How is a same-sex marriage consummated?

[D0UBTFIRE]

Awful stuff to imagine I know - but this is how they won, centering it on a “rights” issue on the person level, and not focusing on the nuts and bolts of their perverse acts.

On an aside, I find it ironic how gay men seem so “clean-cut” in appearance, whereas the acts they engage in in private are the most vile and unclean imaginable.

Another aside observation, how lesbians say they are attracted to females, but then end up with unfeminine “manly” women - just a first-hand observation, very odd.

I’m just feeling really discouraged and unmotivated this week - definitely not feeling very patriotic, just in time for July Fourth.

The Church teaches that homosexual acts are a sin like adultery, masterbation, fornication… So I have no problem with people believing it’s sinful. But no one ever speaks about those other sins in this fashion: “awful to imagine”, “perverse acts”, “most vile and unclean imaginable”… That sort of “disgust” is reserved especially for LGBT people. No wonder they think Christians hate them. Picking on them as if their sin is the worst. As if they were the only one’s sinning. That isn’t teaching truth in love. It’s prejudice. It’s what convinces me that the Church’s teaching stems from cultural bias and not morality.

 

[bluerose]

I wonder if there has been or ever will be one single same-sex “marriage” that has NOT been consummated before it was ratified?

 

[Spudbynight]

There are moves over here in the UK to remove consummation from all legislation related to marriage.

“Gay marriage” won’t affect anyone else’s marriage? Well this is only the start.

 

[utah_rose]

Ridiculous and illogical

This opens up so much - it will only take one lawsuit by one polygamist group in America, appealing all the way to the Supreme Court, to expand the definition of marriage to include groups of 3 or more consenting adults. There are no legal grounds to exclude it, following the prevailing “logic”.

We already have this in Utah and have had many years. They take child brides and have a “spiritual” marriage. The men are a lot older and there’s a lot of inter marriage, so as a result children are born with deformities. The wives get jealous of one another and the children often suffer. They live on the “beast” (welfare). All in all, very sad. Nothing is taught about the real world and no education. They throw the teenage boys out as they’re rivals for the girls affections, and are known as lost boys. When the wives try and escape they’re hunted down, and the AG tends to ignore this. It is not at all like the TV series which I don’t watch. These other women have a low esteem of themselves. It is an off shoot of LDS polygamy, which the church denies.

 

[zamyrabyrd]

I’m just feeling really discouraged and unmotivated this week - definitely not feeling very patriotic, just in time for July Fourth.

Ugh, same here…

 

[zamyrabyrd]

Good point. The names of the sexual organs could also be re-defined, just picking which ever name you want, and even prepositions could be re-defined to mean the opposite of their current meaning. Call the elbow after the male organ, and the knee the female. Call a touch, penetration, and voila. All you have to do is touch the elbow to the knee. Language is wonderfully flexible when you take the path of SCOTUS and ignore the meaning of words.

Remember Billy boy in the WH: “I never had s** with this woman” and “It depends upon what the meaning of the word ‘is’”.

 

[zamyrabyrd]

The Church teaches that homosexual acts are a sin like adultery, masterbation, fornication… So I have no problem with people believing it’s sinful. But no one ever speaks about those other sins in this fashion: “awful to imagine”, “perverse acts”, “most vile and unclean imaginable”… That sort of “disgust” is reserved especially for LGBT people. No wonder they think Christians hate them. Picking on them as if their sin is the worst. As if they were the only one’s sinning. That isn’t teaching truth in love. It’s prejudice. It’s what convinces me that the Church’s teaching stems from cultural bias and not morality.

Another way of describing it is “putting the sexual organs into the digestive system”.

 

[zamyrabyrd]

We already have this in Utah and have had many years. They take child brides and have a “spiritual” marriage. The men are a lot older and there’s a lot of inter marriage, so as a result children are born with deformities. The wives get jealous of one another and the children often suffer. They live on the “beast” (welfare). All in all, very sad. Nothing is taught about the real world and no education. They throw the teenage boys out as they’re rivals for the girls affections, and are known as lost boys. When the wives try and escape they’re hunted down, and the AG tends to ignore this. It is not at all like the TV series which I don’t watch. These other women have a low esteem of themselves. It is an off shoot of LDS polygamy, which the church denies.

Remember how the media was glorifying smoking to the extent of having actors in films light up all the way and including the “Twilight Zone”? The truth is that lies, the more outlandish the better, are devoutly believed by the public more than what reason and commonsense can show them. Hitler said that people believe the big lies, not little ones because they can’t accept the whoppers could be so bad.

 

[catholic1seeks]

This question is like asking “Where is the color red in this black-and-white photo?”

It does not apply and makes no sense, and the question does not have to apply to same-sex couples:

Consummation historically is in reference to something a male and female accomplish. So what? The whole idea of the same-sex marriage concept is that marriage, in the first place, is not defined by specific sexual act – as if there is only one way to proceed with sexual intimacy. Even in societies and traditions that utilize the consummation concept for heterosexual couples, not all of them mean what the Catholic Church does: The Catholic idea of sex cannot involve a sexual act between a male and female that is closed to the reception of new life. Not all agree. In fact, I’m pretty sure that it is only the Catholic Church and maybe a few other groups that maintain this view.

 

[pepipop]

Ridiculous and illogical

This opens up so much - it will only take one lawsuit by one polygamist group in America, appealing all the way to the Supreme Court, to expand the definition of marriage to include groups of 3 or more consenting adults. There are no legal grounds to exclude it, following the prevailing “logic”.

Not to be offensive, but could any other scenario of ‘marriage’ be any worse than SSM - polygamy is neither here nor there now, they may as well add it into the civil ‘marriage’ heap of manure too.

 

[Ender]

Not to be offensive, but could any other scenario of ‘marriage’ be any worse than SSM - polygamy is neither here nor there now, they may as well add it into the civil ‘marriage’ heap of manure too.

Essentially what has happened is the court ruled that the definition of marriage to be between one man and one woman was arbitrary. Given that, any attempt to define what marriage actually is would also be arbitrary, there is therefore no possibility that any limitation on what constitutes a marriage can stand. The logic of the decision is that marriage is whatever the state says it is. Not only is there no natural bar to polygamous marriages but there is no bar anywhere. On what basis can the government justly say people cannot marry their pets, their houses, or any object whatsoever? What criterion exists that allows the government to arbitrarily limit a person’s right to marry whatever he chooses?

Ender