Interesting Quotes From Gay Marriage Supporters

  • Thread starter Thread starter Marc_Anthony
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
TracerBullet said:
I have a very good friend who developed cervical cancer when she was engaged to be married. The treatment included a complete hysterectomy. She can’t be “fixed” and had exactly zero percent chance of becoming pregnant. So there is absolutely no way she and her husband can procreate.

Logically, this means that they should not have been allowed to get married
Click to expand...
Who knows what God can do. He could miraculously heal her. I’m pretty sure that He will never let a man get pregnant though.
 
TracerBullet said:
I have a very good friend who developed cervical cancer when she was engaged to be married. The treatment included a complete hysterectomy. She can’t be “fixed” and had exactly zero percent chance of becoming pregnant. So there is absolutely no way she and her husband can procreate.

Logically, this means that they should not have been allowed to get married
Click to expand...
Actually, I believe this IS Catholic teaching. I might be mistaken though.

It sucks, but sometimes life sucks.
 
Allegra said:
This post makes no sense, but I’m glad you support traditional marriage. I’m confused. Can you explain how my post clarified that anyone was discriminated against?
Click to expand...
I’m going to start a new thread. I don’t want to get off topic.
 
mitex said:
I’m going to start a new thread. I don’t want to get off topic.
Click to expand...
Thank you 🙂

A good reminder that the original topic was more about dissecting the original quotes of the CFA dissenters.

This discussion is closely related and fine, but mitex is right to move out of thread if he feels the conversation is becoming too hyperspecific.
 
Marc_Anthony said:
Actually, I believe this IS Catholic teaching. I might be mistaken though.

It sucks, but sometimes life sucks.
Click to expand...
It would only be an impediment to marriage if the treatment rendered her totally unable to perform the marital act. I think the woman in this case would be free to marry, according to the Church teachings.
 
pete_29 said:
Who knows what God can do. He could miraculously heal her. I’m pretty sure that He will never let a man get pregnant though.
Click to expand...
And pigs could suddenly start flying over barnyards everywhere.

But I’m not gonna hold my breath for either of these things to occur
 
Corki said:
In such a case, the woman is free to marry. Sterility is not an impediment to marriage.
Click to expand...
Yet lack of the ability to biologically reproduce is being used as an argument against same gendered marriage.
Can you explain the rational for that?
 
Allegra said:
It would only be an impediment to marriage if the treatment rendered her totally unable to perform the marital act. I think the woman in this case would be free to marry, according to the Church teachings.
Click to expand...
Some years ago while working in the medical field I cared for a man in his 80 who was involved in an accident when he was in his late 20’s. If memory serves it took place in a lumber mill. The man’s genitals were severed completely off. Thus rendering him incapable of “performing the marital act. Should his marriage have been dissolved after the accident?
 
TracerBullet said:
Some years ago while working in the medical field I cared for a man in his 80 who was involved in an accident when he was in his late 20’s. If memory serves it took place in a lumber mill. The man’s genitals were severed completely off. Thus rendering him incapable of “performing the marital act. Should his marriage have been dissolved after the accident?
Click to expand...
Marriages can’t be dissolved. In the Church he probably wouldn’t have been allowed to get married though.
 
TracerBullet said:
Yet lack of the ability to biologically reproduce is being used as an argument against same gendered marriage.
Can you explain the rational for that?
Click to expand...
Sure. Men and women are supposed to have sex and an unfortunate event rendered one of them sterile.

Gay people can’t have any sort of procreative sex unless one day science comes up with a way to mutilate somebody enough that they get bizarre fake body parts functioning like male and female reproductive organs.

But like I said, from what I remember I don’t think an impotent person could get married. But I might be wrong 🤷
 
TracerBullet said:
Should his marriage have been dissolved after the accident?
Click to expand...
This is a curious comment coming from a Catholic. I assume that you are not well catechized in the faith. :sad_yes:

Marriage, according to your Church, Tracer, is a sacrament, and as such, cannot be “dissolved”.

Now, before you bring up annulments, I suggest you do some research first on what your Church proclaims about annulments lest you display some palaver that does not even resemble what your Church declares.
 
TracerBullet said:
Yet lack of the ability to biologically reproduce is being used as an argument against same gendered marriage.
Can you explain the rational for that?
Click to expand...
The Catholic “argument” against same-sex “marriage” is not that the union is sterile. The act itself is sterile, it is not ordered to procreation. There is a complementarity to human bodies. They naturally fit together - male and female - to create a union that is designed to bring new life into the world. A man and a woman can come together this way; a man and a man or a woman and a woman cannot.

It’s not a person-by-person comparison. It’s a group-by-group comparison. As a group, men and women are capable of reproducing by uniting sexually. As a group, same sex couples are not.

Sure, there are exceptions to the procreative ability of any individual male/female union. With same-sex unions, there is no exception - there is no procreative ability for any of them.
 
Corki said:
Sure, there are exceptions to the procreative ability of any individual male/female union. With same-sex unions, there is no exception - there is no procreative ability for any of them.
Click to expand...
What these pro-homosexual union advocates fail to recognize when they offer the “but you let infertile couples marry, so why not homosexual couples?” argument is this fact:

It is actually the rule, rather than the exception, that most male/female unions are infertile.

A woman’s fertile period occurs one day a month, with the ability to conceive measuring a brief time period before/after ovulation.

Thus, most of the time, when males/females engage in the marital act, it’s not going to result in a baby.

Nothing wrong with that, of course. That’s the Catholic position. Marital relations between a husband and wife are always objectively procreative, and, the majority of the time, subjectively infertile.

What makes homosexual sexual acts immoral is that it is never objectively procreative, and always subjectively infertile.
 
Corki said:
The Catholic “argument” against same-sex “marriage” is not that the union is sterile. The act itself is sterile, it is not ordered to procreation. There is a complementarity to human bodies. They naturally fit together - male and female - to create a union that is designed to bring new life into the world. A man and a woman can come together this way; a man and a man or a woman and a woman cannot.

It’s not a person-by-person comparison. It’s a group-by-group comparison. As a group, men and women are capable of reproducing by uniting sexually. As a group, same sex couples are not.

Sure, there are exceptions to the procreative ability of any individual male/female union. With same-sex unions, there is no exception - there is no procreative ability for any of them.
Click to expand...
You are engaging in special pleading. You want to have your cake and eat it to
 
TracerBullet said:
Yet lack of the ability to biologically reproduce is being used as an argument against same gendered marriage.
Can you explain the rational for that?
Click to expand...
Tracer,

Explain the rationale for a Catholic arguing for same gendered marriage.😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top