Gay marriage OK because homosexuals born that way and deserve to have romantic relationships too?

[fix]

I agree.

I am also in support of Gay marriage. Funny how that works.

Kind a makes you think, about the “reality” and an “absolute” ruling claimed by humans about truth.

Reality is reality. Objective truth is objective truth.

Now, for the moral relativist they simply refuse to accept objective, absolute, unchanging right and wrong. That is why then can allow anything and call it good no matter how wrong the act is.

In the end that is a recipe for tyranny.

 

[buffalo]

There is so much hate on this thread it is absolutely unbelievable.

Why?

Because we hate evil.

 

[court14]

Because we hate evil.

Fear not hate. People fear what they don’t understand. It is the “Us and them” type of thinking which may have lead to group cooperation and development of tribes with pre modern man but is proving unhealthy for a global pluralistic community. It is like liberals saying “conservatives do …” as if all conservatives have identical views.
Given how the media portrays gays also compounds the fear/sterotype; most gay men don’t dress in their mom’s cloths and parade down the street half naked. Sexual orientation doesn’t define an individual and more blue eyes define said individual. It is simply a facet of a persons overall character.

 

[court14]

Because we hate evil.

Fear not hate. People fear what they don’t understand. It is the “Us and them” type of thinking which may have lead to group cooperation and development of tribes with pre modern man but is proving unhealthy for a global pluralistic community. It is like liberals saying “conservatives do …” as if all conservatives have identical views.
Given how the media portrays gays also compounds the fear/sterotype; most gay men don’t dress in their mom’s cloths and parade down the street half naked. Sexual orientation doesn’t define an individual any more blue eyes define said individual. It is simply a facet of a persons idenity no more so than skin color or natural talent at music or sports

 

[court14]

I agree.

I am also in support of Gay marriage. Funny how that works.

Kind a makes you think, about the “reality” and an “absolute” ruling claimed by humans about truth.

Yes and the fact that most people whom claim their brand of dogma as objective morality do just that they claim to have the truth

 

[Cara_Serrano]

To anyone on either side of this debate:

Does Jesus ever address the issue of homosexuality?

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

So did god create instinct?

Of course God created instinct. Then He created man in His image.

We have control over our actions because of our ability to reason…which animas do not have. It sets us apart. We are not controlled by instincts. We can see something that we want, yet control our behaviour and refuse to take something…using the reasoning that God gave us to realize that it doesn’t belong to us. We can empathize and sympathize.

I know that as a divorced Catholic, I am called to be celibate for the rest of the lives of me and my former husband. (By the way, we are divorced because of the lewd conduct that Christ Himself spoke of as being the valid reason for divorce). So I am called to be celibate. Is it what I wanted for the rest of my life? NO.
Am I responsible for my ex husband’s lewd behaviour? NO.
Does that mean that I can forget God’s laws that state that a divorced man or woman cannot remarry…else they are committing adultery? NO!!!
So, just like homosexuals, who through no fault of their own, are somehow disordered, I am commanded by God to be celibate for the rest of my life.
I have no right to look at God and say that He has to change His laws because I have unfairly been made single for the rest of my life.
I am called to acceptance of His laws. In acceptance, I have found a peace more profound than I ever experienced before.

Do I get lonely? You betcha!!!
I draw near to Him, Who understands my loneliness. And I understand that He is not happy with my loneliness. Yet He is unable to make exceptions for my loneliness if He is to continue to be just to other’s.

Homosexuals seem to believe that they are the only ones in the world who are called to be celibate (and suffer for it at times). But the fact of the matter is that there are people all over the world who fall into love or infatuation with people that they are not allowed to marry.
Sometimes close family members fall in love…yet it is unhealthy for society to allow them to marry.
Sometimes married people fall in love with people outside of their marriage. They are not allowed to be involved in those relationships.
Sometimes an adult is attracted to, or infatuated with, a child (through no fault of his/her own)…but that is totally not allowed.

My point is that homosexuals are not the only one’s who need to be celibate. They are not being discriminated against by not being allowed to marry. Marriage is a priviledge…not a right. The priviledge belongs to one man and one woman.

God created us to instinctively and reasonably know male from female.

 

[pathia]

God created us to instinctively and reasonably know male from female.

Except of course when we’re not born ‘reasonably’ obviously one or the other! Behavioral differences in the play-style of a child is more or less the #1 predictor of sexuality later in life.

www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/121659829/abstract

 

[Ross09]

Hi everyone. A friend of mine has come up with an argument for homosexual marriage that I can’t seem to defeat. He says that homosexuals should be allowed to marry because of the fact that they were born that way and also because they deserve to have romantic relationships too. He says it would be unjust to deprive them of equal rights just because they are attracted to the same sex. How do I counter this?

My favorite answer comes from my sister. She wrote in an email to me:

"Love is what God wants each person to experience throughout their lifetime, but there is a difference between erotic and filial love, and that they need to be distinguished. One is not meant to indulge in the passions, but to scrutinize the nature of their feelings and act only with pure intentions. Homosexuality is also considered to be a sort of spiritual challenge to the individual, to draw them closer in relationship to God by seeking pure eternal love, rather than sensual temporal love. "

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

I am no more subject to your subjective understanding of morality than you are of mine.

The fact that I find a ritual of eating someones flesh and drinking said individuals blood as a way to appease an all powerful being repulsive (In fact if only a small group held these belief s society would deem them insane) doesn’t invalidate your freedom to practice said ritual … I recognize your freedom to participate even though it seems unnatural…

Cheers!

Court 14, this is in no way relevant to this conversation. Read the forum rules. You are REQUIRED not to say these sorts of things. Please do not do so again on CAF. We have the right to make rules.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

The purpose of the post was to show that the stats you posted where fallacious not to change your opinion on morality. It seems no amount of evidence(aside from an edict from Rome) will accomplish this.

Rome got it’s laws from Christ. Rome has no authority to change what Christ wills.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

I agree.

I am also in support of Gay marriage. Funny how that works.

Kind a makes you think, about the “reality” and an “absolute” ruling claimed by humans about truth.

Fact of the matter is that I do not hate homosexuals. I know that homosexual activities are sinful. That’s the truth, and I abide by the truth, no matter how much it hurts. I do not have the right, or the ability to change a lie into the truth. The fact is, no one does. That makes those who wish to change the lies into truths very angry. And they begin to hate the truth.

I still do not hate them…only thier behaviour.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Reality is reality. Objective truth is objective truth.

Now, for the moral relativist they simply refuse to accept objective, absolute, unchanging right and wrong. That is why then can allow anything and call it good no matter how wrong the act is.

In the end that is a recipe for tyranny.

And that is where we are heading. Anyone who looks for the truth can see it with a blind eye. Thanks for stating it.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Fear not hate. People fear what they don’t understand. It is the “Us and them” type of thinking which may have lead to group cooperation and development of tribes with pre modern man but is proving unhealthy for a global pluralistic community. It is like liberals saying “conservatives do …” as if all conservatives have identical views.
Given how the media portrays gays also compounds the fear/sterotype; most gay men don’t dress in their mom’s cloths and parade down the street half naked. Sexual orientation doesn’t define an individual any more blue eyes define said individual. It is simply a facet of a persons idenity no more so than skin color or natural talent at music or sports

What you say sounds pretty, but it is not truth. Music, eye color, natural talent or sports doesn’t cause the spread of HIV or aids or syphillis or any other sexually transmitted diseases. It does not cause the breakdown or building up of the family unit, society. It does not create unwanted pregnancies and genocide.

Sinful behaviour, and society’s acceptance of it causes this breakdown of society. And I am not claiming that it is only homosexuals that are responsible for it. It is sexual immorality that is the cause of it. Homosexual activity falls under that catagory.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Yes and the fact that most people whom claim their brand of dogma as objective morality do just that they claim to have the truth

History shows that our brand of objective morality is healthy for society, while the liberal brand is destructive to society.

Under Judao/Christian society, there were families with two natural parents (Science has proven this to be the best thing or children), and not many unwed mothers. Family meant something…and the government did not try to break up the family. In today’s world, if a family needs TEMPORARY help from the government, the government refuses to help unless the parents are divorced.

Liberals have and still are doing all that they can to destroy society. They want anarchy…and that will be the death of society. That is what is coming.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

To anyone on either side of this debate:

Does Jesus ever address the issue of homosexuality?

Yes, He does. He taught His apostles, who went out and taught the world about His love and His laws.

 

[Jesus_N_Cherie]

Except of course when we’re not born ‘reasonably’ obviously one or the other! Behavioral differences in the play-style of a child is more or less the #1 predictor of sexuality later in life.

www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/121659829/abstract

That doesn’t mean that we do not know the difference between male and female. Some people are born with abnormalities of all different sorts. That has nothing at all to do with this arguement.

 

[buffalo]

Fear not hate. People fear what they don’t understand. It is the “Us and them” type of thinking which may have lead to group cooperation and development of tribes with pre modern man but is proving unhealthy for a global pluralistic community. It is like liberals saying “conservatives do …” as if all conservatives have identical views.
Given how the media portrays gays also compounds the fear/sterotype; most gay men don’t dress in their mom’s cloths and parade down the street half naked. Sexual orientation doesn’t define an individual any more blue eyes define said individual. It is simply a facet of a persons idenity no more so than skin color or natural talent at music or sports

Your claim is when we “understand” it we will know it is good and is affirmed by natural law and Divine Law?

Will that also hold true then for other deviant behavior?

 

[court14]

Of course God created instinct. Then He created man in His image.

We have control over our actions because of our ability to reason…which animas do not have. It sets us apart. We are not controlled by instincts. We can see something that we want, yet control our behaviour and refuse to take something…using the reasoning that God gave us to realize that it doesn’t belong to us. We can empathize and sympathize.

I know that as a divorced Catholic, I am called to be celibate for the rest of the lives of me and my former husband. (By the way, we are divorced because of the lewd conduct that Christ Himself spoke of as being the valid reason for divorce). So I am called to be celibate. Is it what I wanted for the rest of my life? NO.
Am I responsible for my ex husband’s lewd behaviour? NO.
Does that mean that I can forget God’s laws that state that a divorced man or woman cannot remarry…else they are committing adultery? NO!!!
So, just like homosexuals, who through no fault of their own, are somehow disordered, I am commanded by God to be celibate for the rest of my life.
I have no right to look at God and say that He has to change His laws because I have unfairly been made single for the rest of my life.
I am called to acceptance of His laws. In acceptance, I have found a peace more profound than I ever experienced before.

Do I get lonely? You betcha!!!
I draw near to Him, Who understands my loneliness. And I understand that He is not happy with my loneliness. Yet He is unable to make exceptions for my loneliness if He is to continue to be just to other’s.

Homosexuals seem to believe that they are the only ones in the world who are called to be celibate (and suffer for it at times). But the fact of the matter is that there are people all over the world who fall into love or infatuation with people that they are not allowed to marry.
Sometimes close family members fall in love…yet it is unhealthy for society to allow them to marry.
Sometimes married people fall in love with people outside of their marriage. They are not allowed to be involved in those relationships.
Sometimes an adult is attracted to, or infatuated with, a child (through no fault of his/her own)…but that is totally not allowed.

My point is that homosexuals are not the only one’s who need to be celibate. They are not being discriminated against by not being allowed to marry. Marriage is a priviledge…not a right. The priviledge belongs to one man and one woman.

God created us to instinctively and reasonably know male from female.

According to to which gospel because one gospel has Christ qualify a reason for divorce and the other it appears he simply states that it is wrong. However if you know the historical context it takes on a completely different meaning. Put away vs divorce …they are not the same thing but this way off topic… I wasn’t aware that the Catholic Church still adhered to this stance. I have a friend who is Catholic who divorced after only 3 months of marriage ( he started physically abusing her after they got married) I asked her what happened with church… She said she had consulted her pere who Counseled her so she would not get into another bad situation if she remarried. Perhaps it depends on the Parrish?

I appreciate your position but I am not catholic nor is the United States Government. As I pointed out in an earlier post if we were to allow the majority’s beliefs/faith to rule we would all be southern baptist.

I know I sound hyper critical of the Roman Church but it is the topic at hand. Has the church done nasty stuff in the past? Yes but I think it was an issue of having to much power. I don’t agree with many of the basic doctrines taught in Christianity in general(atonement…original sin) but as far as how the church developed (at least after about 150CE) they are pretty much on target historically. Also, having been raised southern church of Christ and being taught fallacies about Catholicism like “they don’t follow the Bible…” I am the first clarify the fact that the early church did not have most of the new testament hence the new testament is part of church tradition and the validity of Ap. Session.

 

[court14]

Yes, He does. He taught His apostles, who went out and taught the world about His love and His laws.

Jesus himself is not cited as having addressed homosexuality. The only person who discusses same-sex behavior is Paul but he doesn’t make a general sweep. (Eg in Romans 1) Paul is discussing ritual sex in a fertility cult/temple in Rome (letter to the Romans…). From what we understand of Pagan worship there he was discussing a specific temple… The issue is one of idolatry which consisted of some really strange sexual stuff.