Homosexuality and marriage

[aprilfloyd]

It is a contributing factor.

What does it contribute and what is the issue with anal sex

 

[RevDon]

There is no such thing as a married homosexual, by definition.

Indeed, chastity is what God calls the SSA to.

Jesus gave us examples - “go and sin no more”.

Jesus overturned the tables in the temple.

He did admonish sinners. It is also the third spiritual work of mercy.

“My brothers, if anyone among you should stray from the truth and someone bring him back, he should know that whoever brings back a sinner from the error of his way will save his soul from death and will cover a multitude of sins.” James 5:19-20

As a matter of fact, you are wrong. In 5 states, homosexuals can be married.
Could you describe how a homosexual can be chaste but not celibate?

 

[RevDon]

What does it contribute and what is the issue with anal sex

If I may answer for Buffalo, “It’s icky and thinking about it makes my flesh crawl.”

 

[buffalo]

What does it contribute and what is the issue with anal sex

The health costs and the fact that epithial lining is only one cell thick.

 

[buffalo]

As a matter of fact, you are wrong. In 5 states, homosexuals can be married.
Could you describe how a homosexual can be chaste but not celibate?

These states have redefined marriage. Man may try to do this but the natural and Divine Law always trump. In reality there can be no such thing as homosexual marriage, it is a construct.

I didn’t say that. A chaste person with SSA. We are mixing terms here. The homosexual condition is different than the homosexual act.

A person with the homosexual condition can be chaste by not acting upon it.

 

[RevDon]

Rev -
You disguise yourself in a worldy compassion. An empathetic approach. A humanistic world view that flies in the face of the work Jesus did on the cross. You must be careful to scandalize us as you are contributing to the evil ones work of constantly numbing our sense of sin.

BTW… What is your opinion on abortion?

I assure you, my compassion is not a disguise. It is that compassion that I see as the essential nature of Jesus. What do you think the cross was about? What do you make of John3:17?

If I were the devil trying to undermine the Church, I would convince people that their self-righteousness is a sign of God’s favor, and I would alert them to the failings of others, pretty much like the parable of the Pharisee and the Publican (Tax Collector).

 

[buffalo]

rev don - still unanswered.

Now as a priest how would you counsel them? Say one came into the confessional, read scripture and asked you this - “I just found out sodomy is wrong.” Would you affirm them and counsel them to continue in good conscience? Or would you try to get them on the right road?

 

[RevDon]

These states have redefined marriage. Man may try to do this but the natural and Divine Law always trump. In reality there can be no such thing as homosexual marriage, it is a construct.

I didn’t say that. A chaste person with SSA. We are mixing terms here. The homosexual condition is different than the homosexual act.

A person with the homosexual condition can be chaste by not acting upon it.

No. In those states marriage still means the same thing. What they have changed is who may be married.
I am glad that you admit that there is such a thing as SSA. That is not true of all opponents of same-sex marriage.
A person who does not have sex is celibate. Are you are suggesting that SSA persons could have chaste sex as long as it’s with people of the other gender?

 

[Kolbe300]

There is no such thing as a married homosexual, by definition.

That isn’t remotely true. Not even a little, tiny bit. Take if from a homosexual person who only dated members of the opposite sex in college and after. One who seriously considered marriage as a means to appear “normal” to the rest of the world. Thankfully, honesty won over dishonesty.

If you and others insist on defining the word “homosexual” as nothing more than the physical act between members of the same sex, these discussions will never get anywhere. Which, as it turns out, is always the case on these forums.

 

[RevDon]

rev don - still unanswered.

Now as a priest how would you counsel them? Say one came into the confessional, read scripture and asked you this - “I just found out sodomy is wrong.” Would you affirm them and counsel them to continue in good conscience? Or would you try to get them on the right road?

Answered in post 300

 

[buffalo]

No. In those states marriage still means the same thing. What they have changed is who may be married.
I am glad that you admit that there is such a thing as SSA. That is not true of all opponents of same-sex marriage.
A person who does not have sex is celibate. Are you are suggesting that SSA persons could have chaste sex as long as it’s with people of the other gender?

That changed the definition.

That is why we love the sinner and hate the sin.

If married to the other gender, and within marriage. Sure.

Stephen Bennett Ministries

Stephen, 49 years old, struggled with same-sex attraction (SSA) throughout his teenage and young adult years, living an openly-gay lifestyle for more than 11 years until he was 28 years old. In 1990, Stephen, happy with his homosexual lifestyle and in a committed “gay” relationship for several years, was lovingly and biblically engaged about his lifestyle and evangelized with the gospel of Jesus Christ by a Christian friend. Two years later, much to the shock of everyone who knew him — especially his family and friends — Stephen was born again and completely surrendered his life to the Lord. It was at this time that Stephen made the decision to walk away from his homosexual lifestyle, never to return. His journey of “coming out” of homosexuality then began — dealing with many painful, emotional issues he had buried — including being molested at the age of 11. Stephen would never be the same again.Stephen left his male partner and began his new walk with Christ in January of 1992. He began dating Irene in October of that year, then the two were married the following year, in June of 1993. Today, more than 20 years later, Stephen no longer struggles whatsoever with homosexuality. He shares his story of freedom and complete change at churches, conferences, events, and in the media worldwide. His encouraging message is that individuals who desire change can know that change is completely possible.

 

[buffalo]

That isn’t remotely true. Not even a little, tiny bit. Take if from a homosexual person who only dated members of the opposite sex in college and after. One who seriously considered marriage as a means to appear “normal” to the rest of the world. Thankfully, honesty won over dishonesty.

If you and others insist on defining the word “homosexual” as nothing more than the physical act between members of the same sex, these discussions will never get anywhere. Which, as it turns out, is always the case on these forums.

Then you have changed the definition.

 

[buffalo]

Answered in post 300

I am not seeing that is answered. The answer is a dodge.

And I did predict that eventually you would tell us that “hospitality” was the issue in Sodom. Gee, we got that one wrong for so many years, and only figured it out when homosexuals started their agenda recently.

Trying to read between the lines - you would not tell them sodomy was a sin. Is that correct?

 

[RevDon]

That changed the definition.

That is why we love the sinner and hate the sin.

If married to the other gender, and within marriage. Sure.

Stephen Bennett Ministries

Nice story. I hope Stephen continues to be happy.

Please look at the two paragraphs below. Do you see how one describes access to the office of Senator and the other defines what a Senator is?

*No Person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty Years, and been nine Years a Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State for which he shall be chosen.

A senator is the state’s representative in the Senate. Each state has two senators senators are part of the federal legislative branch*

If you were 28, or had only been a citizen for 6 years, you would be denied election to the Senate.
If the constitution changed the age to 28, or changed the citizenship requirement, it would not change the definition of “Senator.”

 

[RevDon]

I am not seeing that is answered. The answer is a dodge.

And I did predict that eventually you would tell us that “hospitality” was the issue in Sodom. Gee, we got that one wrong for so many years, and only figured it out when homosexuals started their agenda recently.

Trying to read between the lines - you would not tell them sodomy was a sin. Is that correct?

There’s only one line. Loving acts between married spouses are not inherently sinful. They may become sinful when one of them is forced or coerced into it.

 

[Kolbe300]

Then you have changed the definition.

Nope. I’ve just gone with the definition that’s in every dictionary I’ve ever seen.

 

[RevDon]

I am not seeing that is answered. The answer is a dodge.

And I did predict that eventually you would tell us that “hospitality” was the issue in Sodom. Gee, we got that one wrong for so many years, and only figured it out when homosexuals started their agenda recently.

Trying to read between the lines - you would not tell them sodomy was a sin. Is that correct?

If the Sodom story is about homosexuality, then what sense does Lot’s action make?
The story is about abusive power–just as in jailhouse rape today-- and failing to show welcome to the stranger under your roof/ within your gates. Unfortunately, we don’t have the same rule of hospitality in our time, so it is easy to denigrate that interpretation. Scripture must be interpreted within the culture that produced it. At that time, such hospitality was a matter of life and death.

 

[RevDon]

Nope. I’ve just gone with the definition that’s in every dictionary I’ve ever seen.

But there’s a great deal of back story to the way people “define” marriage.

We can say "Between one man and one woman, " but that doesn’t tell us what it is; it just tells us who may do it.
*
one dictionary says:
1.The formal union of a man and a woman, typically recognized by law, by which they become husband and wife.
2.A relationship between married people or the period for which it lasts.*

so its definition includes that it is recognized by law and it is a relationship.

Then we can ask what marriage does:

partners become something that they were not before marrying

(So much for the Dictionary)

Many suggest that a function of marriage is to make parents
but since that does not always happen, and cases in which it does not happen are still called marriage, that can’t be an essential part of the definition.
Some suggest that marriage creates a home, a household or a family
Some say marriage gives spouses mutual support, and where that support is not present, popularly people would say, “that’s no marriage.”
Religious people have some additional expectations for the function of marriage:
It’s a sacrament which gives grace to spouses.

So as far as the definition goes, there is nothing that same-sex marriage would change.

 

[Apolojez]

There is no civil right to marriage of any kind.

Ever heard of the 14th Amendment?

 

[Apolojez]

What Church was the leader against American slavery?

Well good thing we were, so now we can simply take a back seat on this one.