D
dshix
Guest
Proof?
- Status
B
buffalo
Guest
We say - Too bad. I want what I want.
R
RevDon
Guest
Adoptive situations are carefully monitored by social agencies, and with all the publicity, same-sex parents come under special scrutiny.
R
RevDon
Guest
Catholic teaching says that where a marriage is not consummated, there is no marriage.
Can you see how societal concerns slipped into the teaching on marriage?
B
buffalo
Guest
Do they have 2000 years of experience? What are their criteria?
R
RevDon
Guest
I was citing an example put forth by one of the Justices of the Supreme Court. She did not supply answers to your questions, but I’m sure you could get some answers if you did some research.
On the other hand, who cares about those statistics? I wholeheartedly agree with your statement that the state has an interest in marital and family stability.
B
buffalo
Guest
Is your claim that because Mary remained a virgin no marriage took place? You would apply this special miraculous divine event to all men? Why didn’t Jesus have two mothers?
B
buffalo
Guest
You brought it up.
M
Mgray82
Guest
I wonder what the law says…what is the charge to an individual who keeps their child away from its other parent?We say - Too bad. I want what I want.
I’m sure there are cases where a sperm doner daddy would like to meet their child. And where their child would like to meet them. Yet both child and daddy are denied because he made a mistake by signing his child’s rights away.
It’s always the child who is at the most loss. It’s always the child who suffers.
R
RevDon
Guest
Yes, I’m pastoral.
Would you agree that for most people, there is a very dramatic qualitative difference between a brotherly relationship and a marital relationship?
If for no other reason than what we have learned to expect out of those two different relationships.
I believe that for people gifted with the call to chastity it does serve God and the world well. That is a gift from God that neither society nor the Church commands.
R
RevDon
Guest
As the doctor testifying in the video states, in a very small number of persons, that orientation can change, or perhaps it would be more accurate to say that the person’s behavior (because that’s all we can observe or measure) can change.
B
buffalo
Guest
Obstruction.
R
RevDon
Guest
Interesting article:.
"Judaism changed all this. It rendered the “gender of the object” very “morally problematic”; it declared that no one is “interchangeable” sexually. And as a result, it ensured that sex would in fact be “fundamentally interaction” and not simply “a doing of something to someone”.
So sex isn’t just sex; it’s an important part of interpersonal relationships, even when “sex” is not experienced, but rather sexuality. the abandonment of sex as exercise of power over someone was the what Judaism was changing–YES!
Far from being immoral, however, the Torah’s prohibition of homosexuality was a major part of its liberation (1) of the human being from the bonds of unrestrained sexuality and (2) of women from being peripheral to men’s lives.
Yes! Monotheism abandoned the model of those lusty gods who were forever impregnating human women.
The Torah uses its strongest term of censure — “abomination” — to describe homosexuality.
Here the writer betrays a bias. What he doesn’t tell you is that the same term is used 79 times in the Bible, including the following:
Lev 7:18, And if any of the flesh of the sacrifice of his peace offerings be eaten at all on the third day, it shall not be accepted, neither shall it be imputed unto him that offereth it: it shall be an abomination, and the soul that eateth of it shall bear his iniquity.
Lev 11:10, And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you:
Lev 11:13, And these are they which ye shall have in abomination among the fowls; they shall not be eaten, they are an abomination: the eagle, and the ossifrage, and the ospray,
“Judaism cannot make peace with homosexuality because homosexuality denies many of Judaism’s most fundamental principles. It denies life, it denies God’s expressed desire that men and women cohabit, and it denies the root structure that Judaism wishes for all mankind, the family.”
These conclusions are also biased. Homosexual marriage doesn’t deny life, though admittedly, it does preclude procreation. The two are not identical. Is not life more than the begetting of children?
Homosexual marriage in no way interferes with men and women cohabiting if that is their choice.
Homosexual marriage seeks to form families where families did not previously exist. These families might look different from other families, but in purpose and function they are identical.
A
aprilfloyd
Guest
My claim is that the word ‘evil’ does not add anything to a description of an act.
So an aggravation of ‘murder’ would not be ‘evil murder’
Or an aggravation of ‘assault’ would not be ‘evil assault’
Evil does not exist in actuality.
B
buffalo
Guest
Are you confusing chastity with abstinence?
Yes - real marriage is unitive and procreative by design. Since the procreative act is a unitive one, the homosexual act cannot achieve its purpose. Therefore, so called same sex marriage can never fulfill the designs and purpose of real marriage. Never. Even if man through faulty human reasoning redefines it. But, this wouldn’t be the first time man thought He knew better than God.
The Church does indeed command chastity. As for society, 100 million cases of STD’s speaks volumes. 16 Billion a year to treat STD’s.
2348 All the baptized are called to chastity. The Christian has "put on Christ,"135 the model for all chastity. All Christ’s faithful are called to lead a chaste life in keeping with their particular states of life. At the moment of his Baptism, the Christian is pledged to lead his affective life in chastity.
**2349 **“People should cultivate [chastity] in the way that is suited to their state of life. Some profess virginity or consecrated celibacy which enables them to give themselves to God alone with an undivided heart in a remarkable manner. Others live in the way prescribed for all by the moral law, whether they are married or single.” Married people are called to live conjugal chastity; others practice chastity in continence:
There are three forms of the virtue of chastity: the first is that of spouses, the second that of widows, and the third that of virgins. We do not praise any one of them to the exclusion of the others. . . . This is what makes for the richness of the discipline of the Church.
R
RevDon
Guest
I am mystified concerning how you think parenting by same sex parents who adopt children are keeping those children from their biological parents.
Those biological parents–willingly or regretfully–gave up those children.
How do you suggest the children be treated in those circumstances?
B
buffalo
Guest
So murder is what? Evil? You say no. Bad? Disordered? Good?
B
buffalo
Guest
Place them with an adoptive mother and father just like Catholic Charities Adoptive Services used to be able to do.
R
RevDon
Guest
I do not exercise authority over that definition of what constitutes a marriage. The word “marriage” seems to have a wider application than would at first appear.
How many fathers did he have?
R
RevDon
Guest
Yes, I did.
And what it proves it precisely what you concluded: The interest of the state in marriage is more than just for the sake of the procreation of new citizens, as another poster averred.
So the procreation argument cannot be used to ban same-sex marriages.
- Status