I
InSearchofGrace
Guest
There are members in this forum who open threads suggesting that Catholics would want to establish a theocracy or would have religious principle of the Christian faith dictate to the rest that the institution of marriage and opposite sexed parenting not make room for same sex ‘marriage’ and parenting. How do we better explain it is the wrong conclusion to make?
I came across this blog by Frances Kelly posing what choice is better for Americans: sexual diversity or gender diversity in marriage? It is provocative, yes, but pales in comparison to what the pro-gay ‘marriage’ crowd is dishing. What do you think?
"Sex advice columnist Dan Savage demeans women when he says they sh** babies. Savage is lauded as a spokesman for the gay community and goes to the White House to celebrate LGBT pride.
Chick-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy honors women when he says “we are married to our first wives” and that he supports the Biblical definition of family. Social media (and certain politicians) go haywire.
Savage supports same-sex marriage. He values sexual diversity.
Cathy honors traditional marriage. He respects gender diversity.
When it comes to marriage, what will we choose: sexual diversity or gender diversity?
Pro-gender advocates believe gender-integration is crucial to marriage, the bedrock of culture. This allows children to grow up with both a mother and a father. They believe it makes more sense to base marriage law on gender, which is biological and immutable, rather than sexual orientation, which is fluid and subjective. (The Isabella Miller case highlights how relying on changeable sexual orientation for stability can be tragic for a child.)
In contrast, the born-this-way believers have elevated sexual orientation to such an extent that it has become more important than sexual gender. They claim the union of 2 men is equal to the marriage of 1 man and 1 woman. The fact that the men have same-sex attraction is more important than their gender which disqualifies them for marriage in 42 states. They want to eliminate the gender-diversity requirement in our marriage laws to accommodate the sexual diversity of the LGBT community. Anyone who disagrees with them is “anti-gay.”
Nowadays believing marriage should be gender-integrated causes a boycott. How did gender get such a bad rap?
America’s fear of alienating the 1.4% of the population who have same-sex attraction has led to this convoluted thinking that Catholic universities with same-sex dorms are sued, but promoting same-sex marriage means you’re enlightened?
No matter how hard we try, we can’t pretend forever that gender doesn’t matter. The singer Sir Elton John recently made headlines when he acknowledged that it will be “heartbreaking” when his son grows up and realizes he has no mummy. Despite this admission, Elton John and his male “spouse” are actively seeking to hire another surrogate mother. When it comes to marriage, Elton John values sexual diversity over gender diversity, despite the negative impact on his son.
What about America? What will we decide is more important to our future: sterile sex or procreation? What should public schools teach children: sex between men or sex between genders? What do we want the next generation to value more in marriage: gender-segregation or gender-integration?
…
"
I came across this blog by Frances Kelly posing what choice is better for Americans: sexual diversity or gender diversity in marriage? It is provocative, yes, but pales in comparison to what the pro-gay ‘marriage’ crowd is dishing. What do you think?
"Sex advice columnist Dan Savage demeans women when he says they sh** babies. Savage is lauded as a spokesman for the gay community and goes to the White House to celebrate LGBT pride.
Chick-fil-A CEO Dan Cathy honors women when he says “we are married to our first wives” and that he supports the Biblical definition of family. Social media (and certain politicians) go haywire.
Savage supports same-sex marriage. He values sexual diversity.
Cathy honors traditional marriage. He respects gender diversity.
When it comes to marriage, what will we choose: sexual diversity or gender diversity?
Pro-gender advocates believe gender-integration is crucial to marriage, the bedrock of culture. This allows children to grow up with both a mother and a father. They believe it makes more sense to base marriage law on gender, which is biological and immutable, rather than sexual orientation, which is fluid and subjective. (The Isabella Miller case highlights how relying on changeable sexual orientation for stability can be tragic for a child.)
In contrast, the born-this-way believers have elevated sexual orientation to such an extent that it has become more important than sexual gender. They claim the union of 2 men is equal to the marriage of 1 man and 1 woman. The fact that the men have same-sex attraction is more important than their gender which disqualifies them for marriage in 42 states. They want to eliminate the gender-diversity requirement in our marriage laws to accommodate the sexual diversity of the LGBT community. Anyone who disagrees with them is “anti-gay.”
Nowadays believing marriage should be gender-integrated causes a boycott. How did gender get such a bad rap?
America’s fear of alienating the 1.4% of the population who have same-sex attraction has led to this convoluted thinking that Catholic universities with same-sex dorms are sued, but promoting same-sex marriage means you’re enlightened?
No matter how hard we try, we can’t pretend forever that gender doesn’t matter. The singer Sir Elton John recently made headlines when he acknowledged that it will be “heartbreaking” when his son grows up and realizes he has no mummy. Despite this admission, Elton John and his male “spouse” are actively seeking to hire another surrogate mother. When it comes to marriage, Elton John values sexual diversity over gender diversity, despite the negative impact on his son.
What about America? What will we decide is more important to our future: sterile sex or procreation? What should public schools teach children: sex between men or sex between genders? What do we want the next generation to value more in marriage: gender-segregation or gender-integration?
…
"