Obama- urges court, Gay Marriage ban

[josh987654321]

I reject your use of the word “designed”. The organs belong to their owner and can be used as the owner wishes. A hammer is designed to hammer nails. There is nothing to prevent me using my hammer to prop a door open – something it is not designed for.

Wouldn’t you use a crowbar to prop a door open if you had one? why would you say that there is no difference between using a crowbar to prop a door open and using a hammer? because we can see that there is a huge difference in using a hammer to prop a door open and using a crowbar.

Why would we teach builders that it doesn’t matter if they use a hammer or crowbar for that job? wouldn’t you teach them that they should use a crowbar for such a job?

You might break your hammer in trying to prop a door open with it.

I do not accept that homosexuality is either immoral or disordered. It is a naturally occurring minority sexual orientation.

It may be a naturally occuring sexual orientation, but we have many different naturally occuring sexual desires, homosexuals and hetrosexuals, do you feel as a hetrosexual that anything you desire is good for you? or okay to act on? that because you desire something it isn’t immoral to act on it? should we all be giving into our every desires? is giving into every sexual desire how people live a healthy life?

What sexual activities do you see as immoral or disordered? are any sexual activities immoral or disordered accoding to you?

It is certainly natural, because we observe it in animals. How do you define “normal”? Is being left handed “normal”? It is certainly a minority of people, but it is a naturally occurring minority. I see homosexuality in much the same way.

It’s funny you brought up that analogy, there was a TV ad in Australia that used the same one, the problem with that analogy is, that people can learn how to write left handed, if you didn’t have fingers on your left hand to hold the writing tool, than there would be no way that you could write left handed, therefore it would be correct for us to tell them that they can’t write left handed and that right handed is the only way, however because the left hand is the same as the right hand, it can be done both way’s, however homosexuality is not the same as hetrosexuality and therefore cannot be done both ways.

The word “rose” covers many different plants in many different colours. Perhaps a skilled plant breeder could breed a non-rose that smelled like one type of rose. There is nothing inherently impossible about doing that. Using GM methods it could certainly be done.

Yes, but there is nothing yet that makes the acts of homosexuality equivilent to the acts of hetrosexuality.

Have you any examples of major civil disobedience from those countries or states that have already implemented same sex marriage? There may be individuals who have caused problems, but I am not aware of anything that the local police could not deal with. Westboro’ Baptist seem to be very careful to stay within the law.

I haven’t looked into it, however there have already been cases that I have heard of on this forum.

e.g. The bishop who was fined $5000 for saying that the acts of homosexuality were immoral in his mass.

And the Christian adoption agency who suffered massive financial penalties for refuse to adopt out to homosexual couples.

Not in all cases. Remember that freedom of religion is not absolute. The law removes the “freedom” of Aztec priests to offer human sacrifice. Your freedom of religion has to be balanced against the MCC’s equal freedom of religion.

Your right, therefore if our religion becomes a minority, than we will be required to convert to the ways of the majority or we will be persecuted, but we are not a minority yet.

Would the poor be eligable to “freedom of religion” if they rely on government funds?

I am not clear as to what this question is aiming at.

It’s aiming at those who rely on goverment funds and wish to dicriminate between homosexuality and hetrosexuality because they are different and when the law requires them to be viewed and treated equally.
That means they will lose their Jobs or be shut down or sued, because they refuse to submit to such a law.

In part I suspect. In the UK the usual compromise is that Catholic schools teach the state mandated curriculum in normal lessons and Catholic doctrine in religion lessons.

What if we don’t want them to learn a lie about a false equality between homosexuality and hetrosexuality?

And those in public schools who cannot afford to send their kids to private schools, will they have an available option to learn that homosexuality and hetrosexuality are very different and shouldn’t be seen as equal?

What about those who can’t afford to send their kids to a private school and the public school requires these kids to learn in detail like they do hetrosexuality the nature of homosexuality also? as in primary school kids, where they learn in sex education, will sex education include the nature of homosexuality? because it would have to if homosexuality and hetrosexuality are seen as equal in the eyes of the law.

Please continue to next post -

 

[josh987654321]

You should have started using a different word when divorce became legal. Catholic marriage and civil marriage have been different for some years now, long before same sex marriage started. What is changing is civil marriage, not Catholic marriage. They are not the same thing. Again we are back to our difference over whether marriage is one thing or many things. Alternatively, you may want to think of “marriage” as an abbreviation for “civil marriage” or “Catholic marriage” depending on context.

You are right many people have many different views on marriage, that’s why I asked the question to you Rossum, because I can guarntee that many people could not give a clear answer like Christians could, as marriage has become a wide range of things according to most people, marriage is a term that is becoming more and more vague.

Thank you for some interesting questions.

rossum

Thank you Rossum for your interesting replies, I also have some more I want to share with you, however it’s directed at EmperorNapoleon aswell.

Personally, I find it offensive. Where is all of this rancor about children being denied a mother or a father in heterosexual households? Where are the calls to bring about an end to heterosexual divorce or single-parent households? So far, all that has been presented before the Supreme Court is a rank double-standard and a truckload of hyperbole. Its fine if some people have moral objections but don’t tell me that a homosexual couple should be denied a legally recognized lifetime commitment so Britney Spears can have another drunk 55 hour drive-through marriage in Las Vegas to prevent marriage from ‘unraveling.’ That lawyer is a constructing a rather large glass house.

Please consider this: A Child needs role models, which are the parents to mimic, whether they want them to or not, they will mimic them and their lifestyle if they are homosexual or hetrosexual, because it’s all they know, there is no magical choice that they can make, because their choice is bias, with hetrosexual parents their choice will be bias towards hetrosexuality, regardless if they are homosexual or hetrosexual, same with homosexual parents, their choice will be bias towards homosexuality regardless if they are homosexual or hetrosexual, they mimic their parents in how to live their life by what they do, because kids are very observant.

A) The nature of homosexuality means using your organs in a manner they are not designed to be used for (this is why we say that homosexual desires are disordered and immoral desires to act on)
B) The greatest role models or influences in a Child’s life are their parents, not what they say, but what they do. (Example when a parent say’s to their Child “Don’t Smoke” the chances of that Child smoking are greatly increased simply because the parents smoke)

You might say that if A) is behind closed doors than there is nothing for them to observe and mimic, but even if they kiss their partner or act in a way that a hetrosexual couple would, than it’s no longer behind closed doors.

Therefore a homosexual couple raising a child would have a detrimental effect on a poor child’s development and this is where we are heading with same sex marriage.

Thank you for reading
Josh

 

[JimG]

You are right many people have many different views on marriage, that’s why I asked the question to you Rossum, because I can guarntee that many people could not give a clear answer like Christians could, as marriage has become a wide range of things according to most people, marriage is a term that is becoming more and more vague.

Thank you Rossum for your interesting replies, I also have some more I want to share with you, however it’s directed at EmperorNapoleon aswell.

Please consider this: A Child needs role models, which are the parents to mimic, whether they want them to or not, they will mimic them and their lifestyle if they are homosexual or hetrosexual, because it’s all they know, there is no magical choice that they can make, because their choice is bias, with hetrosexual parents their choice will be bias towards hetrosexuality, regardless if they are homosexual or hetrosexual, same with homosexual parents, their choice will be bias towards homosexuality regardless if they are homosexual or hetrosexual, they mimic their parents in how to live their life by what they do, because kids are very observant.

A) The nature of homosexuality means using your organs in a manner they are not designed to be used for (this is why we say that homosexual desires are disordered and immoral desires to act on)
B) The greatest role models or influences in a Child’s life are their parents, not what they say, but what they do. (Example when a parent say’s to their Child “Don’t Smoke” the chances of that Child smoking are greatly increased simply because the parents smoke)

You might say that if A) is behind closed doors than there is nothing for them to observe and mimic, but even if they kiss their partner or act in a way that a hetrosexual couple would, than it’s no longer behind closed doors.

Therefore a homosexual couple raising a child would have a detrimental effect on a poor child’s development and this is where we are heading with same sex marriage.

Thank you for reading
Josh

Even though the posting was not directed to me, allow me to offer a few thoughts. I certainly agree with your final paragraph that a homosexual couple raising a child is inherently detrimental to the child. In fact, the Church would consider placing children with same sex partners as child abuse. That’s why it closes Catholic adoption agencies rather than do so.

(One might read Dawn Stefanowicz’s book “Out From Under,” about being raised by a homosexual parent. She does not blame her father; rather she makes it clear from the outset that she loves him. But it was not the ideal upbringing.)

It’s also true, of course, that a variety of evil social trends have also hurt children and marriage, before same sex marriage was even considered. Contraception, which de-links sex from procreation. Divorce–which deprives children of their parents. Divorce also destroys permanence and fidelity. Contraception led to promiscuity, cohabitation, and devlauing of marriage and children.

Family structure was seriously crumbling even before same sex marriage came on the scene. Heterosexuals destroyed marriage by 90%. Homosexuals wish to destroy it by the remaining 10%.

I hope the trend can be reversed, but it sure doesn’t look good.

I was just in a discussion of whether or not the collapse of family structure leads to the collapse of civilizations. I think it does. So does Carle Zimmerman. We can argue about what caused the collapse of the Roman Empire. But 50 years from now, we will be arguing about what caused the collapse of American and Western culture. The destruction of marriage and family will have had a lot to do with it, but others will argue that the collapse of the family was entirely immaterial.

But I won’t be part of the argument. I’ll be long gone by then! But others will unfortunately have to deal with the social chaos which follows social and family collapse.

 

[_Abyssinia]

Personally, I find it offensive. Where is all of this rancor about children being denied a mother or a father in heterosexual households? Where are the calls to bring about an end to heterosexual divorce or single-parent households? So far, all that has been presented before the Supreme Court is a rank double-standard and a truckload of hyperbole. Its fine if some people have moral objections but don’t tell me that a homosexual couple should be denied a legally recognized lifetime commitment so Britney Spears can have another drunk 55 hour drive-through marriage in Las Vegas to prevent marriage from ‘unraveling.’ That lawyer is a constructing a rather large glass house.

Enshrining gay marriage into law intentionally deprives children of the right to grow up with a mother and a father into law, by the redefinition of parenthood. When marriage occurs that attaches parents to children through ‘presumption of paternity.’ This is an ancient doctrine that means a woman’s husband is presumed to be the father of the children that would be conceived in their marriage

Those who want to redefine marriage want to redefine this to change to ‘presumption of parentage,’ which means that any children that would be born to either one of a gay couple during the course of their marriage is presumed to be the child of both individuals. That means that every child will not be attached to least one of their biological parents. So natural parenthood is undermined and biology is ignored

 

[_Abyssinia]

Up until to the 1970s cohabitation, single parenthood and divorce was discouraged. Then advocates started promoting about the need to eliminate stigma from single parenthood, cohabitation and divorce and there were people that warned the fall out from liberalising attitudes and laws would lead to a terrible fall out in society but those voices were mocked or ignored just as opponents to redefining marriage are being mocked or ignored now

 

[epan]

Up until to the 1970s cohabitation, single parenthood and divorce was discouraged. Then advocates started promoting about the need to eliminate stigma from single parenthood, cohabitation and divorce and there were people that warned the fall out from liberalising attitudes and laws would lead to a terrible fall out in society but those voices were mocked or ignored just as opponents to redefining marriage are being mocked or ignored now

more social, economic, and techno change occurred from 1870 to 1970, than from 70 to 1870, and more than that will have occurred in the subsequent 50 years, and then more in the next 25, and so on.

so, that is the problem. it’s called progress. it happens so quickly that people’s heads are reeling. compare the time it took for women’s suffrage, and the following women’s rights movement, or the racial equality movement, to the gay civil rights movement. depending on what point in history these events started, the time scale changes.

we are in a time of ever accelerating social progress, like it or not. as fast as this is happening now, social change will only happen faster in the near future.

 

[GaryTaylor]

more social, economic, and techno change occurred from 1870 to 1970, than from 70 to 1870, and more than that will have occurred in the subsequent 50 years, and then more in the next 25, and so on.

so, that is the problem. it’s called progress. it happens so quickly that people’s heads are reeling. compare the time it took for women’s suffrage, and the following women’s rights movement, or the racial equality movement, to the gay civil rights movement. depending on what point in history these events started, the time scale changes.

we are in a time of ever accelerating social progress, like it or not. as fast as this is happening now, social change will only happen faster in the near future.

Right, also mentioned by the attorneys at the Supreme Court and the Justice in relation to the 9-states and change since 1996. No doubt a valid point.

 

[_Abyssinia]

more social, economic, and techno change occurred from 1870 to 1970, than from 70 to 1870, and more than that will have occurred in the subsequent 50 years, and then more in the next 25, and so on.

so, that is the problem. it’s called progress. it happens so quickly that people’s heads are reeling. compare the time it took for women’s suffrage, and the following women’s rights movement, or the racial equality movement, to the gay civil rights movement. depending on what point in history these events started, the time scale changes.

we are in a time of ever accelerating social progress, like it or not. as fast as this is happening now, social change will only happen faster in the near future.

The fall out in society from gay marriage is there to see in countries like Netherlands, Norway and Sweden: increase in out of wedlocks births, decline in marriage for hetrosexuals, fewer people thinking marriage should be a perquisite for children and religious liberty impingement, all after gay marriage legalised. Fall out from society is there too see in the impact cohabitation has made which has increased the rate of divorce, and increased rates of divorce and single parenthood have led to poorer outcomes for children which impacts society economically, socially, culturally and for the children who then become adults themselves so things that have a negative impact in society should be discouraged and women’s suffrage and racial equality do not create a negative impact in society whereas gay marriage, cohabitation, and divorce do

 

[simplequest]

The fall out in society from gay marriage is there to see in countries like Netherlands, Norway and Sweden: increase in out of wedlocks births, decline in marriage for hetrosexuals, fewer people thinking marriage should be a perquisite for children and religious liberty impingement, all after gay marriage legalised. Fall out from society is there too see in the impact cohabitation has made which has increased the rate of divorce, and increased rates of divorce and single parenthood have led to poorer outcomes for children which impacts society economically, socially, culturally and for the children who then become adults themselves so things that have a negative impact in society should be discouraged and women’s suffrage and racial equality do not create a negative impact in society whereas gay marriage, cohabitation, and divorce do

First of all correlation does not equal causation. Just because there has been an “increase in out of wedlocks births, decline in marriage for hetrosexuals, fewer people thinking marriage should be a perquisite for children and religious liberty impingement, all after gay marriage legalised” it does not mean it was caused by gay marriage. Also, do you have stats to even prove that?

And even if gay marriage did cause these things, what has been the negative effect? The three countries you stated are all in the top 10 happiest countries in the world.

 

[_Abyssinia]

First of all correlation does not equal causation. Just because there has been an “increase in out of wedlocks births, decline in marriage for hetrosexuals, fewer people thinking marriage should be a perquisite for children and religious liberty impingement, all after gay marriage legalised” it does not mean it was caused by gay marriage. Also, do you have stats to even prove that?

And even if gay marriage did cause these things, what has been the negative effect? The three countries you stated are all in the top 10 happiest countries in the world.

Correlation does not always equal causation but it often can

Legatum Prosperity Index which does the happiness index ranks countries by a variety of things from education to the economy

Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands are so liberal and so irreligious that very few people have a problem with cohabitation, gay marriage, divorce, out of wedlock births

What has been the negative effect? Study after study shows the negative effects of divorce and single parenthood on children, they do worse in all manner of outcomes compared to children brought up married biological parents

Statistics:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=10447350&postcount=256

 

[epan]

The fall out in society from gay marriage is there to see in countries like Netherlands, Norway and Sweden: increase in out of wedlocks births, decline in marriage for hetrosexuals, fewer people thinking marriage should be a perquisite for children and religious liberty impingement, all after gay marriage legalised. Fall out from society is there too see in the impact cohabitation has made which has increased the rate of divorce, and increased rates of divorce and single parenthood have led to poorer outcomes for children which impacts society economically, socially, culturally and for the children who then become adults themselves so things that have a negative impact in society should be discouraged and women’s suffrage and racial equality do not create a negative impact in society whereas gay marriage, cohabitation, and divorce do

i think the problems of cohabitation, divorce and out of wedlock births are happening in countries other than the Scandinavian ones. Further, the out of wedlock birth rates in the US are the highest in the South, where the likelihood of gay marriage acceptance is among the lowest. If you are positing gay marriage as a causal factor for these other problems, i would view your claim as unmerited. As previously stated, i see a converse relationship. It is the acceptance of divorce, etc… as the new normal, which opens the door to the thread of change which eventually accepts gay marriage as normal. if you are serious about stopping gay marriage, then you need to go to the source, straight marriage, and fix that. Since that won’t happen, is why i speculate that whether it takes six months (doubtful), or ten years (probable), or somewhat longer, gay marriage will be the law of the land. Note that i use the word “speculate”. None of us can see the future. But we can identify historic and social trends. That is the trend which I see, which has proceeded logically and predictably for a century or more in the western world.

 

[_Abyssinia]

i think the problems of cohabitation, divorce and out of wedlock births are happening in countries other than the Scandinavian ones. Further, the out of wedlock birth rates in the US are the highest in the South, where the likelihood of gay marriage acceptance is among the lowest. If you are positing a gay marriage as a causal factor for these other problems, i would view your claim as unmerited. As previously stated, i see a converse relationship. It is the acceptance of divorce, etc… as the new normal, which opens the door to the thread of change which eventually accepts gay marriage as normal. if you are serious about stopping gay marriage, then you need to go to the source, straight marriage, and fix that. Since that won’t happen, is why i speculate that whether it takes six months (doubtful), or ten years (probable), or somewhat longer, gay marriage will be the law of the land. Note that i use the word “speculate”. None of us can see the future. But we can identify historic and social trends. That is the trend which I see, which has proceeded logically and predictably for a century or more in the western world.

This is a typical argument from gay marriage advocates, that hetrosexual marriage opened the door to redefining marriage. I do not think that that is true, after all marriage is marriage and marriage by its very essence is only available to man and woman, not two men or two women. The definition of marriage can not change regardless of how many people get divorced. The answer to divorce and cohabitation is not to damage the institution of marriage further by redefining it, but reeducating people on the damage of divorce on children particularly and to urge legislators to reverse no fault divorce laws

Civil unions opened the door to gay marriage. That is why gay marriage started to be pushed in the last 15 years and not much before. Once that door that was opened to gay couples, they wanted marriage

 

[simplequest]

Correlation does not always equal causation but it often can

Legatum Prosperity Index which does the happiness index ranks countries by a variety of things from education to the economy

Norway, Sweden and the Netherlands are so liberal and so irreligious that very few people have a problem with cohabitation, gay marriage, divorce, out of wedlock births

What has been the negative effect? Study after study shows the negative effects of divorce and single parenthood on children, they do worse in all manner of outcomes compared to children brought up married biological parents

Statistics:

forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=10447350&postcount=256

Do you have any evidence that children in these countries are worse off now than they were before gay marriage was legalized?

 

[epan]

This is a typical argument from gay marriage advocates, that hetrosexual marriage opened the door to redefining marriage.

I guess you would disagree with Dr. Jennifer R. Morse, who researches and writes on the topic. Here she is in a presentation sponsored by the Sacramento Archdiocese. It would be inaccurate to classify her as a gay marriage advocate.

youtube.com/watch?v=osCnn-ATrcI&list=PL87BFE691B14DCD2A

 

[Crescentinus]

Do you have any evidence that children in these countries are worse off now than they were before gay marriage was legalized?

Socratic method
Have you clicked the links within the link?

 

[_Abyssinia]

I guess you would disagree with Dr. Jennifer R. Morse, who researches and writes on the topic. Here she is in a presentation sponsored by the Sacramento Archdiocese. It would be inaccurate to classify her as a gay marriage advocate.

youtube.com/watch?v=osCnn-ATrcI&list=PL87BFE691B14DCD2A

I think divorce damaged the institution of marriage by making so many people reject the vows they made but I do not think it opened the door to redefining marriage

Either way, it does not make sense to point to the destructive reality of divorce and basically put across that because of that, gay people should be able to marry

 

[qui_est_ce]

The answer to divorce and cohabitation is not to damage the institution of marriage further by redefining it, but reeducating people on the damage of divorce on children particularly and to urge legislators to reverse no fault divorce laws

Well said.

This argument can be used against those who want to push for more legislation rather than enforcing existing regulations on a myriad of issues before us today.

 

[simplequest]

Socratic method
Have you clicked the links within the link?

I must have missed where it had some sort of statistics saying that children were worse off. Can you show that to me?

Also, this graph is kind of laughable:

weeklystandard.com/sites/all/files/images/KurtzChart.gif

The graph shows a trend starting at the beginning of the 1980’s of increasing out of wedlock births, and then after gay marriage is legalized it continues to go up. To say that gay marriage caused the slight increase from the data given is INCREDIBLY misleading.

 

[Crescentinus]

I must have missed where it had some sort of statistics saying that children were worse off. Can you show that to me?

You mean this?

Social scientist Stanley Kurtz found that out of wedlock births increased about 10% from 1990 to 2000, the time after marriage was redefined in Norway and Sweden

Since registered partnerships started in the Netherlands in 1997 the rate of out of wedlock births has doubled the average increase of the 15 years previous and redefining marriage there has not led to a decrease in this rate in post years after 01, 02, 03

weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/126qodro.asp

nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz200402020917.asp

nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz200402050842.asp

nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz200405040841.asp

nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz200405250927.asp

nationalreview.com/kurtz/kurtz200406030910.as

David Blankenhorn is a liberal democrat who disagrees with the Bible on homosexual behaviour, but he writes on page 233 in his book, The future of marriage, about a survey that says 83% of people from countries where marriage has been redefined think that it is fine to cohabit v 49% from people from countries where marriage has not been redefined

37% of people from countries where marriage has been redefined think they should marry if they want children v 60% of people who think they should from countries where marriage has not been redefined

There is a link between the increase in out of wedlock births and a decline in how people feel about marriage and cohabitation in countries where marriage has been redefined compared to countries that have not

 

[simplequest]

You mean this?

I looked through those links…all from almost 10 years ago and all were written by one person. And I didn’t find anything to say that the children were worse off, just that there were more children born out of wedlock.