homosexual marriage

[CopticChristian]

I would like those who support homosexual marriage to accept that others can genuinely believe it is not possible, and treat them with respect, and I would like those who oppose it to do so without preventing it by law.

Ho,

Your beliefs do not coincide with the real world. Understand that neither do Christian beliefs for many as well. Christian beliefs put a person into a world of acceptance of what is and a belief that things can be different. Christian beliefs put a person into a world of suffering. Paul points this out in Romans 8.

5Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?

36Just as it is written,
“FOR YOUR SAKE WE ARE BEING PUT TO DEATH ALL DAY LONG;
WE WERE CONSIDERED AS SHEEP TO BE SLAUGHTERED.”

37But in all these things we overwhelmingly conquer through Him who loved us.

Christians are not obligated to conform themselves to the world and what you are asking is to be conformed to the world.

You may want to understand that I was watching BBC documentary on the Brian. Bonobos were featured. They have the ability to understand sentences and recognize symbols. Their minds were compared to that of a 5 year old. With that understanding 5 year olds do discover their sexual parts and don’t understand them. They do all sorts of things with their sexual parts. We teach our 5 year olds to act differently rather than accept 5 year old behavior. In other words Adults do not compare 5 year old behavior to adult behavior as a norm.

The bonobo with a 5 year old mind and homosexual activity is not a model of anything except immaturity. I suggest that you understand that in my opinion Homosexuals should just grow up.

 

[Hokomai]

Hokomai,
Re-posting my question that I posed to you earlier, have homosexual couples ever served as the cornerstone of any civilization??

If not, then don’t those types of unions deserve second-tier status?

From your logic, it would appear that some heterosexual couples have been the cornerstones of civilisation. and as all civilisations have fallen, what are we to make of them? I do not think gays should have the right to state-recognised marriage because I want them to build civilisations. I just think it is fair.

 

[stewstew03]

From your logic, it would appear that some heterosexual couples have been the cornerstones of civilisation. and as all civilisations have fallen, what are we to make of them?

Help me to understand what you have logically deduced based on what I have said thus far.
Or if you need me to help you understand my logic, let me know (because based on your response I’m not sure you followed what I wrote).

I do not think gays should have the right to state-recognised marriage because I want them to build civilisations. I just think it is fair.

Who decides what is fair? Is it fair for homosexuals to hijack the institution of marriage?

 

[CopticChristian]

From your logic, it would appear that some heterosexual couples have been the cornerstones of civilisation. and as all civilisations have fallen, what are we to make of them? I do not think gays should have the right to state-recognised marriage because I want them to build civilisations. I just think it is fair.

Ho,

define “fair” that is totally acceptable to all that if something is fair then of course everyone would agree. What is fair?

 

[CHRISTINE77]

From your logic, it would appear that some heterosexual couples have been the cornerstones of civilisation. and as all civilisations have fallen, what are we to make of them? I do not think gays should have the right to state-recognised marriage because I want them to build civilisations. I just think it is fair.

Didn’t anybody ever tell you that life isn’t fair? That’s one of the most important things to learn as an adult.

 

[CopticChristian]

Didn’t anybody ever tell you that life isn’t fair? That’s one of the most important things to learn as an adult.

Christine,

I agree with you. May I suggest that for Ho’s sake it is stated this way.

Life is not fair.

Children have to learn that life is not fair. We teach our children that life is not fair.

We learn as children that life is not fair so that when we become adults we are not frustrated by the unfairness in life.

Life is not fair.

 

[stewstew03]

Christine,

I agree with you. May I suggest that for Ho’s sake it is stated this way.

Life is not fair.

Children have to learn that life is not fair. We teach our children that life is not fair.

We learn as children that life is not fair so that when we become adults we are not frustrated by the unfairness in life.

Life is not fair.

Perhaps Hokomai has reconsidered his or her position on the matter…?

 

[Hokomai]

Perhaps Hokomai has reconsidered his or her position on the matter…?

I said I thought it was fair that homosexuals be able to marry in state-regulated marriages. In repose people have asked who gets to decide what is fair. Well, in coming to my conclusions about what I think is fair, I do. Others asked why life should be fair, or whether I had not heard that it is not fair. Well, I try to make it so in my own sphere of influence, of which the fine co-members of CAF form a part. I know my thoughts often fall upon stony ground, but from time to time I see a little green shoot peeping through the rocks.

 

[ACCT]

Most people could not have imagined even a year ago, that the government of our nation would mandate that Catholics would be forced to pay for abortions or that the government would say that “gay marriages” are valid. Yet, following the messages of Our Lady, this came as no surprise, especially because of Our Lady’s words,

February 2, 2012

“…pride (Satan) has come to rule…”

 

[Hokomai]

Most people could not have imagined even a year ago, that the government of our nation would mandate that Catholics would be forced to pay for abortions or that the government would say that “gay marriages” are valid. Yet, following the messages of Our Lady, this came as no surprise, especially because of Our Lady’s words,

February 2, 2012

“…pride (Satan) has come to rule…”

Is Satan behind only gay marriage contracts, or also other contracts entered into by gay people, such as credit card, time purchase or hire car contracts?

 

[hglundahl]

Is Satan behind only gay marriage contracts, …

He would be behind it even if either going into such were bisexual or primarily heterosexual.

It is not the predisposition of the contractants, except in entering on a valid contract and intending to keep it, it is the nonsensicality of the contract itself.

Conversely, a gay and a lesbian can validly marry each other. If they intend to keep their vows, Satan would not be behind it due to their “orientation”.

That is my main issue with “gay marriage”: it would give lots of red tape to someone who got the bright idea of trying to live like a Christian.

 

[buffalo]

I said I thought it was fair that homosexuals be able to marry in state-regulated marriages. In repose people have asked who gets to decide what is fair. Well, in coming to my conclusions about what I think is fair, I do. Others asked why life should be fair, or whether I had not heard that it is not fair. Well, I try to make it so in my own sphere of influence, of which the fine co-members of CAF form a part. I know my thoughts often fall upon stony ground, but from time to time I see a little green shoot peeping through the rocks.

Things that seem fair do not necessarily advance the common good.

 

[manualman]

If this is a public school setting, I would only use the biblical references as an introduction and note that there is a long history supporting biblical values against presumptive fads that claim to know better and surpass it. Marxism being a rather recent example…

But the case against gay marriage really need not only be founded in Scripture. Scripture isn’t arbitrary. It’s value is in the fact that it is TRUE, so it need not cite itself as authority, it conforms to reality. I’d take this tack: Why is government involved in marriage in the first place? This question is CRUCIAL to evaluating ‘gay marriage’ proposals. The answer is buried in history, but can be quickly summarized by noting that kings, parliaments, congresses, barons and rulers of all sorts have always been faced with the problem of sustaining a community in which their people thrive rather than tear each other apart. Leaders over the millenia have recognized that there was one particular sort of family structure that consistently produced the most stable community of healthy, well adjusted, well trained and community oriented people and that was the family made up of one man and woman in a permanent, lifelong relationship of mutually self-sacrificing love in which that relationship was, by its very nature, oriented towards creating and nurturing new life. Polygamy didn’t work as well, promiscuity has always been a disaster, concubinage never worked well, and serial monogamy falls short too. Same sex relationships obviously fail this test because they are, by their very nature, sterile. They are NOT ordered towards the creation and nurturing of new life. This isn’t just an external incidental difference. Our bodies reflect who we ARE. The bodies of two men reflect the long term sterility of the relationship capacity between the two of them.

Rulers in past ages recognized that the state could never afford to replace what the family provided to the community for zero cost and that providing the service of creating and nurturing future generations took difficult sacrifice and commitment. So they did what governments often do: they created incentives to encourage the desirable institution called marriage. Legal and tax benefits, social and moral favor, etc. were conferred. Today we’ve forgotten the motivation behind government involvement in marriage and focus only on the feelings of people and what they want. But government should never be involved in regulating feelings! The only legitimate reason government has for being involved in defining marriage is because of the recognition that one particular sort of family form is THE most beneficial for the long term prosperity of a culture. That form is traditional marriage: man and woman, permanently committed to one another and their children. Encouraging that form is good government policy. One only needs to look at the way our culture is falling apart since we’ve experience the decline of the traditional family to see how no government programs or policies can ever substitute the benefits of a healthy, true family.

We must not only refuse to endorse gay ‘marriage’, but we must once again recognize the duty we owe our children to commit forever to our own spouses in love and self sacrifice. Only that can reverse the societal decay that has directly corresponded with the increase in divorce rate and unstable family living situations.

The above is all true and verifiable via accepted social science metering standards. But you will be crucified for saying it out loud in secular society today. Prophets are never popular.

 

[CopticChristian]

Is Satan behind only gay marriage contracts, or also other contracts entered into by gay people, such as credit card, time purchase or hire car contracts?

Ho,

You are confused. Looking for shoots?

Is Satan behind Adulterous Credit cards, Liars that purchase cars, Murderers that have contracts…you are considering two actions…

Is Satan behind Contract, Credit Cards or purchasing a Car?

Is Satan behind Adultery, Homosexuality, Murder, etc

You insist on linking people that are perverted to something they do. Take one thing at a time and dissociate them instead of linking them.

Is Satan behind Wife Beaters that donate millions to the Church, provide playgrounds at no cost to children, give alms to the poor, clothe the naked etc…shall we do evil that good may abound…by no means…

 

[InSearchofGrace]

From your logic, it would appear that some heterosexual couples have been the cornerstones of civilisation. and as all civilisations have fallen, what are we to make of them? I do not think gays should have the right to state-recognised marriage because I want them to build civilisations. I just think it is fair.

Homosexuals are not being treated unfairly with laws limiting marriage between a man and a woman. It is not unjust discrimination.

Marriage between men and women deserves the unique status it has had for thousands of years, preceding any church organization and any state formation. Every religion and culture in the world until the challenge by homosexuals in the last forty or fifty years supported the natural institution of marriage on which existence and flourishing of society are based. Consummation or the marital act has been core element of marriage. In fact, a disability to consummate is grounds for annulment.

Your postings suggest you are vested in the idea of homosexual marriage for some reason. Is it because you have close friends or family members who maintain that equality should apply to man-man or woman-woman configuration for some financial or private advantage they do not yet have under existing legal protections or unable to have via legal contracts?

Exactly, how is sexual difference or complementarity that is core to a marriage unfair? Dissimilar treatment follows dissimilar configuration of the participants in marriage, making it something else, but not marriage.

You make more than cursory mentions of various Catholic doctrines in your posts. In fact, the language of your posts is laden with Catholic thoughts, giving the impression you already know much about Catholicism. Yet, you profess to be a non-believer. Are you really closed to teleology, the purpose why we exist, among other things, why sexuality is so ordered? There is no way for two males or two females, in most or all ways good people but who are confused, to reach the telos or end, even if they so much want their union to be classified as a marriage by the state and accepted by all in society.

Materialism and pleasuring of self convinced many to forget what is real. Even if we have become accustomed to a comfortable 70 degrees in our homes, offices, and cars, the forces outside can’t be controlled. The world would still be too cold or too hot for comfort during different times of the day and the seasons. Man somehow forgot what is real.
,

 

[InSearchofGrace]

I said I thought it was fair that homosexuals be able to marry in state-regulated marriages. In repose people have asked who gets to decide what is fair. Well, in coming to my conclusions about what I think is fair, I do. Others asked why life should be fair, or whether I had not heard that it is not fair. Well, I try to make it so in my own sphere of influence, of which the fine co-members of CAF form a part. I know my thoughts often fall upon stony ground, but from time to time I see a little green shoot peeping through the rocks.

There is no preventing homosexual couples to marry in states that already allow them. In the short period that homosexual couples were able to do it in California, a close family member already in a domestic partnership for a decade was being persuaded by his partner to make a go of it just because. (They were also talking about adoption, which made me nervous, as I view gay parenting to be wrong along with gay ‘marriage.’) I was relieved that he decided against getting married as he thought it was superfluous. I let out a sigh of relief and a quiet prayer thanking God. His decision was in the right direction – his partner later wanted to bring in a third party, another male, to the relationship, one serious factor among several, that led to the break-up. And thankfully, they did not get to adopt. You talked about fairness. Would it have been fair for a child to be adopted by same-sex parents whose unions do not provide balance in identification and modeling, not to mention the known instability of such unions? You might say that marriage of straight folks also prove to be unstable. I would say this: the crisis confronting traditional marriage is no reason to manufacture or accept substitutes.

Homosexual marriages are sterile but they increasingly and wrongfully think they have rights to adopt children or via IVF or wombs for hire. Marriage is a calling and children are gifts. Both are not rights.

As for the role of the state in regulating marriages. A redefinition of marriage to include same-sex marriage is beyond the competence of the state because marriage both precedes the state and is a necessary condition for the continuation of the state (because future generations arise from and are formed in marriage).

In close, I note your last sentence in the post above, one example of Catholic thoughts that lace your stream of consciousness I mentioned earlier. I hope it means that some of the arguments made for your benefit in the discourse on homosexual marriage of which you seem to be an advocate takes root. The stony ground needs breaking up and to be transformed to good fertile soil.
,

 

[Hokomai]

Your postings suggest you are vested in the idea of homosexual marriage for some reason. Is it because you have close friends or family members who maintain that equality should apply to man-man or woman-woman configuration for some financial or private advantage they do not yet have under existing legal protections or unable to have via legal contracts?,

No, where I live there are no financial or taxation advantages to marriage or non-marriage, except for the case of relationships which dissolve very early.

 

[Hokomai]

In close, I note your last sentence in the post above, one example of Catholic thoughts that lace your stream of consciousness I mentioned earlier. I hope it means that some of the arguments made for your benefit in the discourse on homosexual marriage of which you seem to be an advocate takes root. The stony ground needs breaking up and to be transformed to good fertile soil.
,

Thanks for your interest in my thinking. I was raised as a Catholic, although I stopped believing in anything beyond the material world in my early 20s. I am now in my 50s. I have remained interested in Catholic moral thought, but I am least influenced by Catholic thinking in the area of sexuality itself. On the other hand, I have come to the conclusion that Catholic thinking about the family has a lot to recommend it, and it is the efforts to block homosexuals forming secure families that find most disturbing about the Catholic position. The seed, you see, sometimes falls on good soil, but produces a thistle rather than a sunflower!

 

[buffalo]

Thanks for your interest in my thinking. I was raised as a Catholic, although I stopped believing in anything beyond the material world in my early 20s. I am now in my 50s. I have remained interested in Catholic moral thought, but I am least influenced by Catholic thinking in the area of sexuality itself. On the other hand, I have come to the conclusion that Catholic thinking about the family has a lot to recommend it, and it is the efforts to block homosexuals forming secure families that find most disturbing about the Catholic position. The seed, you see, sometimes falls on good soil, but produces a thistle rather than a sunflower!

Tax and social policy should advance the natural family. That will be best for the common good.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

Thanks for your interest in my thinking. I was raised as a Catholic, although I stopped believing in anything beyond the material world in my early 20s. I am now in my 50s. I have remained interested in Catholic moral thought, but I am least influenced by Catholic thinking in the area of sexuality itself. On the other hand, I have come to the conclusion that Catholic thinking about the family has a lot to recommend it, and it is the efforts to block homosexuals forming secure families that find most disturbing about the Catholic position. The seed, you see, sometimes falls on good soil, but produces a thistle rather than a sunflower!

Okay, I guess you decided to ignore the portion of my post on materialism.

Your not insignificant exposure to the Catholicism and continuing interest in it may work for or not in your favor. I am almost worried for you as much as I have been for the family member I mentioned. I am not talking about his personal comfort or material welfare since he has an inheritance to use later in life, unless he blows it all too fast. Anyway, you may be materially comfortable and well off in your temporal life, but reason should lead you to want to be a sunflower instead of a thistle.

I have nothing further to add except a hope that you take care, that in the end you don’t completely lose an invincible ignorance defense.
,