If you are opposed to same-sex marriage, are you willing to push for this law?

[JimG]

I was only answering in a “what if this was the only choice” mode. However, I do think there is some logic to what the OP is proposing.

Marriage really is for the regeneration of the family. If a couple isn’t producing children, it really isn’t benefiting society, and shouldn’t really get tax breaks just because two people are married.

I know many people who chose not to have children after they were married. And there are many many more who are not open to having children after they have had one or two, and get fixed. Therefore they cannot have children and sex is totally non-procreative. I realize the Catholic Church’s position on this, (and true practicing Catholics) but this is NOT how most people in our society live.

Therefore what the OP is proposing is not all that far-fetched. If a marriage is non-procreative, (good intentions or not) it really shouldn’t get the sanctions and privileges that go with it.

And some couples fully intend their marriage to be procreative, but it doesn’t happen, through no fault of their own. That is no reason to invalidate their marriage.

Even so, from a government standpoint, the primary benfit to be given to married couples should have to do with children. The current dependency exemption is entirely inadequate and should be raised. A large family should have high enough dependence exemptions to entirely offset any income taxes. (This was the case with my own mother and father, who filled out their tax return on an index card and paid no taxes because they had a lot of kids.) But same sex couples should have no tax benefits because they are not capable of marriage.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Christ commanded the Apostles go out and preach the Gospel to all nations. He told them if a household rejected, dust their feet and move on. No where did Christ command to go out and FORCE them to Himself.

What you are saying is spiraling out of control, has always existed. I would dare say it always will, until God has enough. He doesn’t force, and could. We cannot do better than He can, but doesn’t.

Gay marriage has always existed?? That’s news to me!

 

[JimG]

I certainly wouldn’t prevent what God approves of. We can do no evil, so that good may come of it. It would be wrong to separate what God has joined.

The Church is clear on how we are to treat homosexuals.

Quote:
2358 The number of men and women who have deep-seated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God’s will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

We might try to approach people with the traits of compassion the Church calls for. Only then can we show them , we are of a faith of love, mercy, and forgiveness; as opposed to judgmental, condemning, and unforgiving. If they cannot see love in what we express as a faith of love, the less likely they will be to accept fraternal correction. If they stay astray because of our actions, are we also culpable in their remaining in error from that point on?

I agree. But there is nothing in the quote which mandates that Catholics must support same sex marriage. In fact, we must oppose it.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Gay marriage has always existed?? That’s news to me!

Homosexuality has always existed.

Because someone simply says, ‘I am married’ does not necessarily make it so, to those who know Truth.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

I agree. But there is nothing in the quote which mandates that Catholics must support same sex marriage. In fact, we must oppose it.

Yes, Jim. I agree. But, we are still called to treat those people with the traits of compassion, as defined by the Church.

 

[CHRISTINE77]

Yes, Jim. I agree. But, we are still called to treat those people with the traits of compassion, as defined by the Church.

That has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

That has nothing to do with the topic of this thread.

I believe it’s a necessary part of the discussion. I totally disagree that we could assume a right to sunder what God has joined, based on fertility, or infertility, which life is a gift from God and He blesses each according to His will, not ours. It would be committing a wrong to separate husband and wife, to try and correct homosexual marriage, the same as outlawing pregnancy to prevent abortions. This is inline with the traits of compassion, that the Church teaches towards homosexuals, the same as everyone is entitled to a dignity of life.

 

[PetrusRomanus]

Homosexuality has always existed.

Because someone simply says, ‘I am married’ does not necessarily make it so, to those who know Truth.

But not all know Truth, yet all are called to the Father’s table. Legalizing gay marriage will further scandalize those who dont know Truth.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

But not all know Truth, yet all are called to the Father’s table. Legalizing gay marriage will further scandalize those who dont know Truth.

No one is promoting legalizing gay marriage, at least I’m not. If someone tells a lie, are we that know truth bound by that lie?

People are not going to listen to ‘fraternal correction’ if it is less than the love we claim to share in Christ. This is why the Church recognizes the wrong, and still calls for us to have compassion towards the individuals, I believe.

Now, is it truly love to support a hypothetical of separating that which was legitimately joined by God, in an effort to defeat the wrong? The Church teaches we cannot do evil, so that good may come from it. Causing a wrong on those legitimately joined by God is, in a way, doing evil, so that homosexual marriage maybe defeated, a good. It would be the same to say, ‘let’s outlaw pregnancy, and we’ll defeat abortion.’ It goes against God’s design, to accomplish good.

We, that know truth, are not scandalized by those who make claims that we know not to be truth. However, to go against Church teaching for what we perceive to be good, causes a scandal within the body of Christ. That causes more wrong, than correction.

 

[PetrusRomanus]

No one is promoting legalizing gay marriage, at least I’m not. If someone tells a lie, are we that know truth bound by that lie?

People are not going to listen to ‘fraternal correction’ if it is less than the love we claim to share in Christ. This is why the Church recognizes the wrong, and still calls for us to have compassion towards the individuals, I believe.

Now, is it truly love to support a hypothetical of separating that which was legitimately joined by God, in an effort to defeat the wrong? The Church teaches we cannot do evil, so that good may come from it. Causing a wrong on those legitimately joined by God is, in a way, doing evil, so that homosexual marriage maybe defeated, a good. It would be the same to say, ‘let’s outlaw pregnancy, and we’ll defeat abortion.’ It goes against God’s design, to accomplish good.

We, that know truth, are not scandalized by those who make claims that we know not to be truth. However, to go against Church teaching for what we perceive to be good, causes a scandal within the body of Christ. That causes more wrong, than correction.

Not complying with grave sin is not “doing evil so good may come of it.” Not complying with grave sin is being an obedient, practicing Catholicthat stands their ground and sets a good example by not going along with something because everyone else is doing it.

And just so you dont twist and confuse the truth, the Church asks its faithful to oppose same sex marriage on every level (this doesnt mean we condemn the people).

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Not complying with grave sin is not “doing evil so good may come of it.” Not complying with grave sin is being an obedient, practicing Catholicthat stands their ground and sets a good example by not along with something because everyone else is doing it.

Then show me where the Church teaches less than compassion towards a sinner. Keep in mind, we are all sinners.

Now, how is recognizing something not true complying? It’s not. The Church speaks on the disorder of homosexuality, and yet still requires, “They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.”

In this ‘hypothetical’ situation, people are ready to disrupt the innocent, legitimately bound by God, in order to fight another issue altogether. Why not ban all marriages, and we can be assured no homosexuals can claim to be married? Why not ban all pregnancies, and we can be assured this will impact the number of abortions. We cannot do wrong, so that right may come of it.

 

[PetrusRomanus]

Then show me where the Church teaches less than compassion towards a sinner. Keep in mind, we are all sinners.

Now, how is recognizing something not true complying? It’s not. The Church speaks on the disorder of homosexuality, and yet still requires, “They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.”

In this ‘hypothetical’ situation, people are ready to disrupt the innocent, legitimately bound by God, in order to fight another issue altogether. Why not ban all marriages, and we can be assured no homosexuals can claim to be married? Why not ban all pregnancies, and we can be assured this will impact the number of abortions. We cannot do wrong, so that right may come of it.

How is not contributing to anothers sin lack of compassion? If anything, it is the meaning of compassion and admonishing sinners, informing the ignorant are Spiritual Works of Mercy. Perhaps more research needs to be done on your part.

 

[JimG]

Then show me where the Church teaches less than compassion towards a sinner. Keep in mind, we are all sinners.

Now, how is recognizing something not true complying? It’s not. The Church speaks on the disorder of homosexuality, and yet still requires, “They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.”

In this ‘hypothetical’ situation, people are ready to disrupt the innocent, legitimately bound by God, in order to fight another issue altogether. Why not ban all marriages, and we can be assured no homosexuals can claim to be married? Why not ban all pregnancies, and we can be assured this will impact the number of abortions. We cannot do wrong, so that right may come of it.

The phrase, “Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided,” leaves some ambiguity, which can and will be used by those who promote same sex marriage.

Is refusal to recognize same sex marriage a sign of unjust discrimination?
Is declining to participate in or attend a same sex marriage a sign of unjust discrimination?
Is declining to provide services for a same sex marriage a sign of unjust discrimination?
Is declining to rent a hall for a same sex wedding service a sign of unjust discrimination?

I don’t think so, nor do I think that the bishops intended for the faithful to support same sex marriage in any way. However, I do fear that the end result will be unjust discrimination directed against those who in conscience cannot and will not accept same sex marriage.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

How is not contributing to anothers sin lack of compassion? If anything, it is the meaning of compassion and admonishing sinners, informing the ignorant are Spiritual Works of Mercy. Perhaps more research needs to be done on your part.

I don’t think we’re communicating or something. I don’t understand exactly what point you seem to disagree with, taking the tone of your post to me?

They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided.

Fraternal correction should include respect, compassion, and sensitivity.

Some demand a right to ‘admonish,’ through condemnation, name calling, separating, etc. That lacks respect, compassion, and sensitivity. You’ve heard, ‘you catch more flies with honey, than vinegar.’ You could approach someone wrongly, and entrench them in the error of their ways. That could possibly attribute some of their wrong to yourself, because we are to beware not to cause a brother to stumble.

I have spoken against homosexual marriage, yet approach it through the teaching of the Church. Then you tell me I need do more research? I’m not the one saying hypothetically, ‘let’s split men and women apart, who have no children and disqualify their marriage.’ That is against the very Gospel message Christ taught.

Mat 19:6 Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder.

Why should we even consider splitting a man and woman’s joining before God? Would you also agree a solution to abortion would be to hypothetically outlaw pregnancies? It’s the same principle as being discussed in this thread.

Please explain what exactly you disagree with.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

The phrase, “Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided,” leaves some ambiguity, which can and will be used by those who promote same sex marriage.

Is refusal to recognize same sex marriage a sign of unjust discrimination?
Is declining to participate in or attend a same sex marriage a sign of unjust discrimination?
Is declining to provide services for a same sex marriage a sign of unjust discrimination?
Is declining to rent a hall for a same sex wedding service a sign of unjust discrimination?

I don’t think so, nor do I think that the bishops intended for the faithful to support same sex marriage in any way. However, I do fear that the end result will be unjust discrimination directed against those who in conscience cannot and will not accept same sex marriage.

I don’t think refusing to recognize same sex marriage is a sign of unjust discrimination.
I don’t think declining to participate, or attend, a same sex marriage is a sign of unjust discrimination.
I think refusing to rent a hall, or services, for a same sex marriage is declining to participate, and does not equate to discrimination.

I think the unjust discrimination, as defined by the Church, would be to remove their dignity of life, as explained by the Church; the right to work, the right to housing, the right to healthcare, etc. We all know the Church encourages homosexuals to attend Church. The caveat is, as it is with all moral sins, to refrain from the Eucharist without a sincere confession and repentance. The Church is where all sinners go for correction. Is homosexuality against Church teaching? Yes, as all sins are against Church teaching. Some will argue, my sins are not as bad as their sins. There are none among us righteous. Christ warned, “We cannot see the splinter in another person’s eye, because of the beam in our own eye.”

To summarize, we are to hate the sin, and love the sinner. We can offer fraternal correction, but must realize that we to have our own sins to account for. If we judge another according to their sin, we should expect to be judged according to our own sins, as Christ said. It’s a thin line to judge an action, and not the intent of another person’s heart. This is why we are called to respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Christ calls us through His love for us. If we want to help others see that love, we have to respect, be compassionate, and be sensitive.

 

[JimG]

I don’t think refusing to recognize same sex marriage is a sign of unjust discrimination.
I don’t think declining to participate, or attend, a same sex marriage is a sign of unjust discrimination.
I think refusing to rent a hall, or services, for a same sex marriage is declining to participate, and does not equate to discrimination.

I think the unjust discrimination, as defined by the Church, would be to remove their dignity of life, as explained by the Church; the right to work, the right to housing, the right to healthcare, etc. We all know the Church encourages homosexuals to attend Church. The caveat is, as it is with all moral sins, to refrain from the Eucharist without a sincere confession and repentance. The Church is where all sinners go for correction. Is homosexuality against Church teaching? Yes, as all sins are against Church teaching. Some will argue, my sins are not as bad as their sins. There are none among us righteous. Christ warned, “We cannot see the splinter in another person’s eye, because of the beam in our own eye.”

To summarize, we are to hate the sin, and love the sinner. We can offer fraternal correction, but must realize that we to have our own sins to account for. If we judge another according to their sin, we should expect to be judged according to our own sins, as Christ said. It’s a thin line to judge an action, and not the intent of another person’s heart. This is why we are called to respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Christ calls us through His love for us. If we want to help others see that love, we have to respect, be compassionate, and be sensitive.

Then we are in agreement. My only concern is that the phrase regarding unjust discrimination will be used by some to promote public policies injurious to society, along with a concern that in the end, those unwilling to accept such policies imposed against their conscience will themselves be subject to unjust discrimination.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Then we are in agreement. My only concern is that the phrase regarding unjust discrimination will be used by some to promote public policies injurious to society, along with a concern that in the end, those unwilling to accept such policies imposed against their conscience will themselves be subject to unjust discrimination.

Society is governed by a secular government. I wouldn’t expect perfection. We, Catholics, already challenge government, in the legislation that allows abortion. Do we suffer persecution because of that? Yes, but we can have comfort that Christ is with us, and He said His would suffer persecution for His namesake. He also promised that He would be with His Church until the consummation of the world, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Knowing He said His would suffer persecution for His namesake, what did He teach us about those that would persecute us?

Mat 5:43 You have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thy enemy.
Mat 5:44 But I say to you, Love your enemies: do good to them that hate you: and pray for them that persecute and calumniate you:
Mat 5:45 That you may be the children of your Father who is in heaven, who maketh his sun to rise upon the good, and bad, and raineth upon the just and the unjust.
Mat 5:46 For if you love them that love you, what reward shall you have? do not even the publicans this?
Mat 5:47 And if you salute your brethren only, what do you more? do not also the heathens this?
Mat 5:48 Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect.

We trust in Him, not a secular government that rules over society.

 

[manualman]

Then we are in agreement. My only concern is that the phrase regarding unjust discrimination will be used by some to promote public policies injurious to society, along with a concern that in the end, those unwilling to accept such policies imposed against their conscience will themselves be subject to unjust discrimination.

Bingo. We live in a culture now that has developed a knee jerk reaction to the word “discrimination” in which adding the word “unjust” before it is repetitive and unnecessary. When people today read that word, they assume it is a negative. Few stop to realize that condemning “unjust discrimination” implicitly acknowledges that there is such a thing as legitimate discrimination.

We discriminate against felons by banning them from owning guns.
We discriminate against children by not allowing them to vote.
We discriminate against blind people by refusing them driver’s licenses.

These are all forms of warranted discrimination, not unjust discrimination.
When it comes to homosexual persons, unjust discrimination is that which denies the innate human dignity of the person. Acceptable discrimination (morally, if not legally anymore) is that which maintains the dignity of the person, but refuses to endorse, even implicitly, the immoral behavioral choices the person engages in.

It would be unjust discrimination to decide not to hire a homosexual man for a sales job due to his sexual preferences. It would be entirely justified to deny that man a job teaching at a catholic school. The nature of the jobs itself is different.

 

[Chan26]

I know of a couple like this. They are praying for divine intervention.
Their intercourse is properly ordered. Homosexual intercourse is not!

Oh, dear, shouldn’t they wait until God has decided to intervene. I mean aren’t they being a bit presumptuous?
chan26

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Oh, dear, shouldn’t they wait until God has decided to intervene. I mean aren’t they being a bit presumptuous?
chan26

I thought the poster was referring to a married couple with infertility issues, asking God to intervene???