valid in California. So, the answer to your question is already here. There is no need to theorize about some imagined harm.
Click to expand...
An August hurricane killed at least two people in Vermont, which allows gay marriage. How can you say this practice harms no one?
 
Glennonite said:
I have been reading a lot about the Catholic viewpoint that defense of the family is the real issue regarding gay marriage. I’m on board with that. In any Catholic group, institution, college, parish, etc. we have the right to call it as we see it.

How do I transfer that viewpoint to others in the USA? In other words, in the U.S. there is an expectation or view which holds that as long as one doesn’t harm another, he/she is allowed the freedom to do as they like. “It’s a free country.” Why should I try to enact a law that is restrictive of ANY behavior that doesn’t cause direct, obvious harm to another?

While I don’t think homosexual behavior is morally correct, why should I try try to interfere with people who choose live that way? How does that behavior become my concern? Isn’t it the right of everyone in America to think, believe, and act as they choose as long as they don’t harm others? As a Catholic-American, do I have a duty to try to prevent legal gay-marriage?

Can anyone help me on this question?

Glennonite
Click to expand...
Maybe you should take a peek at “No Man is an Island” by Thomas Merton.

It will perhaps show you how inconsequential we percieve our actions to be vs how you and I truely affect everyone around us.

How can you and I be like Jesus - followers of His - if we don’t do as He did and pray as He did.

“Father forgive them, for they know not what they do”. Or maybe He should’ve just asked the Father to ignore them in favor of the ones that live a Christian life.

No man is an island - your life of prayer and your life of the spirit is crucial to everyone not just in your household, but also in your congregation, your community your job - everyone you come in contact with.

Catholics cannot be selfish and isolationists. Public homosexual perversions, sanctioned by the laws of this and other countries, affects the entire Christian world.

America is headed down the path of obscure moral, ethical and religious relativism - absent of all Christian truth. That path accelerates each day with the thousands upon thousands of abortions performed on a daily basis in this country alone.

Then we wonder why we are at war; or why we have this or that social problem. We’ve abandoned our faith, our God. It’s not God that leaves us to plunge into the open mouth of chaos…it is us that prance proudly away from him and into the very depths of our own delusions.

Gay Marriage…what a vile, demonic concept and euphemism.
 
perro_sarnoso said:
America is headed down the path of obscure moral, ethical and religious relativism - absent of all Christian truth. That path accelerates each day with the thousands upon thousands of abortions performed on a daily basis in this country alone.
Gay Marriage…what a vile, demonic concept and euphemism.
Click to expand...
Gay marriage leads us down the road to "thousands upon thousands of abortions performed on a daily basis.’

I’m trying to wrap my mind around that logic.
 
StAnastasia said:
An August hurricane killed at least two people in Vermont, which allows gay marriage. How can you say this practice harms no one?
Click to expand...
LOL. I read all these comments about the theoretical harm to marriage and to society. I am just asking if anyone can point to any evidence of this in places where gay marriage has been legal for a while. Canada probably has the most experience, at this point. Spain and Brazil have not been at it that long.
 
perro_sarnoso said:
How can you and I be like Jesus - followers of His - if we don’t do as He did and pray as He did.

Gay Marriage…what a vile, demonic concept and euphemism.
Click to expand...
I wonder if the tone of that would qualify it as “hate speech?”
 
FormerWarrior said:
LOL. I read all these comments about the theoretical harm to marriage and to society. I am just asking if anyone can point to any evidence of this in places where gay marriage has been legal for a while. Canada probably has the most experience, at this point. Spain and Brazil have not been at it that long.
Click to expand...
Canada’s maple syrup production is down due to global warming’s impact on maple trees. Could that be a penalty for permitting gay marriage?
 
StAnastasia said:
Canada’s maple syrup production is down due to global warming’s impact on maple trees. Could that be a penalty for permitting gay marriage?
Click to expand...
If it would affect the price or availability of maple syrup, then we are in trouble. Canada and Vermont.
 
FormerWarrior said:
If it would affect the price or availability of maple syrup, then we are in trouble. Canada and Vermont.
Click to expand...
But it probably doesn’t. Research has already shown a negative correlation between tornadoes and homosexuality. The more gay and lesbian people a state has, the lower its rate of devastating tornadoes. There is a positive correlation in the case of Baptists: the more Baptists there are in a state the higher the rate of tornadoes will be. Texas could avert more than a hundred tornadoes per year if it shipped 200,000 Baptists to, say, Alaska.

StAnastasia
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top