I
InSearchofGrace
Guest
I did not state that priests have been forced to marry divorced people.
You missed the point I was making. But never mind.
One thing is certain, you care so much what Catholics think and believe. Why?
,
- Status
You missed the point I was making. But never mind.
One thing is certain, you care so much what Catholics think and believe. Why?
,
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
Oh boy…you really like to toss out “whoppers”.
No Catholic priest has ever been FORCED to marry two divorced people. Catholic priests have married couples where one or both parties were divorced…only after a proper annulment was secured.
O
on_the_hill
Guest
What is unconstitutional about laws that allow gay marriage?
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
The Constitution does not guarantee the right to enter into a same-sex marriage. Indeed, no provision of the Constitution speaks to the issue. In our system of government, ultimate sovereignty rests with the people, and the people have the right to control their own destiny. Any change on a question so fundamental should be made by the people through their elected officials NOT by activist judges.
B
Ben_Carmine
Guest
The Constitution actually protects people from having their rights removed by majority vote.
It’s for all Americans. Not just the majority.
R
rossum
Guest
Some closed, others severed their ties to the Church so they could continue their work. An adoption agency is not a church and does not perform religious services. In particular it does not marry people.
I do not disagree. I am using the example of marrying divorced couples to show that your fears are unfounded.
rossum
Z
Zoltan_Cobalt
Guest
That is very true, Ben.
But in this case judges are inventing “rights” that really don’t exist or have no Constitutional standing.
The “equal protection” framework of the Constitution provides a way of analyzing all equal protection cases. But that framework is not suited for use in evaluating the constitutionality of laws based on the traditional understanding of marriage, which fundamentally determine what marriage is.
The judges are trying to enshrine in the Constitution a particular understanding of marriage under which the sex of the partners makes no difference. The Constitution, however, does not dictate that choice. It leaves the choice to the people, acting through their elected representatives at both the federal and state levels.
F
Faithdancer
Guest
There is no such thing as “same sex marriage,” no matter how many states or countries legitimize something by that name. What is being “normalized” is a grotesque and unnatural parody of holy matrimony. I would happily go to jail before solemnizing such a farce, and any minister who does officiate a same-sex “marriage” is no longer a minister of God, he is a minister of Satan.
'Nuff said.
'Nuff said.
J
JimG
Guest
Yes. Same sex unions can never be marital. They can never be conjugal. They can never be remotely ordered to procreation. There is nothing marital about them. They are simply a parody of actual marriage, which requires sexual complementarity. (Something which has been recognized for several thousands of years until our own irrational era.)
I
InSearchofGrace
Guest
Also my belief. The CC is the big prize, though. Why else are gay activists pushing on all fronts in every direction possible? Especially when they have the government as their instrument. The law is getting more and more oppressive and further polarization seems inevitable.
Take a read of this recent development.
Government to Ordained Ministers: Celebrate Same-Sex Wedding or Go to Jail
R
rossum
Guest
So, where are all those priests forced to marry divorced couples?
The Hitching Post Wedding Chapel is a business, not a church. It is as much of a church as those Elvis Wedding Chapels in Las Vegas. It is a for-profit business, and closed on Sundays. As a business it has to obey the laws appropriate for businesses, not the law appropriate for churches.
rossum
J
Joe_5859
Guest
Right. This situation is not directly comparable to forcing churches to perform same-sex weddings.
However, religious freedom is still in play here. They are being forced to operate their business in a manner that runs counter to their religious convictions. I still find it scary that the government would attempt such coercion, even if their wedding “chapel” is not a church per se.
R
rossum
Guest
It is directly comparable. In both cases there is a difference between civil marriage and Catholic marriage. In one case over divorce and in the other about same sex marriage. In the first case the two different versions of marriage exist side by side. The state recognises marriages that the Church does not. The Church does not recognise some valid civil marriages. Neither side forces their version on the other. The same will happen with same sex mariage. Indeed, that is what is currently happening in Europe and in the US states where SSM is legal.
Where does it say that Christians must run a Wedding Chapel as part of their Christian beliefs. If you don’t like obeying the law, then find a different business to run. All business serving the public must serve the public. Would a strong anti-Catholic protestant businessman be allowed to put up a sign saying “No Catholics Served”? Do you think that should be allowed?
rossum
I
InSearchofGrace
Guest
Exactly.
Complicity or silence are the only two acceptable options for gay activists.
Just look at the CoE faces in the UK, forced into the corner, by its gay clergy,
Church of England gives up fight against gay marriage, and powerful and monied members like Barrie Drewitt Barker and his partner, homosexual couple in London demanding CoE wedding.
Barker: “I want to go into my church and marry my husband. The only way forward for us now is to make a challenge in the courts against the Church.”
Gay activists say with a straight face, Catholics need not worry.
When in fact, the malevolent miasma, sexual freedom trumping religious liberty, is spreading in Western countries including the U.S. Canadian Catholic schools are told to skip the teaching on the sinfulness of homosexual behavior!I rest my case.
News on the Idaho ministers being sued for declining to marry a gay couple is already a thread in World News on it. Betting rossum can’t resist depositing his .02 there.
,
- Status