Is the battle over same sex marriage over?

  • Thread starter Thread starter PoliSciProf
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The battle is over. My friend - a former catholic who joined the UCC - just attended a gay wedding where two former catholic priests married; they adopted a small vietnamese boy last year! Only in Massachusetts! One of the priests was dressed in “feminine” attire and “marital aids” were prominiently displayed at the cermony.
 
seandoe said:
The battle is over. My friend - a former catholic who joined the UCC - just attended a gay wedding where two former catholic priests married; they adopted a small vietnamese boy last year! Only in Massachusetts! One of the priests was dressed in “feminine” attire and “marital aids” were prominiently displayed at the cermony.
Click to expand...
Where’s the “weeping” smiley when you need it??? It just makes me so sad to see people who’s identity is so completely wrapped up in their sexuality, rather than in God where it belongs. What is that going to do to the poor child they adopted?😦
 
He_Man said:
^^ What he said.

Also, since the majority of the general populace is against same-sex marriage it stands to reason that the courts in CA simply hijacked the notion.
Click to expand...
By your argument, if the majority voted to banish Catholicism, it would be so.

By your argument, if the majority voted for racial segregation, it would be so.

Not much of an argument if you ask me.
 
LookAWayDixieLd said:
Not at all.
  1. Homosexuals comprise less than 3% of the population.
  2. Homosexuality is a self-extinguishing lifestyle.
Interesting how God’s design works huh?:cool:
Click to expand...
Actually, recent genetic research is showing that the female siblings of homosexuals, have some favoured genes in that they are able to produce more children than people without homosexuals in their families. So, the homosexual gene ( if there is one) would be passed on to future generations.

Interesting stuff…

You can google news it.

Of course, it’s the gay conspiracy at work again. :rolleyes:

I think you’ve confused your opinion with science.
 
Hmmmm some of the posters here are confused about our country’s political system. Well first of all, we are not a true democracy - if we were, everyone would vote on every issue. But we are not - we elect public officials to make decisions - that is where we get our say. Our founding fathers set it up this way because they knew that not everyone can be educated on every issue and so would not necessarily know what’s best for them. Which brings me to the whole public opinion thing - which gladly someone already mentioned. When desegregation came into play, by far most of the population was against it - but our nations leaders saw the whole picture and knew what was best far more than anyone else. And the funny thing is if you look back it looks just like the gay rights movement of today - people upset that they were being forced to live with and accept certain different people, and appalled by the “ramifications” that would take affect on their children. And a whole lot of those people were nice, Catholic, church-going families.
That being said, however, I am in no position to force people to change beliefs. But I think our old friend Herodotus said it best - that those who don’t study history are doomed to repeat it.
At the same time the church’s position on gay marriage has absolutely nothing to do with the political battle of legal marriage. After all, the state is not forcing churches to marry same-sex couples, so frankly I don’t get why you are so up in arms about it. I mean, why should you be able to prohibit someone from doing something if it doesn’t hurt you. To do so would go against one of the fundamental ideas of our country and human rights (a country which btw was founded on religious freedom).
 
seandoe said:
The battle is over. My friend - a former catholic who joined the UCC - just attended a gay wedding where two former catholic priests married; they adopted a small vietnamese boy last year! Only in Massachusetts! One of the priests was dressed in “feminine” attire and “marital aids” were prominiently displayed at the cermony.
Click to expand...
May God have mercy on their souls.
 
Deacon_Ed_B said:
May God have mercy on their souls.
Click to expand...
Doesn’t God have mercy on everyone’s soul?

Your post is written in such a manner that you are giving the impression that you are saying a prayer for these people.

However, on the other hand, your post also contains a tone that these people need special mercy, more mercy than most sinners.

Married homosexuals really don’t affect Roman Catholics.

The majority of Roman Catholics don’t attend weekly Mass, which is a grave sin and in some cases is a mortal sin.

Why not spend the same energy that is spent on homosexual sinners and put that energy into the hundreds of millions of Roman Catholics who don’t attend weekly Mass?
 
Such things weaken people’s ideas of marriage. As a result of the acceptance of divorce, some people get married with the idea of getting divorced if it doesn’t work out. I was upset to hear my son’s wife soon after they were married say casually that she would divorce him if it didn’t work out, though they had no problems then.
To speak of homosexual “marriage” as if it were equivalent to genuine marriage is to make marriage even more unimportant to many people. To undermine people’s committment in this way would be a serious problem.
 
onetimeposter said:
Doesn’t God have mercy on everyone’s soul?

Your post is written in such a manner that you are giving the impression that you are saying a prayer for these people.

However, on the other hand, your post also contains a tone that these people need special mercy, more mercy than most sinners.

Married homosexuals really don’t affect Roman Catholics.

The majority of Roman Catholics don’t attend weekly Mass, which is a grave sin and in some cases is a mortal sin.

Why not spend the same energy that is spent on homosexual sinners and put that energy into the hundreds of millions of Roman Catholics who don’t attend weekly Mass?
Click to expand...
You totally misunderstand what I was doing and saying. Yes, I was praying for them. These were two ex-priests getting married, with their “followers” knowing their background. Think of the scandal and error this conveys. Yes, I do pray that God may have mercy on their souls, and so should you.
Prayers & blessings
Deacon Ed B
 
kristie_m said:
ahhhh…hope springs eternal! 👍 Personally, I tend to agree with the person that commented on the overall apathy of the voters, and that scares me to no end. Because believe me, those in favor of SSM are going to be out IN FORCE. We need to have our voices heard…and not just on the forums!

BTW…what’s with all the CA politicians that label themselves Catholic and consistantly back sinful practices? UGH! Don’t get me started!!! :mad:
Click to expand...
Hope, indeed, springs eternal. However, my answer is the same. I’m not Catholic…but I believe God is sovereign…and He may allow this to happen. As people repress the knowledge of God…He gives them over to their strange lusts…and the apathetic (or the many non-gay people championing legal same-sexed marriages) are also repressing knowledge of God.

There are more of them than there is of us.

That doesn’t mean we don’t get out and vote our consciences. It’s not about winning or losing…lest we use ends to justify the means. We need to be less focussed on the results…and more focussed on obedience to God’s word. If we love Him, we will obey
His words…yet know this world is becoming exponentially stranger to us.
 
P.s., I’m Baptist…but Lisa4Catholics referred me…and I love her (in a filial and agape way). :hug1:
 
onetimeposter said:
Why not spend the same energy that is spent on homosexual sinners and put that energy into the hundreds of millions of Roman Catholics who don’t attend weekly Mass?
Click to expand...
Why don’t you mind your own business and lecturing others what to do with their time.
 
I think we’re losing the battle against the “marriages” taking place. I think the battle ground is now shifting to defending our right to not like it. Therapists who won’t counsel SS couples are being sued, and they’re losing. A photographer who wouldn’t do a SS ceremony was sued, and she lost. Soon, churches that won’t perform the ceremonies will be sued.

The buzz word is still “tolerance” but they won’t be happy with being “tolerated.”

Those who display anything short of beaming, enthusiastic acceptance of gay “marriage” will be viewed in the same light we now view people who don’t like to share drinking fountains with black people.
 
Aww isn’t anyone going to respond to my post 😦 Not to be vain, but I was hoping for a good debate 😃
 
peduzzi89 said:
Aww isn’t anyone going to respond to my post 😦 Not to be vain, but I was hoping for a good debate 😃
Click to expand...
I disagree with you, but you spoke so eloquently that I couldn’t manage to respond in a way that didn’t make me come off sounding like an idiot. 😃

I do have to say, though, that the prospect of someone as pro-abortion as one of our presidential candidates is, knowing what’s best for me when it comes to issues of morality is laughable, at best. (my it’s difficult to speak freely when you’re not supposed to name names on the politicians!!!) :rolleyes:
 
HOPEFUL_IN_UK said:
I think we’re losing the battle against the “marriages” taking place. I think the battle ground is now shifting to defending our right to not like it. Therapists who won’t counsel SS couples are being sued, and they’re losing. A photographer who wouldn’t do a SS ceremony was sued, and she lost. Soon, churches that won’t perform the ceremonies will be sued.

The buzz word is still “tolerance” but they won’t be happy with being “tolerated.”

Those who display anything short of beaming, enthusiastic acceptance of gay “marriage” will be viewed in the same light we now view people who don’t like to share drinking fountains with black people.
Click to expand...
I agree with you.
 
Well, Kristie, about the issue of abortion - that is a different battle. I am totally against abortion, but the point of political officials is not to define what is moral, but to protect your rights (one of which is the ability to define for yourself what is moral if you so choose).
 
I know how you feel about no one responding, since I have felt the same way myself. Actually, though, my earlier post, #28, was a response to some of the issues you raised, namely, how does same sex “marriage” matter to the public in general?
peduzzi89 said:
Aww isn’t anyone going to respond to my post 😦 Not to be vain, but I was hoping for a good debate 😃
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top