R
Rau
Guest
Can you give an example of a sin that I could commit, for which God will deem my children to be guilty as a consequence of my sin?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
D
davidv
Guest
I believe you have misinterpreted the other poster. The aspect of the sin that is carried to subsequent generations is the consequences, not the guilt.Can you give an example of a sin that I could commit, for which God will deem my children to be guilty as a consequence of my sin?
K
Kitcat1968
Guest
I see many people here are still going on about how it is harmful to the child to have same sex parents.
Prove it.
No one is arguing against the fact that a child having a loving mother and father actively engaged in their upbringing is bad. Of course not. But what bothers me is the assertion that a child having two loving parents of the same gender is bad for the child. How? Again, prove it.
The opposite has already been proven, time and time again. Children who are raised by a gay couple fair no differently from any other child raised in what some would call “an ideal family unit”.
I understand what the church says, but over the years I have been exposed to the world outside the catholic bubble (particularly within my own family), and I have seen nothing but something beautiful. I’ve seen my grandson fall in love. I watched as he and his partner said their vows. I’ve witnessed them raising my great grandchild for years now.
They’ve done a better job than I did.
A mother and father is not what is ideal. Unconditional love is what is ideal. What form that takes shouldn’t matter, as long as the child grows into an adult that is caring, respectable and mature.
I am no longer going to comment on whether or not Catholic adoption agencies should be forced to adopt out children to gay couples. I have already made my position on the clear. But I have gained enough wisdom through personal experience to have the opinion that state run adoption agencies should not actively avoid giving children to stable, civilly married, same-sex couples. These couples should be held to the same standards as every other couple, regardless of gender, and held to the highest level of scrutiny when being evaluated.
It’s that simple.
Prove it.
No one is arguing against the fact that a child having a loving mother and father actively engaged in their upbringing is bad. Of course not. But what bothers me is the assertion that a child having two loving parents of the same gender is bad for the child. How? Again, prove it.
The opposite has already been proven, time and time again. Children who are raised by a gay couple fair no differently from any other child raised in what some would call “an ideal family unit”.
I understand what the church says, but over the years I have been exposed to the world outside the catholic bubble (particularly within my own family), and I have seen nothing but something beautiful. I’ve seen my grandson fall in love. I watched as he and his partner said their vows. I’ve witnessed them raising my great grandchild for years now.
They’ve done a better job than I did.
A mother and father is not what is ideal. Unconditional love is what is ideal. What form that takes shouldn’t matter, as long as the child grows into an adult that is caring, respectable and mature.
I am no longer going to comment on whether or not Catholic adoption agencies should be forced to adopt out children to gay couples. I have already made my position on the clear. But I have gained enough wisdom through personal experience to have the opinion that state run adoption agencies should not actively avoid giving children to stable, civilly married, same-sex couples. These couples should be held to the same standards as every other couple, regardless of gender, and held to the highest level of scrutiny when being evaluated.
It’s that simple.
R
Rau
Guest
He said the sins were carried, not that consequences will flow. The latter might readily be the case, eg. If I murder my wife, the kids bear the consequences of no mother, and a father in prison. Perhaps they are orphaned.I believe you have misinterpreted the other poster. The aspect of the sin that is carried to subsequent generations is the consequences, not the guilt.
If parents are not willing to bring their child up in the faith, a consequence is that the child will not be baptised as a child.
Is this your point Nacho?
R
Rau
Guest
Were you preparing sex education materials for school children, would you give equal weight to same sex couples?I see many people here are still going on about how it is harmful to the child to have same sex parents.
Prove it.
No one is arguing against the fact that a child having a loving mother and father actively engaged in their upbringing is bad. Of course not. But what bothers me is the assertion that a child having two loving parents of the same gender is bad for the child. How? Again, prove it.
The opposite has already been proven, time and time again. Children who are raised by a gay couple fair no differently from any other child raised in what some would call “an ideal family unit”.
I understand what the church says, but over the years I have been exposed to the world outside the catholic bubble (particularly within my own family), and I have seen nothing but something beautiful. I’ve seen my grandson fall in love. I watched as he and his partner said their vows. I’ve witnessed them raising my great grandchild for years now.
They’ve done a better job than I did.
A mother and father is not what is ideal. Unconditional love is what is ideal. What form that takes shouldn’t matter, as long as the child grows into an adult that is caring, respectable and mature.
I am no longer going to comment on whether or not Catholic adoption agencies should be forced to adopt out children to gay couples. I have already made my position on the clear. But I have gained enough wisdom through personal experience to have the opinion that state run adoption agencies should not actively avoid giving children to stable, civilly married, same-sex couples. These couples should be held to the same standards as every other couple, regardless of gender, and held to the highest level of scrutiny when being evaluated.
It’s that simple.
J
JimG
Guest
Several considerations. When we speak of same sex parents, we have to realize that same sex couples are by nature not capable of natural parenthood in so far as it relates to their relationship with each other. The only way same sex couples can be parents is by the involvement of an opposite sex person or opposite sex couple.
Second, if we speak of a same sex couple raising their child Catholic, does this mean that they will teach the child that same sex relations are intrinsically disordered? That’s a part of Catholic teaching, and teaching it to their child means teaching that their own relationship is disordered. The parents are in a dilemma here. Do they teach the truth? Do they practice the truth? Do they cause their child to doubt the Faith?
Second, if we speak of a same sex couple raising their child Catholic, does this mean that they will teach the child that same sex relations are intrinsically disordered? That’s a part of Catholic teaching, and teaching it to their child means teaching that their own relationship is disordered. The parents are in a dilemma here. Do they teach the truth? Do they practice the truth? Do they cause their child to doubt the Faith?
K
Kitcat1968
Guest
-that’s an opinion. Not a fact. There are many same sex parents who are FAR more capable than heterosexual parents. Again, what matters is their child comes first. Period.Several considerations. When we speak of same sex parents, we have to realize that same sex couples are by nature not capable of natural parenthood in so far as it relates to their relationship with each other. The only way same sex couples can be parents is by the involvement of an opposite sex person or opposite sex couple.
Second, if we speak of a same sex couple raising their child Catholic, does this mean that they will teach the child that same sex relations are intrinsically disordered? That’s a part of Catholic teaching, and teaching it to their child means teaching that their own relationship is disordered. The parents are in a dilemma here. Do they teach the truth? Do they practice the truth? Do they cause their child to doubt the Faith?
-in the case of my grandson, which I’m sure is usually the case within the Catholic community, he left the catholic faith. Of course he did. Because the Catholic faith teaches that he and his partner are unfit to raise their daughter, which couldn’t be further from the truth.
P
Peter_Plato
Guest
Let’s take a different approach to this. Suppose a group of parents was persuaded as part of a social experiment to endow their children for their upbringing to a collective institution that took over the raising of these children. Further suppose that these institutions carefully tracked the children through their adult lives and found that there was no apparent negative impact on the lives of these children. The results, let’s assume, were clear that these children cum adults suffered no worse from psychological or sociological deficits than their peers in the culture within which they lived. Would that constitute “proof” for you that because their upbringing in these institutions was not “harmful” to the children so raised that would be sufficient reason to make this kind of social experiment unproblematic as far as you as concerned?I see many people here are still going on about how it is harmful to the child to have same sex parents.
Prove it.
…
It’s that simple.
Given this “proof” would you advocate for the institutional raising of children, generally?
There would exist no “proof” that these children were harmed, therefore there would be no reason for them NOT to be raised in this way. Is it truly that simple?
The reason I bring this up relates to what would constitute acceptable proof for you. This goes back to the anecdotal nature of your experience. Suppose your grandson had not been gay and had “fallen in love” with a like-minded woman and together had biological children. Only having this situation as a “comparable” would it be possible to truly contrast your great grandchild’s life to what it is now and make definitive statements comparing gay unions and traditional marriages in terms of their efficacy in raising children.
It is insufficient to compare the success of parenting of a gay couple to the general culture because the majority of children in the United States come from broken homes. If your anecdotal comparison is to your great grandson’s peers the impression you have is going to be biased against strong traditional marriages.
I think the fundamental issue in this question relates to the two paths relative to the raising of children that are being advocated in modern western culture.
One path is basically an abandonment of traditional marriage towards allowing children to be raised in whatever manner appears to be minimally functional. The problem here is that taking such a path is akin to a social experiment where the future results are largely unknown. Your request for “proof” can at this time be only inadequately provided because of the relatively small sample size.
The other path is holding to a traditional conjugal view of marriage. The problem is that marriage has not been properly supported and more than half of marriages end in divorce so the majority of children come from broken families. This means any comparisons between children being raised by a gay couple and children in the general population will be skewed against traditional marriage since the general population of children will have an array of social and psychological issues.
To be a proper study, children from supportive and nurturing heterosexual families would need to be carefully selected and tracked and comparisons made to those from same sex situations. Studies of this quality are difficult to come by, but there are a few.
My sense, however, is that even if definitive proof existed that children raised in “less traditional” situations are markedly less well off, you would still not be convinced, irrespective of your demand for proof.
R
Rau
Guest
Sorry, I did not read any “opinion” in the post by JimG, only fact. I believe you misread his second sentence.-that’s an opinion. Not a fact. There are many same sex parents who are FAR more capable than heterosexual parents. Again, what matters is their child comes first. Period.
-in the case of my grandson, which I’m sure is usually the case within the Catholic community, he left the catholic faith. Of course he did. Because the Catholic faith teaches that he and his partner are unfit to raise their daughter, which couldn’t be further from the truth.
To your second point, I don’t believe the faith teaches about the fitness of any persons to raise a child. That is a matter of prudential judgement by those facing the question.
K
Kitcat1968
Guest
The fact remains there is no credible evidence suggesting these children are deprived or anything. Just the opposite. They have two parents that love them. Many of us and many children wish we were that lucky.Let’s take a different approach to this. Suppose a group of parents was persuaded as part of a social experiment to endow their children for their upbringing to a collective institution that took over the raising of these children. Further suppose that these institutions carefully tracked the children through their adult lives and found that there was no apparent negative impact on the lives of these children. The results, let’s assume, were clear that these children cum adults suffered no worse from psychological or sociological deficits than their peers in the culture within which they lived. Would that constitute “proof” for you that because their upbringing in these institutions was not “harmful” to the children so raised that would be sufficient reason to make this kind of social experiment unproblematic as far as you as concerned?
Given this “proof” would you advocate for the institutional raising of children, generally?
There would exist no “proof” that these children were harmed, therefore there would be no reason for them NOT to be raised in this way. Is it truly that simple?
The reason I bring this up relates to what would constitute acceptable proof for you. This goes back to the anecdotal nature of your experience. Suppose your grandson had not been gay and had “fallen in love” with a like-minded woman and together had biological children. Only having this situation as a “comparable” would it be possible to truly contrast your great grandchild’s life to what it is now and make definitive statements comparing gay unions and traditional marriages in terms of their efficacy in raising children.
It is insufficient to compare the success of parenting of a gay couple to the general culture because the majority of children in the United States come from broken homes. If your anecdotal comparison is to your great grandson’s peers the impression you have is going to be biased against strong traditional marriages.
I think the fundamental issue in this question relates to the two paths relative to the raising of children that are being advocated in modern western culture.
One path is basically an abandonment of traditional marriage towards allowing children to be raised in whatever manner appears to be minimally functional. The problem here is that taking such a path is akin to a social experiment where the future results are largely unknown. Your request for “proof” can at this time be only inadequately provided because of the relatively small sample size.
The other path is holding to a traditional conjugal view of marriage. The problem is that marriage has not been properly supported and more than half of marriages end in divorce so the majority of children come from broken families. This means any comparisons between children being raised by a gay couple and children in the general population will be skewed against traditional marriage since the general population of children will have an array of social and psychological issues.
To be a proper study, children from supportive and nurturing heterosexual families would need to be carefully selected and tracked and comparisons made to those from same sex situations. Studies of this quality are difficult to come by, but there are a few.
My sense, however, is that even if definitive proof existed that children raised in “less traditional” situations are markedly less well off, you would still not be convinced, irrespective of your demand for proof.
P
Peter_Plato
Guest
The fact that things are apparently going well at this time for one couple and one child is not proof of the kind you are asking for from proponents of traditional marriage. I can bring to the table hundreds of examples of heterosexual couples who have and are now raising large numbers of exceptionally well-off children. (I taught elementary school for thirty years.) I can also attest that children suffer greatly when they experience the separation and divorce of their parents.The fact remains there is no credible evidence suggesting these children are deprived or anything. Just the opposite. They have two parents that love them. Many of us and many children wish we were that lucky.
You may want to read this summary paper on the effects of marriage breakup:
winst.org/wp-content/uploads/WI_Marriage_and_the_Public_Good.pdf
The authors candidly admit that gay unions are not within the parameters of the studies they have looked at, but they provide reasons for thinking similar issues will likely arise.
N
Nacho45
Guest
I never suggested they would be guilty of your sin.Can you give an example of a sin that I could commit, for which God will deem my children to be guilty as a consequence of my sin?
N
Nacho45
Guest
Yes, that is my point. Another example we see on a regular basis is the destruction of the traditional family unit due to a multitude of reasons. A generation was not properly raised and now have no idea how to properly raise their children and it continues to get worse. One such symptom is the apathetic approach to abortion. There are many others, but yes, this is where I was going with my post. I apologize for the confusion.He said the sins were carried, not that consequences will flow. The latter might readily be the case, eg. If I murder my wife, the kids bear the consequences of no mother, and a father in prison. Perhaps they are orphaned.
If parents are not willing to bring their child up in the faith, a consequence is that the child will not be baptised as a child.
Is this your point Nacho?
P
Prodigal_Son
Guest
And what do you say of someone like me? You see, my father received a closed head injury when I was a young child, which made him behave like a child himself. So basically, I grew up without a father. This lack hurt. I didn’t know what it meant to be a man, because I didn’t have a man to show me. I lacked confidence in masculine environments. I always felt that something huge was missing from my life.The fact remains there is no credible evidence suggesting these children are deprived or anything. Just the opposite. They have two parents that love them. Many of us and many children wish we were that lucky.
Are you suggesting that a second mom would have provided for my lack?
S
shelby_sun
Guest
If by fact you mean it is the teaching of the Catholic Church based on beliefs.Sorry, I did not read any “opinion” in the post by JimG, only fact. I believe you misread his second sentence.
To your second point, I don’t believe the faith teaches about the fitness of any persons to raise a child. That is a matter of prudential judgement by those facing the question.
I think her direct experience means more than your prudential judgement. It sounds like many of the posters here have had no personal experience with anyone who is a same sex couple raising a child. If I am wrong please speak up and tell me the actual damage done to a child being raise by said couple.
Again I want to make clear there is the Church’s teaching which I am in no way trying to change and their is the actual experience these people are having. It does not sound like they have a place in the Catholic Church which is something they must consider before adopting a child.
R
Rau
Guest
No - it would be potentially confusing to refer to teaching as fact.If by fact you mean it is the teaching of the Catholic Church based on beliefs.
I think her direct experience means more than your prudential judgement. It sounds like many of the posters here have had no personal experience with anyone who is a same sex couple raising a child. If I am wrong please speak up and tell me the actual damage done to a child being raise by said couple.
Again I want to make clear there is the Church’s teaching which I am in no way trying to change and their is the actual experience these people are having. It does not sound like they have a place in the Catholic Church which is something they must consider before adopting a child.
My prudential judgement is not in the picture. What I said was that the faith does not teach about the fitness of any persons to raise a child; rather, those charged with placing children with adoptive parents make that judgement.
I do not know what teaching you are referring to.
J
Joie_de_Vivre
Guest
Sexuality is not monolithic. I believe it’s fluid and depending on one’s preference should not be reduced to labels and categories to live up to human beings need to control and compartmentalise everything.
Sounds like a bisexualWhy can’t a man sleep with a woman just because he had sex with another man yesterday?
I’ve heard of it happening, sometimes it involved love, sometimes it didn’t.Why can’t a woman marry a man all because she has been dating women her entire life?
Um, okay.Whether or not s/he is in denial about whom s/he is it’s their choice. Let people be the drivers of their carriages to self discovery. You cannot advocate pro choice and in the same breathe preach moral conservative principles that limit some else’s choice to be who they are.
People don’t really fall for gender types, they fall for people who fall within them to some degree.What’s wrong with people falling for people instead of gender types?
What is?This little diatribe was recently posted in a blog I came across about how wonderful the gay lifestyle is. I think it sums up everything that is wrong with the whole gay agenda.
Anal sex isn’t as common as people think among gay men, a quarter have never done it and quite a few have no interest doing it ever again.Two gays living together and not having anal sex. That would be rather uncommon by the sounds of things
E
eamonnroma
Guest
Why would it be rare? Two gay people who are friends can easily be flat mates. Sex would not enter into the situation.Actually, I doubt that would be all that uncommon, since a lot of gay people (like a lot of straight people) just don’t like anal sex. But two gay people living together in complete chastity would be rare.
P
Prodigal_Son
Guest
No, I agree with that. I was talking about two gay people in a romantic relationship who were chaste – that happens, but it is rare.Why would it be rare? Two gay people who are friends can easily be flat mates. Sex would not enter into the situation.
B
Ben_Carmine
Guest
I agree. Too many children have parents that don’t care about them.The fact remains there is no credible evidence suggesting these children are deprived or anything. Just the opposite. They have two parents that love them. Many of us and many children wish we were that lucky.
I once read, if I remember correctly, a long study on children raised by two same sex parents. It concluded that the children raised were no worse off and even tended to fair off slightly better than the average child. The theories on that weren’t that same sex parents were inherently better, it was that stability of two parents seemed to be the most important thing in raising a child. The shared burden of it.
It’s thought the reason why they tended to be slightly above average is because the average was brought down by people who didn’t want to have/didn’t care about their kids (the amount of people that have kids accidentaly for example, I know of many teenage pregnancies in my small town alone) whereas it wasn’t possible to have kids accidently in a same sex relationship. The child was there because both parents wanted it to be there to raise it with love and care.
It makes me sad when people argue against letting a child be raised by two loving parents. That’s something that many of us would have loved in our childhoods, stability and love.
So anyway, I’m glad you said that Kitcat.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.