Lawmakers urge Archbishop Salvatore not to attend traditional marriage rally

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jon_S_1
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jon_S_1

Guest
Lawmakers ask S.F. archbishop not to attend anti-gay marriage rally
latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-sf-archbishop-20140611-story.html

He surely needs our prayers to continue to stand up for truth.
In a letter Tuesday, 80 lawmakers and faith and community leaders – among them Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom and San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee – called on Cordileone to cancel his planned appearance at a National Organization for Marriage march and rally in Washington, D.C., on June 19.
Click to expand...
If he attends as scheduled, they noted, he will be “marching and sharing the podium” with individuals who “have repeatedly denigrated lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people.”
Click to expand...
The letter then quotes other event participants who have likened homosexuality to incest and bestiality.
Click to expand...
By standing alongside those participants and organizers, “you appear to be endorsing their troubling words and deeds, which directly contradict the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ pastoral teaching that ‘God does not love someone any less simply because he or she is homosexual. God’s love is always and everywhere offered to those who are open to receiving it,’” they wrote.
Click to expand...
 
If he doesn’t go now he will appear to be endorsing the troubling words and deeds of the children of the prince of this world who have asked him not to attend.
 
Hmm… sounds like the law makers are not distinguishing the GLBT issue with the same sex marriage issue. The Archbishop can simply offer his support for the dignity of the GLBT communty (as the church teaches) while distinguishing and outlining the church’s teaching on the sacrament of marriage…what;s the problem?

Trickster
 
I would not phrase it as “anti-gay marriage” since “gay” is anti-marriage. Rather, I would term it as a pro-marriage rally and leave it at that.
 
If he attends as scheduled, they noted, he will be “marching and sharing the podium” with individuals who “have repeatedly denigrated lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people.”
Click to expand...
The letter then quotes other event participants who have likened homosexuality to incest and bestiality.
Click to expand...
By standing alongside those participants and organizers, “you appear to be endorsing their troubling words and deeds, which directly contradict the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ pastoral teaching that ‘God does not love someone any less simply because he or she is homosexual. God’s love is always and everywhere offered to those who are open to receiving it,’” they wrote.
Click to expand...
Wow. I mean wow.

Did I misread that, or did the letter clearly imply that God’s love is NOT offered to people who commit incest or bestiality?

The letter seems to be seriously confused about the nature of sin. As such, it doesn’t oppose Catholic teaching – rather, it just doesn’t understand Catholic teaching at all.
 
Prodigal_Son said:
Wow. I mean wow.

Did I misread that, or did the letter clearly imply that God’s love is NOT offered to people who commit incest or bestiality?

The letter seems to be seriously confused about the nature of sin. As such, it doesn’t oppose Catholic teaching – rather, it just doesn’t understand Catholic teaching at all.
Click to expand...
Yes, they seek to equate love with “supporting whatever you want to do”. God lives them so they should be able to do whatever they want.

Ummm. That’s not love folks.
 
If he attends as scheduled, they noted, he will be “marching and sharing the podium” with individuals who “have repeatedly denigrated lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people.”
Click to expand...
The letter then quotes other event participants who have likened homosexuality to incest and bestiality.
Click to expand...
Whether the archbishop attends or not is his business and personal choice. What I think is most telling though is how lawmakers are not buying that there is a link between homosexuality and incest and bestiality. I think if I were against SS marriage I would distance myself from those particular arguments because they are blatantly wrong and are having unintended consequences among lawmakers.
 
frobert said:
Whether the archbishop attends or not is his business and personal choice. What I think is most telling though is how lawmakers are not buying that there is a link between homosexuality and incest and bestiality. I think if I were against SS marriage I would distance myself from those particular arguments because they are blatantly wrong and are having unintended consequences among lawmakers.
Click to expand...
Link between homosexuality and incest and beasiality? How so?

Trickster
 
trickster said:
Link between homosexuality and incest and beasiality? How so?

Trickster
Click to expand...
I don’t think link is the right word.

I think it is more that justifying beastiality, polygamy, incest, etc. can be done with the very same arguments homosexuals use to justify gay marriage.

Basically the argument is “what two consenting adults do in their bedroom is of no concern to anyone but them”
 
Jon_S said:
I don’t think link is the right word.

I think it is more that justifying beastiality, polygamy, incest, etc. can be done with the very same arguments homosexuals use to justify gay marriage.

Basically the argument is “what two consenting adults do in their bedroom is of no concern to anyone but them”
Click to expand...
Is there a same argument? After all, consent is impossible when it comes to animals, so bestiality is out. And if incest involves minors, then it too is out.
 
Coatimundi said:
Is there a same argument? After all, consent is impossible when it comes to animals, so bestiality is out. And if incest involves minors, then it too is out.
Click to expand...
But not all incest involves minors. What if someone wanted to marry their mother? Who are you to judge? Love is love, and they just want to be happy.
 
Well, they are right to be concerned if there are people who will be speaking in a way that contradicts Catholic teaching. However, asking him NOT to go is not the correct response. He SHOULD go and speak to the ACTUAL teachings in the CCC. These politicians, not surprisingly, completely missed the point.
 
I would be curious to know these individuals why the letter states have made anti-gay comments. Is this accurate or have they simply expressed opposition to same sex marriage.

If individuals have denigrated gay people I can understand the concern but I would like to know to what they are referring.
 
Coatimundi said:
Is there a same argument? After all, consent is impossible when it comes to animals, so bestiality is out. And if incest involves minors, then it too is out.
Click to expand...
I guess beastiality might be different but invest does not necessarily involve minors. Adult siblings can have sex. 🤷
 
I don’t know…the fact that they stated in a letter that he should not go is troubling to me. I don’t see how going to a rally suggests anything negative against the “gay” community. Are we not allowed to choose to attend something that we support or stand for? I would go to the rally. Does that imply I am somehow against gay people?

This is nothing but a veiled threat to try and silence someone, a shepherd and member of the clergy, all wrapped up in a nicely formatted letter. :rolleyes:
 
Here is Archbp. Cordileone’s response:

sfarchdiocese.org/media/media-releases/2014/AB%20letter%20final.pdf

Among other things, he says:

“The March for Marriage is not “anti-LGBT” (as some have described it); it is not anti-anyone or anti-anything. Rather, it is a pro-marriage March. The latter does not imply the former. Rather, it affirms the great good of bringing the two halves of humanity together so that a man and a woman may bond with each other and with any children who come from their union. This is precisely the vision promoted by Pope Francis, who recently said, “We must reaffirm the right of children to grow up in a family with a father and mother.” Rest assured that if the point of this event were to single out a group of individuals and target them for hatred, I most certainly would not be there.”
 
lutheran_farmer said:
Well, they are right to be concerned if there are people who will be speaking in a way that contradicts Catholic teaching. However, asking him NOT to go is not the correct response. He SHOULD go and speak to the ACTUAL teachings in the CCC. These politicians, not surprisingly, completely missed the point.
Click to expand...
Not only that, but I bet if this was the other way around …the arzobishop (or any religious person) asking the politician not to attend to something they would be screaming out of their lung s how he dares to say something like that…that is an attack on freedom of speech!

Oh and what about freedom of religion, isn’t lawmakers making that request to the arzobishop against freedom from religion…what about freedom from the state imposing religious views on a religious. Again if it would be the other way around the lawmakers would be screaming freedom of religion… Catholics want to control the government!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top