Law, Homosexuality, Sin

  • Thread starter Thread starter Flavius_Aetius
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Flavius_Aetius

Guest
I have a few questions and statements to make…

Using the United States of America as my example; why do we as Catholics/Chirstians try to impose a ‘one man one woman’ amendment? Their are people who do not follow our beliefs and yet I have to accept that Laws are allowed to be made to have a secular government pass a law that would keep rights away from a minority?

Don’t get me wrong; the last thing I’d want is to reduce the sanctity of Marriage.

For that matter why did we as Christians ever allow the government to use the sacred word of ‘Marriage’ for their own state accepted unions?! We should of struck the problem where it started and just made all ‘marriages’ by the State called something else… :mad:

I’m losing what it means to be a good Catholic because I hear some claims to just be a good example, and others to have to vocalize your belief no matter how much it causes others to despise you. So which is it? Are we suppose to tell everyone their own faults like a Pharisee or stay silently conserned about our own salvation and watch as 8/10 of the world goes to Hell. (Not statistical just a unsupported claim.)

Then theirs the inevitable Media sponsored ‘civil right’ movement that will give Homosexuals the right to ‘marry’ while Christians will be seen as the ‘roadblock’; creating even yet more praise toward the increasing Secularization of the world. Argh I hate secularism!

AND! Before I get a post about Catholics fighting against Abortion which is a sin and at the moment legal; it is still a subject that can be rationalized by even atheists (their are Pro-life Atheists) Fighting to keep Homosexual from ‘marrying’ by State however will always just be a battle held by Theists only and simply viewed as “Narrow-minded” Grah how many times that words been used to define any Christian with an pebble of Faith!

The fact that all these changes will be inevitable only raises my cynicism even more…
 
Flavius_Aetius said:
For that matter why did we as Christians ever allow the government to use the sacred word of ‘Marriage’ for their own state accepted unions?! We should of struck the problem where it started and just made all ‘marriages’ by the State called something else… :mad:
Click to expand...
Because at one time there more commonly held moral beliefs in U.S. society, and in other societies, which never imagined that marriage would be anything other than man/woman.
 
Flavius_Aetius said:
I have a few questions and statements to make…

Using the United States of America as my example; why do we as Catholics/Chirstians try to impose a ‘one man one woman’ amendment?
Click to expand...
This is not a Catholics/Chirstians imposed idea
Their are people who do not follow our beliefs and yet I have to accept that Laws are allowed to be made to have a secular government pass a law that would keep rights away from a minority?
Click to expand...
If you study the issue you will find there are no “rights” being “keep away”
Don’t get me wrong; the last thing I’d want is to reduce the sanctity of Marriage.
Click to expand...
For that matter why did we as Christians ever allow the government to use the sacred word of ‘Marriage’ for their own state accepted unions?! We should of struck the problem where it started and just made all ‘marriages’ by the State called something else… :mad:
Click to expand...
I’m losing what it means to be a good Catholic because I hear some claims to just be a good example, and others to have to vocalize your belief no matter how much it causes others to despise you. So which is it?
Click to expand...
It is not a catholic issue. Marriage predates all christianity. The catholic part is restricted to the responsibility to remain married.
Are we suppose to tell everyone their own faults like a Pharisee or stay silently conserned about our own salvation and watch as 8/10 of the world goes to Hell. (Not statistical just a unsupported claim.)
Click to expand...
Then theirs the inevitable Media sponsored ‘civil right’ movement that will give Homosexuals the right to ‘marry’ while Christians will be seen as the ‘roadblock’; creating even yet more praise toward the increasing Secularization of the world. Argh I hate secularism!
Click to expand...
AND! Before I get a post about Catholics fighting against Abortion which is a sin and at the moment legal; it is still a subject that can be rationalized by even atheists (their are Pro-life Atheists) Fighting to keep Homosexual from ‘marrying’ by State however will always just be a battle held by Theists only and simply viewed as “Narrow-minded” Grah how many times that words been used to define any Christian with an pebble of Faith!
Click to expand...
The fact that all these changes will be inevitable only raises my cynicism even more…
Click to expand...
Whether governments change the governments standards or not, people will not change. Heteros will marry and make children, SSAs cannot produce children it is impossible. SSAs can obtain children but not produce them. Call it as you will, let others call it what they want the facts do not change.
 
The thing is that marriage is not a thing of Divine law, Church las or even Civil law. Marriage is a thing that all humans are entitled to by Natural law. But this is obviously, between a man and a woman. The laws of nature demonstrate this, without even going onto a moral plane. Some cite hs activity in animals. Some animals do crazy things that are not even inline with other animals. But anyhow, animals are not a guideline to how humans should behave. Because if not, racism, canibalism, nudism, stealing, infanticide, public loitering, homicide, street fighting and noise pollution would be JUUUST GREAT!
 
michael_quinlan said:
Can’t we agree to disagree?
Click to expand...
Provided the disagreement is in an alternative to achieve a focused good. Otherwise it goes against the principles of fraternal correction. For the Christian any advice has a salvific nature. It is not an option simply to allow someone to have the option of erring.

Andy
 
Can love between 2 people of the same sex have any redeeming quality?
 
There are only 2 loves according to Catholic doctrine:
  1. Love of God to the point of forgeting oneself
  2. Love of oneself to the point of forgeting God
The love of another creature is only a channel of either of the two.

Obviously sinning is not loving God, so sinful relationships enter into #2.
 
I believe the Great Commandment is a proper balance of love directed to at least three parties if not more.
 
Corki said:
Agape love, yes. Philia love, yes. Eros love, no.
Click to expand...
Maybe then, our attention as a Catholic Community should give great attention to these forms, and very little attention to the last.
 
michael_quinlan said:
I believe the Great Commandment is a proper balance of love directed to at least three parties if not more.
Click to expand...
Parents, children, spouses, friends, etc it is not a problem to love. Control of ones sexual impulses is not an issue of love. The church teaches celibacy outside of marriage for all.
 
Marriage predates our modern sense of government and law. As the basic building block of society, its existence has been assumed in law since the beginning. As modern government formed and law began to achieve at least equal standing as political power, governments enshrined the institution of marriage with some legal protections because they recognized that civilization itself is dependent on the stability of the family. Without intact families, we are a mere one generation away from anarchy again.

In short, government has no real jurisdiction over marriages. They can’t legalize ‘gay marriage’ any more than they can repeal the law of gravity.
 
theistgal said:
Marriage is a sacrament - how is it “not a thing of Divine law or Church law”? :confused:
Click to expand...
Marriage is not divine because it is not generated as a direct act of god.

Church Law is used to recognize proper marriage but does not generate marriage.

Marriage is generated mutual by a man and woman and becomes a covenent, as a covenent with God it becomes a sacrament.

SSA can not enter the covenent and thus not achieve this form of sacrament

hope that helps
 
So if the man was 90% heterosexual and his wife was 95% heterosexual, they could feasibly form a marriage covenant. They aren’t perfectly 100% heterosexual. What do you think?
 
caoindealbhan said:
So if the man was 90% heterosexual and his wife was 95% heterosexual, they could feasibly form a marriage covenant. They aren’t perfectly 100% heterosexual. What do you think?
Click to expand...
I’m not sure what you mean by “perfectly heterosexual.” If you mean by that, attraction to others, while nevertheless limiting oneself in thought & practice to the heterosexual partner (spouse!), that should be perfect enough for God. Many dyed-in-the-wool heterosexuals strongly prefer the company of their own gender, & are more emotionally attached to them than to anyone of the opposite gender, including their spouses.

Perhaps I misunderstand the question.
 
michael_quinlan said:
Can love between 2 people of the same sex have any redeeming quality?
Click to expand...
Sure. But it’s not the love that’s wrong, but the intent and actions. Too bad we don’t distinguish between Agape and Eros in our society…but that’s what the other side wants, to erase the distinction.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top