Homosexual marriage

  • Thread starter Thread starter FireFromHeaven
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
There’s at least two definitions of natural:
  1. Something found in nature
  2. Something that functions as it was intended
When we say that homosexuality is unnatural, what we mean isn’t that it isn’t found in nature, what we mean is that it isn’t meant to be that way. And even among animals, homosexuality is unnatural (it isn’t supposed to be that way), but animals don’t have immortal and rational souls as we do, so they can’t sin. It is an anomaly within nature.

If you look at the nature of humans, being that we are of two sexes that compliment each other, you can see that we are meant to pair with the opposite sex. Even under the ideas of natural selection, it is not a good biological factor, as it cannot allow for the production of offspring if a male attempts to mate with a male, or the other way around.

And in regards to the marriage part. A homosexual union or “marriage” does not fit the definition of marriage. And marriage is not an invention of man (as are our beliefs), so we have no right to change what it means. Just because two people love each other isn’t a valid reason alone for two people to marry. In fact, many priests may question whether you are ready for marriage if that is the answer you give to “why do you seek marriage?”.

The institution of marriage was given as a way to make a safe, faithful, and prosperous family atmosphere to raise a family that is good and pleasing to God. We weren’t meant to be having sex outside of marriage. So not only homosexual, but heterosexual relations outside of marriage is wrong. And since a homosexual cannot validly marry someone of the same sex, because they cannot fulfill the roles defined in marriage. Just like you can’t have a veterinarian legally act as a medical doctor, under God’s laws, you can’t have a woman (mother) legally fulfill the role of a man (father), or vice versa, even if they are similar, their roles are specific.

I hope this makes some sense and helps.
 
FireFromHeaven said:
On it not being natural. From what I remember around 30% of animals practice Homosexuality. What other reasons are there?
Click to expand...
I’m in favor of homosexual marriage, but this argument is not such a good one since animals do all sorts of natural things that we humans would not want to do.
 
No, it would not be permissible.

Again, because it would leave a marriage with a broken deffinition in that it would not be open to life.

Mary and Jospeh were permitted to do it because of the nature of their society back then. They suspect Mary was a consecrated virgin and Joseph was probably an older man asked to be her “caretaker” more or less back then in that women needed a man to provide for them. This all symbolizes monks, nuns, etc that offer a gift of themselves sooo entirely that it is able produce “life” …spiritual life.

Sorry, gotta go pick up some taco bell for the wife…lol. I’ll be back in a few if you still want to talk.

Awsome questions.
 
Accursed2 said:
Because homosexuality is a detestable sin and an abomination. bible.cc/leviticus/18-22.htm
Click to expand...
look, we should realize that homosexual inclinations are NOT sinful unless acted upon with behavior. also, calling homosexuality an “abomination” is not very charitable to our brothers and sisters who have this cross to bear. bottom line is that everyone struggles with various temptations and sins, and it is not morally right to condemn others for attraction, which is something out of our control. it is not our place to say that an uncontrollable attraction is a “detestable sin” (in fact, it is not very nice to say), and i think that it is important to clarify that though the behavior is disordered, the attraction in and of itself is not sinful unless acted upon. i really respect our brothers and sisters who struggle with this cross, because it is not an easy one to bear.
 
I now understand that it is not a good arguement. Michael pointed that out. Melter why do you support it? Ok Michael tell me when you get back.
 
FireFromHeaven said:
I used to be something of a cafeteria catholic. Over this year I have grown to agree with all of the vaticans teachings. Except for one. I just can’t understand why Homosexuals can’t be married. Why is this?
Click to expand...
Good answers so far…read the links. I’ll try to add my 2 cents, basically variations on whats been already said.
  1. The Marriage issue----I agree with what has been said 100%…I’d just like to add we can’t focus always on the couple in marriage. In the words of St. Thomas, Marriage is primarily an office of nature. That means that marriage isn’t just like God saying okay I’m giving you romantic feelings for the heck of it, and we then invented all this marriage stuff. God made marriage in nature (not nature as in animals, as in part of the natural law with humans) with a specific role. Here is a little more on this : newtheologicalmovement.blogspot.com/2011/07/same-sex-marriage-advocates-are-far-too.html
  2. The sex issue- I think in addition to the marriage issue, we have to understand the sex issue. Of course, the Church teaches that if a man and woman are impotent, they cannot marry. Thus, consumation of the marriage must at least be a potential (as in the case of Josephite marriage which is rare and often only temporary…Mary and Joseph’s situation is obviously unique in the extreme). Same sex couples can’t do this because their mimicry of sex is immoral…I think we can look at that through the obvious natural law way–iow, some parts were certainly not meant to go together and trying to make them go together is obviously a grave misuse of nature in the eyes of God…or we can look at it on a deeper level and I think this was touched on already. But I’ll add I think sexual acts without procreative potential really aren’t the same in any way at all. They are forbidden amoung two ppl of the opposite sex so this isn’t a gay issue, its an issue with engaging in acts which by their nature are sterile. These acts aren’t the loving act sex is meant to be.
 
FireFromHeaven said:
I now understand that it is not a good arguement. Michael pointed that out. Melter why do you support it? Ok Michael tell me when you get back.
Click to expand...
Gay marriage is permitted in Reform Judaism based on that movement’s interpretation of the biblical passages on the subject. According to Judaism in general, the first purpose of marriage is mutual love and companionship; procreation is also important but secondary. I also support it based on respect for the moral values held by other religious groups, including Friends and Native Americans, as well as some atheists, who are not opposed to gay marriage.
 
FireFromHeaven said:
I used to be something of a cafeteria catholic. Over this year I have grown to agree with all of the vaticans teachings. Except for one. I just can’t understand why Homosexuals can’t be married. Why is this?
Click to expand...
Because marriage is the sanctification of the sexual act and all sexual acts must be open to the possibility of new life. Since homosexual acts are unable to be open to the possibility of new life, sanctification is not possible and therefore marriage is impossible.
 
MidnightSun12 said:
Because marriage is the sanctification of the sexual act and all sexual acts must be open to the possibility of new life. Since homosexual acts are unable to be open to the possibility of new life, sanctification is not possible and therefore marriage is impossible.
Click to expand...
Just a quick thing: Those acts are unable to be open to the possibility of new life by nature and when everything is working as it is meant to. I’m adding that because someone is going to jump on and say it means infertile couples shouldn’t be able to get married.
 
meltzerboy said:
G According to Judaism in general, the first purpose of marriage is mutual love and companionship; procreation is also important but secondary.
Click to expand...
I love my children and they love me so should I be allowed to marry them? what if I love more than one man or 2 men and one woman and they love me should I be allowed to marry them? Also I know my cat loves me because she goes with em everywhere I go, sits on my lap as soon as I sit down, sleeps on my bed …I love my cat should I be allowed to marry my cat?
 
hey fire!

I’m back.

I’m gonna take a look at your article
 
FireFromHeaven said:
It still strikes me as wrong. Please read this article. It is on the longish side. Tell me what you think of it. Any holes in their reasoning?

stjohnsmcc.org/new/BibleAbuse/index.php
Click to expand...
I think there is a problem once we start saying that Scripture translations have been lost and Christianity has had it wrong all these years…also as Catholics we trust the Church teaching as well.

Here is my question though, why do we need the Bible to tell us homosexual behavior is wrong? I do not mean to be crude here, just trying to point some stuff out: Some body parts really aren’t compatible. Its just that they aren’t. In any way. And we know this not through the Bible but through reason.

Have you read my previous post? What do you think?
 
Actually, I don’t need to. lol

I recognize this argument. It holds no water. We have a strong copy of the canon of scripture.
 
I am sorry Tom and Michael. I have a lot of homework and it isn’t going to do itself. I will tell you at 11:00 if I am finished. If not Good Night and God bless.
 
If I am not done I will continue our discussion in the morning.
 
Sounds good fire.

I’m off work tomorow and I’ll be up late tonight as well. Have fun with the homework.
 
Ok Michael I managed to pull my way through. That does seem true as well on the biblical falsities. Tom is also corect tht certain body parts don’t match. But I still can’t say that I believe it is wrong. Forcing someone to agree with me just doesn’t seem right.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top