North Carolina voters ban gay marriage, civil unions

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pfaffenhoffen
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hi, Cjmclark,

Not quite.

Take a look at his tremendous effort in getting ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ removed as an issue. How the Uniform Code of Military Justice now has removed sodomy by consenting adults from the laws - and this was behavior that Gen George Washington punished wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=101

Our Military Chaplains now have a massive problem - notwithstanding their personal beliefs and those of their church - they are now required to officiate at the attempted ‘mrriage’ of homosexual couples. Many of these dedicated men have left the military rather then engage in sinful behavior by denying God’s Law.

So, please, do give our President the credit he is due - making another encumberance to those who claim to live by their conscience.

I am very proud of the people of North Carolina.

God bless
Of course he did. It just became politically expedient to do so, as Romney appears to be trying to paint himself as more conservative.

It is worth noting that despite early indicators of his “support” for gay marriage during his last campaign, Obama managed to do not a single thing in four years to help that particular cause.
 
You people are silly (and I mean it in the sense of frivolous and unserious, i.e., a silly mistake). Let’s play the triumphalism game and look beyond the next two or three decades.

Demography is destiny, after all. And the people who support gay marriage are not reproducing. They are leftists with a fertility rate of near zero. And it is near zero precisely because they are pro-abortion, pro-contraception, pro-homosex., etc. etc. They are aborting and contracepting and sodomizing themselves and one another into oblivion. Because evil is always its own undoing.

The kinds of orthodox Christians who turn out in droves to support anti-gay “marriage” measures have fertility rates through the roof, by contrast. You don’t even have to go to an SSPX or FSSP chapel to find a family of half a dozen kids or more. They are all over the place, in the more devout parts of the country. Again, I compare any number of my Catholic friends to any of my radical leftist acquaintances, with their soft spot for state-subsidized perversity, and the numbers are simply going the wrong way for you all. My devoutly Catholic friends are badly outnumbered, but they’re having 4, 5, 6 or more kids each. My far-more-numerous leftist friends have a total combined fertility of ZERO. Bagel. There isn’t a single child between the lot of them. Most of them will probably die without children given that they hate them and wouldn’t dream of detracting from their plans for getting a master’s in poetry and backpacking through Europe to have even one baby.

Granted, the leftist establishment is very good at seizing and converting Christians, first in public school, then in universities, then in PC-addled corporate and government work environments. That’s what they’re relying on to carry this legacy forward: the fact that they have gotten very good at indoctrinating other people’s kids, with their own complicity. But all these things are dependent on an endless stream of taxpayer money that is drying up as the economy continues to deflate and debt-based money meets its grisly and mathematically inevitable end. The elaborate framework built up which gave birth to this ludicrous movement approximately five minutes ago is *collapsing *and there is nothing that any of you have the power to do to arrest these trends.

Seriously, where is this magical long-term-future pro-gay “marriage” consensus going to come from? You all certainly aren’t going to birth it, considering you won’t make the sacrifices necessary to bear enough kids to carry your legacy forward. How are you going to corrupt our children, then, since that’s your only other option? Through the universities we’re not going to be going to once the debt bubble collapses and emphasis begins shifting again toward trades and away from womyn’s studies and underwater bean farming? Through the mainstream media no one listens to or believes in? Through spiritual osmosis or something?

Granted, the difference in fertility is going to take two, three, or four generations or more before it catches up. Our position is similar to that of the devout Christians in the early Roman empire, a tiny and (soon-to-be, in our case) persecuted minority. But guess what – 300 years later and those devout Christians were running the show, and the idols of the pagan gods lay smashed in the streets. And it happened because the Christians were the ones having kids while the Romans cannibalized their young and entertained every perverse lust that flitted across their frontal lobes. Because evil is always its own undoing.

It’s going to take a while, but it’s going to happen. It can’t not happen. Homosexuality-enthusiasts and their hangers-on in the collapsing sectors of Christendom (e.g., mainline Protestantism and heterodox Catholicism) simply aren’t reproducing and for that reason, your beliefs come with an expiration date. How long can institutional support for this sort of meritless nonsense last when its committed enemies are outbreeding its supporters by a ratio of like 5:1? Or 10:1? A few generations, maybe?

The Romans had on their side the fact that their leaders had steel in their guts and were willing to try to genocide the Christians out of existence. I have no doubt you guys will try (you have before, after all), but you’re not worthy opponents of us. There isn’t a Marcus Aurelius among you. I doubt there’s even a Stalin; whatever else is true of liberalism, it’s not good at producing alpha males. So you’ll bring out the knives and bear your fangs and we will go singing to our martyrdoms with joyous hearts by the hundreds and we will still outlast you. We’ve done it before, against greater odds and far more dangerous people than you misfits. And if you don’t, your end will just come that much quicker. And when it does human nature will reassert itself and your little experiments in gnosticism will end, and future generations (none of which will be descended from you, natch) will detest you for your pride and indecency. And gay “marriage” and every other non sequitur you invent in the meantime will slide down the rat hole like the moral and historical anomaly it is. Because evil is always its own undoing.
This is all quite adorable, but not the least bit compelling. You’re clinging to mountain’s worth of wishful thinking and false assumptions. In a way, I’m happy to see it - victory is always easier when your opposition is content to sit back and claim it well in advance.
 
Hi, ASimon,

Your post seemed rather dismissive - is this what you intended?

God bless
This is all quite adorable, but not the least bit compelling. You’re clinging to mountain’s worth of wishful thinking and false assumptions. In a way, I’m happy to see it - victory is always easier when your opposition is content to sit back and claim it well in advance.
 
Why not? You’ve conceded that gay marriage has a net neutral effect on society (I would say the effect is net-positive, but nevermind that). So, in your view, gay marriage wouldn’t hurt anything, even if it didn’t help. But gays want it, and they have a legitimate reason to want it. And by your own admission, it wouldn’t hurt society if they had it. So why not?
It would hurt gay people themselves…yeah I’ll say that again. Two gay people getting married would be harmful to both of them. It’s a mortal sin, which if not repented of, could damn their souls to Hell. Has anyone here considered the argument that perhaps Catholics actually care for gay men and women? We do. It’s just that we see them walking toward a cliff with their sinful choices and are trying to keep them from falling off.

It’s not just gay marriage that’s a problem. Two men having sex is sinful, period…an invalid marriage doesn’t change that fact at all. The only thing it does is pretend to legitimize an act that, by its very nature, is harmful to the souls of those involved. But isn’t that what our society is all about? Being politically correct so we don’t hurt each other’s feelings?

I don’t expect ASimon to agree with what I’ve said here…but professed Catholics on this thread who don’t agree with the Church’s teaching on this (or any other issue) need to think long and hard about what Christ would say to all this political correctness.

Matthew chapter 10 has some powerful hints:

Whoever does not receive you, nor heed your words, as you go out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet. Truly I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city. verses 14-15

Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; and children will rise up against parents and cause them to be put to death. You will be hated by all because of My name, but it is the one who has endured to the end who will be saved. verses 21-22

Therefore everyone who confesses Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven. Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it. verses 32-29
 
Hi, ASimon,

Your post seemed rather dismissive - is this what you intended?

God bless
Absolutely. Read the post it’s in response to, and you’ll see why. I’m certainly not going to go point-for-point in debunking it. I’ll be here all night.
 
It would hurt gay people themselves…yeah I’ll say that again. Two gay people getting married would be harmful to both of them. It’s a mortal sin, which if not repented of, could damn their souls to Hell. Has anyone here considered the argument that perhaps Catholics actually care for gay men and women? We do. It’s just that we see them walking toward a cliff with their sinful choices and are trying to keep them from falling off.

It’s not just gay marriage that’s a problem. Two men having sex is sinful, period…an invalid marriage doesn’t change that fact at all. The only thing it does is pretend to legitimize an act that, by its very nature, is harmful to the souls of those involved. But isn’t that what our society is all about? Being politically correct so we don’t hurt each other’s feelings?

I don’t expect ASimon to agree with what I’ve said here…but professed Catholics on this thread who don’t agree with the Church’s teaching on this (or any other issue) need to think long and hard about what Christ would say to all this political correctness.

Matthew chapter 10 has some powerful hints:

Whoever does not receive you, nor heed your words, as you go out of that house or that city, shake the dust off your feet. Truly I say to you, it will be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city. verses 14-15

Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; and children will rise up against parents and cause them to be put to death. You will be hated by all because of My name, but it is the one who has endured to the end who will be saved. verses 21-22

Therefore everyone who confesses Me before men, I will also confess him before My Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies Me before men, I will also deny him before My Father who is in heaven. Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household. He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me; and he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who has found his life will lose it, and he who has lost his life for My sake will find it. verses 32-29

This is all very much beside the point. Yes, I’m aware that your faith regards homosexuality as sinful. But I’m equally aware that your faith’s views on sin have no bearing on the legality of gay marriage. Bringing it up simply muddies the waters unnecessarily.
 
This is all very much beside the point. Yes, I’m aware that your faith regards homosexuality as sinful. But I’m equally aware that your faith’s views on sin have no bearing on the legality of gay marriage. Bringing it up simply muddies the waters unnecessarily.
Actually, when Catholics vote their Faith (as they obviously did in this case), then our Faith determines the legality (or in this case illegality) of “gay marriage”. Exactly as it should be. So, no…it’s not beside the point. The point is that in a rare moment of grace, the voters have spoken in accord with the Catholic Church and God’s will has won the day. 👍
 
Very true. Homosexuality was not address in Loving v Virginia.

However, you are saying that there is no law that says a gay person can’t marry someone of the opposite sex. Although this is true, at the time of Loving v Virginia there was no law stating a black person couldn’t marry, or a white person couldn’t marry. They just couldn’t marry each other (marry a race other than their own).

I think what people are saying is this situation seems very similar, just replacing race with gender.
Yes there was a law it was called the Racial Integrity Act of 1924. This explictily prohibited whites form marryng blacks
 
Because incest is currently illegal, so that law would need to be changed first. Homosexual relations between non-related adults are not illegal.

rossum
and gays can marry according to crrent marriage laws. being gay doesnt exclude them
 
Hi, NonServiam,

Don’t stray too far from objective reality.

Males and females are the only ones in the Animal Kingdom that can reproduce - two males or two females produce no offspring. This fact does not require a belief in God - just a belief in the obvious.

Homosexual behavior does not produce off-spring. If this were a wide-spread activity, eventually there would be no humans. Period. Now, THAT is the law - ignore it at your own peril.

God bless
People are perfectly allowed to vote in according with their consciences, but the law is not allowed to enshrine the doctrines of a specific religion.

If you want to believe that marriage is some sort of mystical institution created by your god and is just for heterosexuals, then by all means believe that and belong to a church that teaches that and only recognizes heterosexual marriage.

But keep your beliefs out of the law that applies to all people in the country, including those who don’t share your beliefs.

Right, those are your doctrinally-motivated beliefs. You’re perfectly free to hold them, but you’re not free to enshrine them in the law that applies to people who don’t share those presuppositions.
 
The pursuit of happiness is a right in the US Constitution. Are heterosexual marriages all as miserable as you suggest? I wonder why they are so popular?

rossum
again the PURSUIT not the attainment. where did i suggest they were miserable? i have been happily married for 25 yrs
 
But one potential avenue of happiness is shut off for gays, but not shut off for heterosexuals. The law is the same, but its effect is to block off a potential route to a constitutional right.

rossum
you continue to confuse “pursuit” of happiness with attainment. the govt is not required to make you or anyone happy. this is what you either refuse to or cant accept
 
Hi, ASimon,

The purpose of CAF is dialogue - not terse put-downs.

Try again … like the thread is intended to encourage.

God bless
Absolutely. Read the post it’s in response to, and you’ll see why. I’m certainly not going to go point-for-point in debunking it. I’ll be here all night.
 
My far-more-numerous leftist friends have a total combined fertility of ZERO. Bagel. There isn’t a single child between the lot of them.
Your eyes must have mislead you. I mean, this IS a joke right? Not a single offspring - not even an adopted Lily?
Most of them will probably die without children given that they hate them and wouldn’t dream of detracting from their plans for getting a master’s in poetry and backpacking through Europe to have even one baby.
All too true. Add in running marathons or finishing triathlons.
 
Although this would be too unpopular to post on facebook :rolleyes: I think this is the right decision.

I don’t hate gay people nor do I condone gay-bashing.

Christ loves us all, but I stand firm on what is in His Word.
Ah, but you also want to insist everyone else does. Therein lies the true issue.
 
The Catholic Church has been quite clear…
Everyone is not Catholic. Or Christian. Some who are Christian, disagree. The whole world is not required to be Catholic. All Catholics still get to have all we profess: Sacramental marriage, insistence on chastity for those outside of Sacramental marriage.

Impinging on freedom, is not the Catholic Church’s teaching.
 
Two men having sex is sinful, period…
You know what Jesus called the devil? Not “the thief.” Not “the fornicator.” He called him THE LIAR. Now, here is this sin so terrible, Jesus uses it to name the ultimate source of evil.

The day you start passing around a petition in your state to make lying, any kind of lying, a criminal offense, is when I’ll give your position serious consideration.

The objections are religious. We don’t foist our beliefs onto others because we don’t want theirs foisted off on us. We want the right to our Sacraments, including marriage. We want the Church to insist on a year’s worth of notice for a marriage, to require pre-marriage counselling, to not recognize civil divorce as valid.

We are free to practice our beliefs because we allow freedom to others. Start denying that freedom and then, when the government impinges on us, we will have no right whatsoever to complain.
 
Marriage is a unique and very particular thing. For the sake of society …for children…Marriage must be protected and preserved. It is not simply an issue for those who are Christian or religious even.

It it is a wonderful event that NC has seen this! 🙂
 
Hi, NonServiam,

Don’t stray too far from objective reality.

Males and females are the only ones in the Animal Kingdom that can reproduce - two males or two females produce no offspring.

God bless
1st: we are, by the definition of the Church, not lower animals. Two, gender is pretty loosely controlled in a lot of animals. There’s a type of fish, probably more than one, that has a single male and a group of females that he fertilizes and they lay all the eggs. (Or maybe give live birth - but I digress.) When the male dies, the largest female turns into a male. This is true with certain amphibians, also. Seems like in God’s creation, there’s room for all kinds of reproduction.

I know a gay couple that has adopted two unwanted children.

How many have you adopted? Or anyone fighting for whatever they want to stay comfortable for themselves. Staying comfortable is how we got all these kids without parents. Think they have any chance of being catholic when they grow up?

If we hadn’t fallen so short of our own ideals as Christians, none of this would be an issue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top