Obama declares support for same-sex marriage

[He_Man]

The problem is. Allen, that instead of joining the debate you express your opinions and then get upset whenever anyone responds.

Not to mention, it’s called Catholic Answers, not Catholics who like to offer ideas where the Church has spoken definitively.

The fact that Catholics would even offer a contrarian opinion on Church teaching is absurd. I’d expect questions about what the teaching is, both from Catholics and non-Catholics, but once stated, what is there to discuss?

 

[Allen2Saint]

Yet, no one can even respect what my passions relate to, which I find sad as well. It’s been suggested I shouldn’t even be allowed to post here. Charitable? At least the atheists listened to reason and could show a little respect to someone they disagreed with.

Ever since Mark responded to my post in a civil manner, I reviewed what he said and dug into the church’s view. The root issue for me is that I believe homosexuality is naturally occurring. I am quite able to understand the idea and I understand that I disagree with the church on this. Maybe because the words “crooks” “murderers” and “homosexuals” bring up images and memories of real people I minister to, rather than words on a page.

 

[rlg94086]

Yet, no one can even respect what my passions relate to, which I find sad as well. It’s been suggested I shouldn’t even be allowed to post here. Charitable? At least the atheists listened to reason and could show a little respect to someone they disagreed with.

Ever since Mark responded to my post in a civil manner, I reviewed what he said and dug into the church’s view. The root issue for me is that I believe homosexuality is naturally occurring. I am quite able to understand the idea and I understand that I disagree with the church on this. Maybe because the words “crooks” “murderers” and “homosexuals” bring up images and memories of real people I minister to, rather than words on a page.

Actually, the Church doesn’t say that homosexuality isn’t “naturally occurring.” It’s occurrence is as “natural” as any other sinful tendency. Natural occurrence does not equal moral.

 

[estesbob]

Yet, no one can even respect what my passions relate to, which I find sad as well. It’s been suggested I shouldn’t even be allowed to post here. Charitable? At least the atheists listened to reason and could show a little respect to someone they disagreed with.

Ever since Mark responded to my post in a civil manner, I reviewed what he said and dug into the church’s view. The root issue for me is that I believe homosexuality is naturally occurring. I am quite able to understand the idea and I understand that I disagree with the church on this. Maybe because the words “crooks” “murderers” and “homosexuals” bring up images and memories of real people I minister to, rather than words on a page.

The Church takes no stand on the cause of SSA. Having SSA is not a sin but is disordered. One may not choose to be attracted to the same sex but acting on the attraction is a choice and a sin.

I may, for instance, find myself attracted to my neighbors wife. That in itself is not a sin. if, however, I CHOOSE to act on this attraction either through lustful thoughts or an affair i have committed a sin.

 

[Elizabeth502]

The problem is. Allen, that instead of joining the debate you express your opinions and then get upset whenever anyone responds.

I agree. He asked for rational responses to “any of his points.” I gave him one in post 390. No acknowledgement; no dialogue.

 

[He_Man]

Yet, no one can even respect what my passions relate to, which I find sad as well. It’s been suggested I shouldn’t even be allowed to post here. Charitable? At least the atheists listened to reason and could show a little respect to someone they disagreed with.

Ever since Mark responded to my post in a civil manner, I reviewed what he said and dug into the church’s view. The root issue for me is that I believe homosexuality is naturally occurring. I am quite able to understand the idea and I understand that I disagree with the church on this. Maybe because the words “crooks” “murderers” and “homosexuals” bring up images and memories of real people I minister to, rather than words on a page.

You can offer opinions all you want. The point is, you are arguing against fact, as taught by God, through the Church. If I began to argue that water was not wet, it would be pointless, and people would think I was a troll. I’m not saying you are, since you obviously believe what you purport, but it doesn’t make it any more worthy of debate.

People on here get chided for disagreeing over global warming and man’s effect on it all the time. Yet you are complaining that your opinion on gay “marriage” is being not respected. We can respect each other, without respecting an opinion that are told is untrue by God.

If I started a topic about how I believed Mary wasn’t immaculately conceived, the opinion would get zero respect from Catholics, because it is 100% wrong.

I don’t get why people who show up and disagree with the Church get their feelings hurt when they are told “no, you’re wrong.” We’re not telling you because we believe it, we’re telling you because God said so. Take it up with Him.

And why is also that you assume because one opposes gay “marriage” that they don’t minister or support those who may struggle? My brother in law does not abide or tolerate criminal behavior, yet still does prison ministry. If you minister to the gay community, I applaud you, but do so in line with the teachings of the Church, not your belief which doesn’t fall in line with God’s teachings.

 

[Jeanne_S]

You can offer opinions all you want. The point is, you are arguing against fact, as taught by God, through the Church. If I began to argue that water was not wet, it would be pointless, and people would think I was a troll. I’m not saying you are, since you obviously believe what you purport, but it doesn’t make it any more worthy of debate.

People on here get chided for disagreeing over global warming and man’s effect on it all the time. Yet you are complaining that your opinion on gay “marriage” is being not respected. We can respect each other, without respecting an opinion that are told is untrue by God.

If I started a topic about how I believed Mary wasn’t immaculately conceived, the opinion would get zero respect from Catholics, because it is 100% wrong.

I don’t get why people who show up and disagree with the Church get their feelings hurt when they are told “no, you’re wrong.” We’re not telling you because we believe it, we’re

telling you because God said so. Take it up with Him.

Well said!

And why is also that you assume because one opposes gay “marriage” that they don’t minister or support those who may struggle? My brother in law does not abide or tolerate criminal behavior, yet still does prison ministry. If you minister to the gay community, I applaud you, but do so in line with the teachings of the Church, not your belief which doesn’t fall in line with God’s teachings.

 

[markomalley]

Ever since Mark responded to my post in a civil manner, I reviewed what he said and dug into the church’s view. The root issue for me is that I believe homosexuality is naturally occurring. I am quite able to understand the idea and I understand that I disagree with the church on this. Maybe because the words “crooks” “murderers” and “homosexuals” bring up images and memories of real people I minister to, rather than words on a page.

Let me ask you one question: why would sinful behavior be more acceptable if the proclivity to display that behavior has a genetic source than if the proclivity to display that behavior has an environmental source?

I will grant that it might make a difference in treating the cause of the behavior. But that doesn’t make the behavior acceptable.

 

[ComputerGeek25]

Let me ask you one question: why would sinful behavior be more acceptable if the proclivity to display that behavior has a genetic source than if the proclivity to display that behavior has an environmental source?

I will grant that it might make a difference in treating the cause of the behavior. But that doesn’t make the behavior acceptable.

You know what they say, the road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

Simply becase people may have some sort of pre disposition towards drug use, alcohol abuse, mental illness, pedophellia, etc. does not make the behaviour right to such a point that we should encourage it.

 

[Allen2Saint]

Simply becase people may have some sort of pre disposition towards drug use, alcohol abuse, mental illness, pedophellia, etc. does not make the behaviour right to such a point that we should encourage it.

Easy words to say in a vacuum. Try doing something like volunteer visits in hospitals and jails and let me know if you still feel OK making those comparisons.

Thank you all. I’ve received quite an education here.

 

[Allen2Saint]

Let me ask you one question: why would sinful behavior be more acceptable if the proclivity to display that behavior has a genetic source than if the proclivity to display that behavior has an environmental source?

I will grant that it might make a difference in treating the cause of the behavior. But that doesn’t make the behavior acceptable.

Having spent a long time meeting and spending time with gay couples, sometimes in the most dire of circumstances, I couldn’t discern any difference between the committed straight couples and the committed gay couples in terms of what was between them. They loved each other, cared for each other and wept over losing one another the same as straight couples did. The biggest burden I saw on them was their lack of acceptance in our society and the fear that a religious person would reject them in their hour of need, which some of my peers did and I refused to.

Conrtary to what people have said, I certainly have no need to irritate people or to argue points no one cares about. I see I am in disagreement with the church and I will explore, learn and spiritually deal with it with my elders in my church.

Thanks again, everyone. I learned some valuable lessons here.

 

[estesbob]

Having spent a long time meeting and spending time with gay couples, sometimes in the most dire of circumstances, I couldn’t discern any difference between the committed straight couples and the committed gay couples in terms of what was between them. They loved each other, cared for each other and wept over losing one another the same as straight couples did. The biggest burden I saw on them was their lack of acceptance in our society and the fear that a religious person would reject them in their hour of need, which some of my peers did and I refused to.

Conrtary to what people have said, I certainly have no need to irritate people or to argue points no one cares about. I see I am in disagreement with the church and I will explore, learn and spiritually deal with it with my elders in my church.

Thanks again, everyone. I learned some valuable lessons here.

I am still at a loss as to how a couples “commitment” to each other mitigates grievous sin. And as I mentioned before love NEVER expresses itself in sinful behavior.

I am curious as to who you are referring to when you talk about exploring it with the" elders of your Church"?

You might also try reading this:

scborromeo.org/ccc.htm

 

[_Abyssinia]

Afro is a website that covers Black history, news etc. they did a poll of 1141 readers and 34% said they disagreed with Barack Obama’s position on gay ‘marriage’ and can no longer support him because of it:

afro.com/poll/poll_results.htm

 

[markomalley]

Having spent a long time meeting and spending time with gay couples, sometimes in the most dire of circumstances, I couldn’t discern any difference between the committed straight couples and the committed gay couples in terms of what was between them. They loved each other, cared for each other and wept over losing one another the same as straight couples did. The biggest burden I saw on them was their lack of acceptance in our society and the fear that a religious person would reject them in their hour of need, which some of my peers did and I refused to.

Conrtary to what people have said, I certainly have no need to irritate people or to argue points no one cares about. I see I am in disagreement with the church and I will explore, learn and spiritually deal with it with my elders in my church.

Thanks again, everyone. I learned some valuable lessons here.

Allen, you have repeated yourself. With due respect, please answer the question I posed for you.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Maybe because the words “crooks” “murderers” and “homosexuals” bring up images and memories of real people I minister to, rather than words on a page.

Prostitutes are real people, too, often with “hearts of gold” or at least histories of melodrama. That changes nothing about the objective evil of selling one’s body (whether male or female, by the way). You fail to separate (as several others have said) emotion from Truth, and pastoral ministry from the concurrent responsibility of our Church to witness to that Truth by refusing to condone prostitution, drug use, alcoholism, and homosexual behavior, regardless of how much society glamorizes any of that, excuses any of that, and wants to legislate any of that into a high moral standard.

Several of us on CAF, defending Truth, have close friends and relatives who are in one or more of these same situations. It doesn’t make us cold and unfeeling, or less feeling than you are, because we are able to separate emotions from moral principles.

So consider carefully whatever you claim to “have received quite an education” about (here). What you cannot claim to have learned is that we have less compassion than you, or that we demonstrate that less.

 

[fix]

Easy words to say in a vacuum. Try doing something like volunteer visits in hospitals and jails and let me know if you still feel OK making those comparisons.

Thank you all. I’ve received quite an education here.

Why? Does emotionalism change the moral law?

 

[fix]

Having spent a long time meeting and spending time with gay couples, sometimes in the most dire of circumstances, I couldn’t discern any difference between the committed straight couples and the committed gay couples in terms of what was between them. They loved each other, cared for each other and wept over losing one another the same as straight couples did. The biggest burden I saw on them was their lack of acceptance in our society and the fear that a religious person would reject them in their hour of need, which some of my peers did and I refused to.

Conrtary to what people have said, I certainly have no need to irritate people or to argue points no one cares about. I see I am in disagreement with the church and I will explore, learn and spiritually deal with it with my elders in my church.

Thanks again, everyone. I learned some valuable lessons here.

Confirming another in sin, while claiming compassion, is a serious error and certainly not God’s will.

What is at all costs to be avoided is the unfounded and demeaning assumption that the sexual behaviour of homosexual persons is always and totally compulsive and therefore inculpable. What is essential is that the fundamental liberty which characterizes the human person and gives him his dignity be recognized as belonging to the homosexual person as well. As in every conversion from evil, the abandonment of homosexual activity will require a profound collaboration of the individual with God’s liberating grace.

What, then, are homosexual persons to do who seek to follow the Lord? Fundamentally, they are called to enact the will of God in their life by joining whatever sufferings and difficulties they experience in virtue of their condition to the sacrifice of the Lord’s Cross. That Cross, for the believer, is a fruitful sacrifice since from that death come life and redemption. While any call to carry the cross or to understand a Christian’s suffering in this way will predictably be met with bitter ridicule by some, it should be remembered that this is the way to eternal life for all who follow Christ.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

love NEVER expresses itself in sinful behavior.

I agree with what Elizabeth, fix, and you say, but this part is not quite true. An adulterous heterosexual couple can truly be in love with one another, even as they express their affection in adulterous relations and even as reconciliation with their spouses might be impossible. My take on this situation would be for them to try to seek an annulment of their marriages, if possible.

 

[fix]

I agree with what Elizabeth, fix, and you say, but this part is not quite true. An adulterous heterosexual couple can truly be in love with one another, even as they express their affection in adulterous relations and even as reconciliation with their spouses might be impossible. My take on this situation would be for them to try to seek an annulment of their marriages, if possible.

I think the point is one cannot claim love while helping destroy another’s soul. Our actions must not contradict our words. If we really love God and our neighbor we would not break God’s law.

 

[Rich_Olszewski]

I think the point is one cannot claim love while helping destroy another’s soul. Our actions must not contradict our words. If we really love God and our neighbor we would not break God’s law.

True in theory, but not so applicable in practice. The advice about God and our neighbor is of course correct, but that applies to everything. Not all of us are so perfect as to be able to follow your advice without fail.