Now that gay marriage is a decided issue in the USA, can the Catholic Church go back to preaching the Gospel now?

[CaliLobo]

1. The way the Church has dealt with the gay community needs improvement. In too many cases, the Church has not been clear that love and acceptance of individuals does not equal tolerance of their behavior.
2. It is not biologically “normal” to be homosexual. Humans are heterosexual by nature as a species. That deviations from the norm exist might be “natural” but that doesn’t make them normal.
3. This is one of my biggest pet peeves. Extending marriage rights to same-sex couples affects many people in many ways. You may think that the negative effect is “worth it” to achieve some perceived equality, but it is intellectually dishonest to say that there is no effect.
4. What does? Legalized same sex “marriage” ensures that more children will grow up in disfunctional homes.
5. Protected from what? The only protection is protection from a portion of estate tax that I know of. Any other protection of the “spouse” needs to be taken care of with a will and/or joint ownership.
6. So? Are you saying that depravity is ok as long as it is “long-lasting”?
7. That is not the nature of law. All laws legislate morality. Laws against rape, child marriage, tax evasion and slandar are all based on moral principles.
8. Non sequitor. Sharia is a body of law. Individual laws bases on moral principles, like most of the laws we have already, do not lend precedent to replacing a body of existing laws with Sharia.
9. Of course not. But it is obligated to set moral boundries and to hold its citizens accountable. Without that, we would be living in chaos.
10. See my response to point #1. Catholics, in many cases, have been confused about how to adhere to Gospel teachings while not compromising on morality. Protestant ministers have been more clear on those points.
11. The Church is always chaning but she won’t abandon core teaching.

1. The best way to change people’s behavior is not to legislate against it, but to preach the Gospel. But as far as secular individual rights go, gays deserve equal treatment.
2. Yes it is normal. Homosexuality is found in 400 species.
3. How does it affect you as a heterosexual? It does not.
4. Some gay couples adopt children and have very functional, loving homes.
5. You are in denial of reality. Look up how many rights are still being denied unless we extend marriage rights to gays.
6. Irrelevant for a secular government.
7. It’s not based on morality; it’s based on a desire to provide restitution to victims of crime.
8. Legislating based on morality will definitely create precedent that a Muslim can use to justify sharia.
9. Once again, secular government should not legislate based on morals.
10. Yes, I agree.
11. What is the origin of the teaching that we must legislate against gay marriage rights? It’s not found in the Bible. I’ve repeatedly asked CAF where is the Bible verse that teaches we must oppose gay marriage rights politically, and I’ve gotten nothing. Therefore, though we cannot have gay sex personally, our political response to the problem is wide open. So we can tell people to go and sin no more, but it does not follow that we HAVE to oppose their secular, legal, human rights.

 

[Michael57]

I am sorry, but I think the assumptions of the OP are so very wrong, and on so many levels.

There are plenty of resources on the teaching of the Church about the issue of homosexuality and gay marriage. It hasn’t changed in 2,000 years. Try “scripture catholic”, look at the CAF tracts, look at the CCC.

 

[SMA_12]

pastormacsponderings.wordpress.com/2013/06/27/pondering-my-reactions-to-scotus-rulings-on-gay-marriage/

Now that gay marriage is almost fully decided in the USA, can the Catholic Church now stop attempting to meddle politically in this issue?

Can Catholics now realize that:

1. The way Catholics have dealt with the gay community has been incorrect, hateful, and bigoted, and God is telling us to rethink how we engage with gays,
2. Though Christians should not be gay, it is still biologically normal to be gay and impossible to convert one out of being gay (Exodus Int’l shutdown).
3. Extending marriage rights to gays does not affect straight people,
4. It ensures that the children of gays are legally and equally protected,
5. It ensures that surviving gay spouses are equally protected,
6. Gays are indeed capable of lasting, committed relationships, and straights are capable of swinging and depravity
7. It is futile to legislate morality,
8. If we legislate morality it leads to bad precedent and Muslims demanding sharia in the USA.
9. A secular government is not obligated to follow the Bible,
10. Ironically, although Protestant churches allow for one to vote his conscience, Protestants are more likely to oppose gay rights than Catholics. Could it be because Protestant churches actually preach the Gospel and teach the Bible to members of all ages? Could it be because Protestant churches don’t push political views down one’s throats?
11. The Church needs to change to survive another generation, and convert modern people?

Can the Catholics now give up this political fight, now that the law is decided (much like no-fault divorce laws have been decided)?

Can we go back to preaching the Gospel now? Isn’t Gospel preaching more important than politics?

Here is an excerpt from the above article that may give us clues on what to do from now on:

I hope we realize that the Rainbow Rulings are God’s call for Christians to rethink how we engage with gays.

We never stopped preaching the Gospel. We preach the WHOLE thing, we don’t leave out the parts that might make society “uncomfortable”, such as the immorality of gay marriage.

If I am a Christian, why on earth would I just sit back and do nothing ( or only preach the “non-offensive” parts of the Gospel) as others are making decisions that are putting their souls in jeopardy?

Please do not come on to a Catholic site, and proceed to call the CC bigoted. Show some respect.

 

[CaliLobo]

…] otherwise your assertions are just your own personal ideas. I would however want to show you some of the most ludicrous aspects of your post.

1. The Church has always taught that “there is neither man nor woman, but all are one in Christ”. She has taught that all discrimination is to be avoided towards homosexuals…The Church condemns all lust and practices that desecrate sexuality, not the sexual orientation. Same-sex sex is as condemned as masturbation or heterosexual marital sex closed to procreation, for instance.
2. That is anti-scientifical nonsense. APA writes that sexual orientation should be considered fluid, just to mention an example… What is written is that all sexual act closed to procreation is an offense to God.
3. Nonsense. When matrimony is redefined from what God intends (the lifelong union between one man and one woman, where sexual intercourse - marital embrace - is practiced for procreative and unitive purposes) this strikes to the core of society itself. Especially when adoption is being considered.
4. Explain who are the children of gays, and if they are by adoption, what happened to their right to have a mother and a father, as they were born from a mother and a father.
5. Factually inaccurate.

• A 2001 National Center for Health Statistics study on marriage and divorce statistics reported that 66 percent of first marriages last ten years or longer, with fifty percent of these lasting twenty years or longer. A 2002 U.S. Census Bureau study reported similar results. The 2003-2004 Gay/Lesbian Consumer Online Census surveyed the lifestyles of 7,862 homosexuals. Of those involved in a “current relationship,” only 15 percent describe their current relationship as having lasted twelve years or longer.
• In The Sexual Organization of the City, University of Chicago sociologist Edward Laumann argues that “typical gay city inhabitants spend most of their adult lives in ‘transactional’ relationships, or short-term commitments of less than six months.”
• In his study of male homosexuality in Western Sexuality: Practice and Precept in Past and Present Times, Pollak found that “few homosexual relationships last longer than two years, with many men reporting hundreds of lifetime partners.”
• In Male and Female Homosexuality, Saghir and Robins found that the average male homosexual live-in relationship lasts between two and three years.

1. Prostitution and pederasty were quite common and legal in quite advanced civilizations, until the Church fought for moral legislation to be implemented…
2. Or to good precedents, as I mentioned above.
3. A secular government is obliged to give the best and promote good. It can be shown that the orthodox apostolic teaching on morals as kept by the Catholic Church (and distorted by other denominations) is through reason alone the best that can be promoted. If you do not believe my words, read Thomas Aquinas…
4. Probably not, since “Protestant” churches usually teach whatever interpretation of the Bible they came up with and push down their faithful’s throats some quire anti-scriptural post-XVI-century principles such as “sola fide” and “sola scriptura”.
5. The Church has 1.2 billion faithful and growing, and is found in all the nations…

1. Yes, so why talk about the speck in their eye when Catholics (and Protestants) have planks in their own eyes when it comes to sexual sin? Should we make it illegal to masturbate? Should we ban all porn and condoms and pills?
2. Gays can procreate through adoption. And if the APA says sexuality is fluid, that means homosexuality is normal!
3. In all countries and states where marriage rights are extended to gays, none of the negative consequences about breakdown of family and society have occurred. Quit the fearmongering.
4. There is no right to have a mother and father. One cannot choose his family.
5. I will bet a large sum that the same findings can apply to straights, regarding length of relationships. (My last gf was only a month!)
6. Now there are movements to legalize prostitution, since that too is between consenting adults. As a criminal lawyer, I can tell you that juries don’t give a rat’s tail about prostitution cases.
7. If you want to risk the advent of sharia in the USA, go ahead.
8. I don’t think the oppression promulgated by Catholics in Europe and to Native Americans is what Aquinas had in mind.
9. That’s a good point. But at least Protestants use the Bible to justify their teachings. Where does the Catholic interpretation come from?
10. The CC is clearly declining in Europe. The only reason it is barely growing in America is due to Hispanic immigration. Hispanic Americans are converting to Protestantism (see Time, April 2013). nation.time.com/2013/04/04/the-rise-of-evangelicos/
    
    http://swampland.time.com/2013/03/01/us-hispanics-are-becoming-less-catholic/

“Gallup also found that Hispanic Protestants are far more religious than both their Catholic and non-Latino church brothers and sisters. Nearly two-thirds of Protestant Hispanics say they are “very religious.” Just 43% of Catholic Hispanics identify that strongly, a few points higher that the national average of 40% for all religious Americans. That gap is consistent across age groups.”

 

[CaliLobo]

We never stopped preaching the Gospel. We preach the WHOLE thing, we don’t leave out the parts that might make society “uncomfortable”, such as the immorality of gay marriage.

If I am a Christian, why on earth would I just sit back and do nothing ( or only preach the “non-offensive” parts of the Gospel) as others are making decisions that are putting their souls in jeopardy?

Please do not come on to a Catholic site, and proceed to call the CC bigoted. Show some respect.

I have repeatedly asked CAF for the Biblical justification for denying gays the political, legal, secular, human right to marry. I have gotten nothing.

Which means that the Christian political response to this problem is open to interpretation and change.

 

[StudentMI]

1. Gays can procreate through adoption.

That’s a fairly absurd comment.

1. There is no right to have a mother and father. One cannot choose his family.

Read Catholic writings on the subject. There is indeed such a right.

1. That’s a good point. But at least Protestants use the Bible to justify their teachings. Where does the Catholic interpretation come from?

Seriously?

1. The CC is clearly declining in Europe. The only reason it is barely growing in America is due to Hispanic immigration. Hispanic Americans are converting to Protestantism (see Time, April 2013). nation.time.com/2013/04/04/the-rise-of-evangelicos/
   
   http://swampland.time.com/2013/03/01/us-hispanics-are-becoming-less-catholic/

All this talk of “most people think this or that” amounts to an argumentum ad populum. As an economist once said, “I may be alone, but I am right.”

 

[RileyG]

Gays can ‘reproduce’ through adoption? (??) huh?

 

[kathyhumanist]

It is impossible for the Catholic Church to recognize a gay “marriage” because marriage between a man and woman was ordained by God and the Church has no authority to change what God has decreed. What part of that do you not understand, CaliLobo? God’s laws are immutable. No human being can undo them.

Or do you honestly think that man has the power to undo what God has decreed? Do you think God was wrong?

It appears that many people are arrogant enough to believe they know better than their Creator, and they have the right to declare that God was in error when he created male and female and instituted marriage between a man and a woman.

It is unequivocable in the Sacred Scriptures that homosexual relations are an abomination to the Lord and are condemned. It is plainly stated. That does not mean that the people themselves are an abomination, but homosexual sex is. Along with all sex outside of the bonds of matrimony. Do you think God changed His mind and now approves of it?

No, the Church will never give in on this. It cannot, and remain the true Church and be true to God.

It seems that you, and many other Catholics/Christians just don’t realize that what YOU believe God does or has done, or believes or teaches or says, …is just your belief! It is NOT fact in any way. Therefore, what people of any other religion, or atheists believe, is just as valid as what ALL Christians believe…Your point of view is just one BELIEF, and no more valid or fact than any other beliefs.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

pastormacsponderings.wordpress.com/2013/06/27/pondering-my-reactions-to-scotus-rulings-on-gay-marriage/can the Catholic Church now stop attempting to meddle politically in this issue?

Paul VI gives the best answer to this…

“The teaching Church does not invent her doctrines; she is a witness, a custodian, an interpreter, a transmitter. As regards the truth of the Christian message, she can be called conservative, uncompromising. To those who would urge her to make her faith easier, more in keeping with the tastes of the changing mentality of the times, she answers with the apostles, we cannot do so." (Paul VI, General Audience, 19 Jan 1972)

 

[revert_jen]

Should we make it illegal to masturbate?

No, we just shouldn’t let people “marry” themselves.

-Jen

 

[Tantum_ergo]

pastormacsponderings.wordpress.com/2013/06/27/pondering-my-reactions-to-scotus-rulings-on-gay-marriage/

Now that gay marriage is almost fully decided in the USA, can the Catholic Church now stop attempting to meddle politically in this issue? The Catholic Church (and we Catholics) aren’t making this a political issue, you are. It isn’t a political issue at all. It’s a question of moral truth.

1. So GOD (who has some pretty powerful things to say about gay ACTIONS, is incorrect, hateful, and bigoted because He has taught that homosexual actions are wrong, and marriage (see Christ’s OWN WORDS) is between one man and one woman, and not ‘same-sex’, and now YOU say He’s changed His mind? ?
2. It is gay ACTIONS which are morally wrong. It is equally morally wrong for a STRAIGHT person (and it’s all people not simply Christians) to engage in sex outside of marriage.
3. You really think that? Condoning a moral wrong for one group doesn’t have an affect on others even if they aren’t ‘affected’ personally? Wow.
4. You have GOT to be kidding. Any child of a gay person is either adopted or conceived outside the sexual act between the two gay people. . .and children of STRAIGHT people who are conceived outside the sexual act of the two straight people, or adopted, have rights by virtue of being born. There is no difference now, nor has there EVER, been, regarding PROTECTION of ‘the children of gays’. Way to make a strawman.
5. Protected for what? You mean that a man or woman cannot ensure MONEY or property to a person to whom he/she is not married? News to ME!
6. and that has to do with marriage how? Oh wait, your redefinition of marriage seems to be 'it’s only for LOVE and since straights cheat on their spouses as much as they remain faithful, gays should have the ‘choice’ too. it’s not about what marriage is ‘supposed’ to be, it’s about a faux ‘equality’ based on emotional blackmail.
7. Right. So you’re okay with never charging anybody with murder. After all, the issue of murder is a MORAL one, isn’t it?
8. . See above.
9. Ah, so now you’re acknowledging that the Bible has recorded God’s teachings and thus demonstrates God’s moral authority. But that a ‘secular government’ doesn’t have to enforce moral authority. Therefore, YOU want total anarchy.
10. Could it be that you’re simply trying to present your OPINION as fact (which it is not???
11. Make no mistake, sugar, the Church will outlast this generation and then some.

Can the Catholics now give up this political fight, now that the law is decided (much like no-fault divorce laws have been decided)? Again, it is NOT a political fight. You can call it that, but you’re wrong.

Can we go back to preaching the Gospel now? We never stopped and we don’t intend to. Isn’t Gospel preaching more important than politics?I T IS NOT A POLITICAL ISSUE NO MATTER HOW OFTEN YOU TRY TO MAKE IT ONE.

Here is an excerpt from the above article that may give us clues on what to do from now on:

I hope we realize that the Rainbow Rulings are God’s call for Christians to rethink how we engage with gays.

I personally trust the Holy Spirit instead. He is timeless and not concerned with being ‘relevant’ or ‘contemporary’ or ‘politically enlightened’ etc.

 

[SMA_12]

I have repeatedly asked CAF for the Biblical justification for denying gays the political, legal, secular, human right to marry. I have gotten nothing.

Which means that the Christian political response to this problem is open to interpretation and change.

http://chirho.me/memes/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/250617_158293930987024_1619207592_n.jpg

SOULS are at stake!

 

[livingwordunity]

1. It is futile to legislate morality

It is what the state does, we cannot rob, steal, murder, rape, abuse, kidnap…You get the idea. The jails are full of people who broke the morals of our society. You really haven’t thought that through but rather soaked in what TV tells you. Do you realize how much TV and the media have influenced your thinking? You have to step out of the matrix to see it.

 

[Linusthe2nd]

pastormacsponderings.wordpress.com/2013/06/27/pondering-my-reactions-to-scotus-rulings-on-gay-marriage/

Now that gay marriage is almost fully decided in the USA, can the Catholic Church now stop attempting to meddle politically in this issue?

Can Catholics now realize that:

1. The way Catholics have dealt with the gay community has been incorrect, hateful, and bigoted, and God is telling us to rethink how we engage with gays,
2. Though Christians should not be gay, it is still biologically normal to be gay and impossible to convert one out of being gay (Exodus Int’l shutdown).
3. Extending marriage rights to gays does not affect straight people,
4. It ensures that the children of gays are legally and equally protected,
5. It ensures that surviving gay spouses are equally protected,
6. Gays are indeed capable of lasting, committed relationships, and straights are capable of swinging and depravity
7. It is futile to legislate morality,
8. If we legislate morality it leads to bad precedent and Muslims demanding sharia in the USA.
9. A secular government is not obligated to follow the Bible,
10. Ironically, although Protestant churches allow for one to vote his conscience, Protestants are more likely to oppose gay rights than Catholics. Could it be because Protestant churches actually preach the Gospel and teach the Bible to members of all ages? Could it be because Protestant churches don’t push political views down one’s throats?
11. The Church needs to change to survive another generation, and convert modern people?

Can the Catholics now give up this political fight, now that the law is decided (much like no-fault divorce laws have been decided)?

Can we go back to preaching the Gospel now? Isn’t Gospel preaching more important than politics?

Here is an excerpt from the above article that may give us clues on what to do from now on:

I hope we realize that the Rainbow Rulings are God’s call for Christians to rethink how we engage with gays.

You are welcome to your opinions. I throughly disagree, from top to bottom. And the issue is far from being over.

Linus2nd

 

[Monkey1976]

1. The best way to change people’s behavior is not to legislate against it, but to preach the Gospel. But as far as secular individual rights go, gays deserve equal treatment.

We preach the Gospel not only through our words, but also through our actions. How is encouraging homosexual activity preaching the Gospel?

1. Yes it is normal. Homosexuality is found in 400 species.

So is rape, cannibalism, males fighting to the death for mates, murder… Do we really want to use the animal kingdom as the model for our laws?

1. How does it affect you as a heterosexual? It does not.

Being required to legally accept a falsehood as truth harms me as a human being.

1. Some gay couples adopt children and have very functional, loving homes.

Where they are willingly depriving those children of either a mother or father. I call that selfish and abusive, not “loving”

1. You are in denial of reality. Look up how many rights are still being denied unless we extend marriage rights to gays.

Rights? Zero. Financial benefits attached to a particular institution ordered toward the production of the next generation of taxpayers? Several, and for the reason that they are freely choosing to not participate in that institution and would rather change the laws so they can get the benefits without having to obey the one rule that every society - east and west, pagan and Judeo-Christian, advanced and primitive - has agreed on for the past several thousand years. That is nothing short of selfishness.

1. Irrelevant for a secular government.

Then explain the laws on public indecency.

1. It’s not based on morality; it’s based on a desire to provide restitution to victims of crime.

If I am caught growing marijuana for my personal use, it’s still a crime even though there is no victim. If I murder a desert hermit with no living relatives, there’s nobody to make “restitution” to, and it’s still a crime.

1. Legislating based on morality will definitely create precedent that a Muslim can use to justify sharia.

We’re not talking about legally requiring attendance at Mass. We’re talking about something that predates every current religion and culture. The fact that Our Lord raised it to the dignity of a Sacrament is irrelevant to the secular culture, but the consistent historical understanding is not.

1. Once again, secular government should not legislate based on morals.

For some people, the murder and enslavement of others is seen as good, but we have laws against those acts because they are immoral.

1. Yes, I agree.

At least we agree on something

1. What is the origin of the teaching that we must legislate against gay marriage rights? It’s not found in the Bible. I’ve repeatedly asked CAF where is the Bible verse that teaches we must oppose gay marriage rights politically, and I’ve gotten nothing. Therefore, though we cannot have gay sex personally, our political response to the problem is wide open. So we can tell people to go and sin no more, but it does not follow that we HAVE to oppose their secular, legal, human rights.

God has made His opinion of homosexual activity abundantly clear. He also clearly taught that if one dies in a state of unrepentant serious sin, one’s final destination is Hell. Finally, He told us as Christians that it is far worse to encourage another in their sin is an offense far worse than the sin itself. Given all this, we know that failing to oppose same-sex “marriage” is saying to those who bear the cross of same-sex attraction that we don’t care if they go to Hell. Actively supporting it is handing them an express ticket and booking the seat next to them. It doesn’t matter how nice the ride is - the destination is what matters.

 

[Tantum_ergo]

It seems that you, and many other Catholics/Christians just don’t realize that what YOU believe God does or has done, or believes or teaches or says, …is just your belief! It is NOT fact in any way. Therefore, what people of any other religion, or atheists believe, is just as valid as what ALL Christians believe…Your point of view is just one BELIEF, and no more valid or fact than any other beliefs.

So tell me, Kathy. Your own statement here expresses your belief, right? It is NOT fact in any way. Why should I pay it any more attention than you pay to my belief?

Oh wait. If you have two different beliefs that are directly contradictory, then they can’t BOTH be right, can they?

One person believes that homosexual actions are wrong.
Another believes they are right.

These two statements are contradictory. Therefore, they cannot both be right, and obviously they can’t both be wrong. SO: One is right. One is wrong. They aren’t simply 'two equally valid beliefs", are they now?

And don’t try the “well, it’s only wrong if you THINK it is”. That won’t wash. Either something is wrong absolutely, or it’s right. You can’t have something that is right (morally speaking) for one group, or one time.

Unless, of course, you want to support that fine institution of slavery. Hey, it was legal 200 years ago, right? Some of the slaves (especially those who lived with kind masters and were treated like ‘family’) were perfectly fine with it. So. . .either slavery is always morally wrong, or sometimes it’s right. So, Kath, is slavery ever ‘right?’

If you accept that slavery is always morally wrong. . .then congratulations. You’ve recognized that there are moral absolutes that don’t depend on what ‘society’ degrees is truth.

And if you recognize that, then you’ll have to think, and think hard, about who ‘determined’ that actions which have been condemned as moral wrongs by not simply Catholic Christians, but by everyone from cavemen to pagans to Jews, Buddhists, Muslims, and ‘non-religious’ people from the dawn of time. . .and why suddenly in a time where people are actually LESS morally upright than they have ever been. . .suddenly THESE people have been ‘granted’ an insight that makes them capable of turning an absolute moral wrong into a ‘crime against humanity’?

 

[10gr8kids]

Am I the only who thinks that it doesn’t make sense for the OP to tell Catholics to not do something and then praise Protestants for doing that same thing?

I noticed the same contradiction and thought it was very strange.

 

[Canuck000]

As a recent convert the the Catholic Church (Easter 2013), I would be VERY disappointed if the CC changed to the sad ways of society, and for the sake of “modernism”.

I left my protestant church BECAUSE of the many changes that have taken place over recent years.

As Catholics we need to remain as we were meant to remain. I love that we don’t change and bend the rules to fit in. I love that we stand our ground on many issues.
I love the Church as it is.

 

[CB_Catholic]

Gays can ‘reproduce’ through adoption? (??) huh?

This just shows the absurd lengths some people will go through to justify what they know really is an unjustifiable position. He won’t even address the fact that God condemns homosexual relationships in the Scriptures, and it is called an abomination, and those who practice it will not see the Kingdom. Those passages cannot be misinterpreted.

He won’t even address the fact that marriage was instituted by God between male and female, and man has no power to change God’s laws.

And he states that 400 species of animals have homosexuality, so that makes it natural. So now we compare ourselves to animals and take our cues from them. Not to mention that there are literally MILLIONS of animal species–so we can see that 400, even in the animal kingdom, is quite an aberration. Plus it is rather absurd to say one is addressing human rights, yet look to animals for an example.

The arguments are getting sillier and sillier.

The Catholic Church has always preached the Gospel–the full Gospel, not just the one people want to hear. That is why it has always been hated. It takes more courage to be a professing Catholic who believes all the Church holds to be true than to just go along with popular opinion and political correctness. Believe me, Jesus was no wimp, just going along with the crowd. He called a sin a sin and did not excuse it. But He did forgive it. He loves the homosexual persons–he hates the sin. And he told sinners to “sin no more”. How one can justify gay “marriage” as being ok with God when He clearly condemns homosexual sex is beyond me. Is God two-faced?

 

[Tantum_ergo]

No, I point this out to show that Protestants have been better at the mission that Catholics want to accomplish, by being flexible politically and NOT shoving political views down one’s throats.

Both Protestants and Catholics today are slowly becoming more accepting of gay marriage rights. They are correct, and Christlike, to do so.

“Love your neighbor as you love yourself.”
Today, social justice-oriented Catholic and Protestant churches are realizing their historical errors and actually applying this verse towards gays.

**Really? your Protestant “mission” appears to be caving toward secular demands and a rewriting of the Bible to attempt to justify a moral wrong. **

You’re like people who say, “No no Junior, it’s not GOOD to eat too much candy”. . .you form support groups who all talk about how bad candy is for your children, you talk about how to bring more fruit and vegetables into the house. . . but you left Junior EAT ALL THE CANDY HE WANTS because if he doesn’t, he cries and screams that you made him FEEL BAD. . .and that is the ultimate SIN. So you salve your conscience by saying that you KNOW too much candy is bad, but surely if you don’t make Junior feel bad by depriving him, he will (in time) learn the error of his ways because of your ‘niceness’.

Let this grandma tell you, hon, 'giving in to Junior" DOESN"T WORK.