Gay Marriage: The Death Knell of Christiany

  • Thread starter Thread starter Verdanty
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No. Open practicing homosexuals commit suicide just as often. They also are involved in the outrageous crimes. It is the homosexuality.
 
I know that that would be a serious violation of human rights but with what I see, sometimes I’m tempted to think that it’s the way to go. It would also be a logistical nightmare and so I give up on the idea right quick.

But I don’t have a problem with SSM. It was my own singleness that got me to the point where I thought, it’s probably not going to happen for me so I’m not going to stand in the way of those who have that someone and a stupid law says they can’t be recognized as legal.
 
SSM is at this time relatively rare, as is the raising of children by homosexual parents, so there can be as yet no good long-term studies.

However, I do recall a similar situation, that of divorce. Early studies showed that the children of divorce were just fine, thank you very much. It was not until much later, when the first large-scale cohort of children of divorce were in their 30s and 40s that the scale of devastation of divorce began to be revealed.

and oddly, early studies of children of divorced parents doing just fine were remarkably like the studies today of children of homosexual parents: the children are still quite young, the test subjects self-selecting, and the parents the ones doing the reporting.
OTOH, I don’t think that SSM is going to destroy Chrisitianity. many have left the Church; it is not yet destroyed. Marraige as a secular institution was destroyed long ago.
 
Homosexuality is NOT a mental illness and Sodomy is NOT a disease, in fact millions if not billions of heterosexual partners perform sodomy on a daily basis.
 
It’s not a ballot, it’s not compulsory. It’s a survey.

At this point we don’t have a count on how many will return and what way they will fill in the survey. Gotta wait till November.
 
niceatheist said:
Children could still find out who their biological parent is, in either case, providing that parent wishes to be found.
Click to expand...
And this “providing the parent wishes to be found” is the problem. The child should have an absolute right to information on their biological parent if such information is available.
 
exnihilo said:
Again, with this we have professional decision makers. That means academics. We lowly peons must wait until the academics pronounce judgment.
Click to expand...
We can just listen to the Holy Father. He has already spoken on the issue of a child’s need to have a mother and father. In this case, the morally correct course is more dependable than an academic opinion based on little evidence and blind political optimism.
 
Joe1 said:
What is this debate even about?
Click to expand...
The encroachment of gay marriage in society and it’s impact on the future of Christianity.

The day may come when a pluralistic society means this is no longer an issue. Even in such a worse case scenario, if Church leaders decide, like no-fault divorce and remarriage, that it is not a fight worthy of time, there is still no reason for despair. All that would be needed is the separation between civil marriage and the Sacrament of Matrimony. I look for this to eventually happen, especially since ministers are considered agents of the state when they perform marriages. It might be that they cannot decline gay marriage and maintain this status.

In this case, civil marriage would have to be contracted with a state official, and then the Sacrament overseen by a priest or deacon, so that the Catholic Church can maintain control over the Sacrament. Other Christians who still hold true doctrine on homosexuality could do likewise.
 
pnewton said:
All that would be needed is the separation between civil marriage and the Sacrament of Matrimony.
Click to expand...
Is there not a degree of separation now? Would we require anything beyond the non-obligation on priests to fulfill the civil duties for SSM?
 
Last edited:
The Sydney Anglican diocese donated one million dollars to the no campaign.

In a Victorian Anglican Diocese their Bishop ticked yes.

One million!
 
“Death knell”? Not quite. Christianity is committing suicide in Europe and is so-so in the US. But, in Africa, 9 MILLION came into the Church last year*. And, we are not even talking Korea, Viet Nam and China. China may have the largest population of Christians on earth if current trends continue.
  • Strangers in a Strange Land, by Archbishop Charles Chaput
 
Christianity survived murderous persecution at the hands of the Romans and the Soviets.

If the church were a man, it would be the guy who survived being mauled by a bear and chewed up by a shark and is still in great shape. Claiming gay marriage is christianity’s “death knell” is like claiming the aforementioned guy will die of a stubbed toe.
 
Yet another broad generalization group-think statement from the far-left.

Virtue-signaling = “oh, look at me! I’m so tolerant. I’m going to tell you about all of my opinions on the internet that have polite society’s stamp of approval. And meanwhile, like, check out all of my atheists/gay/Muslim “friends” I am defending. Isn’t that like so cool and courageous of me even though it’s the easiest evah.”

And if you don’t agree with my virtue-signaling, you want to stigmatize empathy, are a racist, bigot, wanna throw granny off the cliff, hate the poor, ect ect.
 
Comparision isn’t wrong per se, but the reasoning behind it often is. A lot of reasoning seems to be “therefore I can support it–it’s not so bad, which is good because then I can look cool in front of my friends on social media or in the faculty lounge”.

Some people’s main goal in life appears to be to impress their friends.

But when’s the last time you saw one of their so-called “friends” defend that person?

Virtue-signaling and selling out to be polite society is actually going to be quite a one-way street for anyone who is even remotely Catholic.
 
Rau said:
40.png
pnewton:
All that would be needed is the separation between civil marriage and the Sacrament of Matrimony.
Click to expand...
Is there not a degree of separation now? Would we require anything beyond the non-obligation on priests to fulfill the civil duties for SSM?
Click to expand...
In most Common Law jurisdictions, the officiator (whether Priest, rabbi, minister, etc.) plays two roles. There is the religious ceremony, which will meet whatever obligations are required by that religion, and then the officiator also acts as a representative of the state, and is empowered by the state to enact the marriage. In reality, in most common law jurisdictions you have to get a marriage license anyways, and that’s usually where the actual legal niceties of marriage are, the vows before the representative of the state are just sort of the final step.

And as I understand it, there are all sorts of civil marriages that the Church doesn’t recognize. My wife was divorced twice before we met, so I’m guessing our union would not be recognized by the Church, and yet I don’t see too many Catholics demanding we be forced not to be recognized as married.
 
AdamPeter said:
40.png
niceatheist:
Children could still find out who their biological parent is, in either case, providing that parent wishes to be found.
Click to expand...
And this “providing the parent wishes to be found” is the problem. The child should have an absolute right to information on their biological parent if such information is available.
Click to expand...
I guess it depends on what is meant by “information”. If we’re talking about health information (ie. heritable diseases and genetic disorders), then yes, I think there should be some way for a child to find that information out. If you mean the biological parent’s last known address, I’m not sure I want to give anyone an absolute right to lift that veil. There should be some way for a biological parent to “veto” the request, if they truly do not wish to be in contact with their child. That wouldn’t be great for the child, but adoption was always intended as a one-way street, and finding biological parents is a relatively recent phenomenon.
 
niceatheist said:
In reality, in most common law jurisdictions you have to get a marriage license anyways, and that’s usually where the actual legal niceties of marriage are, the vows before the representative of the state are just sort of the final step.
Click to expand...
In Texas, the step is a necessary on. The marriage is not recorded until the minister takes the license to the courthouse for recording, or mails it in. Also, there are specific rules on who can officiate. I have done this myself a few times.

There was some fear that since the state allows ministers to legally officiate a wedding, they could be made to officiate all without discrimination. I don’t think this could happen, but I never thought one could be forced by law to bake a cake.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top