Gay Marriage

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rachel84
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Our bodies were not designed for the usages that occur in a homosexual relationship. It is against science.
Click to expand...
Just a point here-that type of “usage” is not restricted to the homosexual community.
 
Quite simply the Church refuses to believe that can a condition be “normal” or “natural” when statistics show it leads to early death; sexual addiction and promiscuity; inability to procreate normally; numerous health problems including STDs, cancer, hepatitis, HIV/AIDS and other life-threatening diseases; drug and alcohol abuse; and a high risk of depression and suicide. Gay happiness is a Hollywood myth.
Click to expand...
I could introduce you to quite a few gay people who are not only happy, but have never had any of the problems you reference above-but I would bet I don’t need to. You likely have already come in contact with them, you just don’t know them well enough to know that they’re gay. Most of us don’t wear signs and our everyday “lifestyle” is so close to yours that without us coming right out and telling you, there’s no way you’d know.

I could also introduce you to more than a few heterosexuals who have experienced some or all of the issues you raise above-but then you’ve probably come in contact with them too.

Yes, our community has our fringe dwellers, but so does yours.
 
mkingdomlvr said:
I could introduce you to quite a few gay people who are not only happy, but have never had any of the problems you reference above-but I would bet I don’t need to. You likely have already come in contact with them, you just don’t know them well enough to know that they’re gay. Most of us don’t wear signs and our everyday “lifestyle” is so close to yours that without us coming right out and telling you, there’s no way you’d know.

I could also introduce you to more than a few heterosexuals who have experienced some or all of the issues you raise above-but then you’ve probably come in contact with them too.

Yes, our community has our fringe dwellers, but so does yours.
Click to expand...
Yet these are not fringe issues, so I don’t get your point. Are you arguing for the normality and naturalness of the gay lifestyle? What part of Andrew J. Sodergren’s paper do you disagree with?

payingattentiontothesky.com/causes-of-homosexuality-a-christian-appraisal-of-the-data/

DJ
 
djeter said:
Yet these are not fringe issues, so I don’t get your point. Are you arguing for the normality and naturalness of the gay lifestyle? What part of Andrew J. Sodergren’s paper do you disagree with?

payingattentiontothesky.com/causes-of-homosexuality-a-christian-appraisal-of-the-data/

DJ
Click to expand...
I’m speaking from the perspective of someone who is in the community and isn’t getting all my impressions about gay people from videos of the NY Gay Pride parade and op ed pieces that come from an admitted bias.

I have no issue with people who believe that homosexual activity is sinful, that’s what the Church teaches and I would never try to refute that. What I am refuting is the idea that homosexuals are somehow more sinful and more miserable than heterosexuals.
 
There is a whole section on gay marriage deserving of your attention. It is such a difficult issue to navigate and you will be greatly served by Professor George’s rhetoric.
Click to expand...
An issue with what? There is no issue nor is there difficulty. We can thank God for the base Law for that. But there is a long lineup of reformers ad nausea willing to make sound sacred principles more palatable to the secular world.

Current liberal secular laws reveal a fault. Civil Society is to obtain it’s base principles from Jesus, who is also the Church.

Andy
 
Great words. Thank you. How does one respond to the partners of a gay marriage who decide to have children?
 
Some gay couples are adopting kids, just as hetero couples.

It’s questionable whether government should even be in the marriage business. I can see forcing folks to get a license to drive, or a license to carry a gun, but why should 2 people be forced to register to get married ? Other than a means for the government to make a few extra bucks I see no purpose for it.

I get the discrimnation argument from my liberal wife and kids, when we discuss gay marriages. They think churches should be forced to allow gay marriages. I think they are out of their minds.

The state has absolutely no right to impose its wishes on what folks believe. It is a fine line that the govenrment has crossed when it starts or trys to legislate morality. On the other hand racial discrimination would still be going strong, IF the state had not stepped in and did exactly that.

I can’t imagine the government trying to force churches to allow gay marriages. That would clearly be a case of the state trying to interfere with peoples beliefs. The Church has every right to teach and practice whatever rituals and sacraments as it believes God wants it to. For the government to step in and try to impose its will on our forms of worship would be an outrage. I doubt it would stand up in a court battle, especially since I think there are at least 5 Catholic members of the Supreme court.
 
wcknight said:
Some gay couples are adopting kids, just as hetero couples.

It’s questionable whether government should even be in the marriage business. I can see forcing folks to get a license to drive, or a license to carry a gun, but why should 2 people be forced to register to get married ? Other than a means for the government to make a few extra bucks I see no purpose for it.

I get the discrimnation argument from my liberal wife and kids, when we discuss gay marriages. They think churches should be forced to allow gay marriages. I think they are out of their minds.

The state has absolutely no right to impose its wishes on what folks believe. It is a fine line that the govenrment has crossed when it starts or trys to legislate morality. On the other hand racial discrimination would still be going strong, IF the state had not stepped in and did exactly that.

I can’t imagine the government trying to force churches to allow gay marriages. That would clearly be a case of the state trying to interfere with peoples beliefs. The Church has every right to teach and practice whatever rituals and sacraments as it believes God wants it to. For the government to step in and try to impose its will on our forms of worship would be an outrage. I doubt it would stand up in a court battle, especially since I think there are at least 5 Catholic members of the Supreme court.
Click to expand...
You’re right-A little thing called the First Amendment protects the Churches-free exercise of religion and all that.

and I agree with you on marriage and the government too. If the government got out of the marriage business altogether and marriage was reserved for those who wished to get sacred unions, there would be no concern about government “forcing” churches to marry gay people. If every union was called a “civil union” for legal purposes and marriage was only a church ceremony the whole issue would be solved.
 
Rachel84 said:
I am trying to explain it to my friend
Click to expand...
Are you sure your their friend? If you don’t accept and respect him/her you are not their friend. You may argue that you are trying to protect them, but its their life not yours. If they want to “mess” it up then let them, and allow them to see the error of their ways when they pass on. Maybe jesus will smack them so hard they will fall into hell for insult his daddy.
 
Has anyone here noticed that in the 5 years that gay marriage has been legalized in Massachusetts NONE of the disasters predicted by oppponents have come to pass? No gay couples have sued to marry in churches that do not accept gay marriage, nobody has gone to court for the right to marry their dog and the citizens of MA still appear to be free to preach about the sin of homosexuality as much as they want.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top