Poll: California Catholics strongly support homosexual unions

[sedonaman]

I probably should know this, but my brain is slow today.

Could you tell us in what document this statement was made? Or provide a link to a news article about it?

It was in a pastoral letter titled: “On our civic responsibility for the common good,” Roman Catholic Archbishop Raymond Burke of the Archdiocese of St. Louis which forbade Catholics to vote for candidates who support abortion access, physician assisted suicide, reproductive cloning, same-sex marriage, and embryonic stem cell research. He calls these the five “intrinsic evils” – undoubtedly derived from CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH Letter To The Bishops Of The Catholic Church On The Pastoral Care Of Homosexual Persons vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19861001_homosexual-persons_en.html which states in part, “…Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder. …” [Emphasis added]

So if homosexual acts are an “intrinsic moral evil”, that which facilitates it, i.e., homosexual “marriage”, also has to be by extension.

Now if you want to find some wiggle room in the Vatican statement, have at it.

---

“Madness, once unleashed, knows no bounds.” – Winston Churchill

 

[StAnastasia]

I went through RCIA in California. I loved that parish… . plenty of good Catholics, however… it was LIBERAL… they blew off the abortion issue in 2008, as if it was no biggie…I can see majority of Catholics in California supporting gay marriage. Just my year in a California parish showed me the HUGE difference between the rest of the country and California.

You spit out “liberal” as if it’s a dirty word. If there is a huge difference between California and the rest of the country, perhaps it’s because more Californians know LGBT people and treat them as fellow human beings, not as “intrinsically disordered” sad cases.

 

[Dale_M]

It was in a pastoral letter titled: “On our civic responsibility for the common good,” Roman Catholic Archbishop Raymond Burke of the Archdiocese of St. Louis which forbade Catholics to vote for candidates who support abortion access, physician assisted suicide, reproductive cloning, same-sex marriage, and embryonic stem cell research. He calls these the five “intrinsic evils” – undoubtedly derived from CONGREGATION FOR THE DOCTRINE OF THE FAITH Letter To The Bishops Of The Catholic Church On The Pastoral Care Of Homosexual Persons

Oh, okay. So you are you are referring to an instruction given by Archbishop Burke to the Catholics of the St. Louis Archdiocese. I thought you meant something more universal, such as a statement by the US Catholic bishops or a Vatican document.

Now if you want to find some wiggle room in the Vatican statement, have at it.

Wiggle room? I’m not sure there is any reason to wiggle. The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith document you cite makes no mention of five intrinsic evils being a priority.

I’m not saying that Archbishop Burke didn’t have good reasons for coming up with his list, but I think claiming that the Vatican has endorsed that list is unwarranted.

 

[sedonaman]

…Wiggle room? I’m not sure there is any reason to wiggle. …

There is if you support homosexual “marriage” because obviously the church is against it, and you appear to be trying to find a justification, however slight, for it, like it was only one bishop and not the whole USCCB, as though he would contradict the Vatican.

---

“Madness, once unleashed, knows no bounds.” – Winston Churchill

 

[Dale_M]

There is if you support homosexual “marriage” because obviously the church is against it, and you appear to be trying to find a justification, however slight, for it, like it was only one bishop and not the whole USCCB, as though he would contradict the Vatican.

Oh, not at all. I have consistently represented that the Church teaches same-sex marriage is to be opposed. My objection was to your claim that:

The bishops have set the priority by declaring homosexual unions as one of five intrinsic evils.

I was simply seeking a clarification about this list of five intrinsic evils, and the nature of its authority. You had said it was a statement of “the bishops,” and I had never heard of it.

 

[Aquinas62]

Sorry, you and the bishops have it backwards. It is sheer cowardice to pretend to care about marriage by starting with preventing other people from getting married, and then to slink away and refuse to fight against divorce. Divorce is the real threat to marriage. Outlaw divorce first, and then go about preventing other people from getting married. To refuse to do this is cowardice.

I am sorry, you are inside out on this one, You cannot be Catholic and be for gay Marriage, it is not possible. Also, catholics do not allow divorce in canon law, only an annulment. there are many threads on this so I won’t go into details, but I am going through the process myself. Do I like it? no I don’t but I must do this in order for my current marriage to be considered valid in the church and the eyes of God where it really counts. Gay marriage? not possible, you have to be a Man and Woman to be Man and Wife… I knew this in kindergarten… only in this age of confusion is it an issue now. Oh you can call it marriage, but it would be as valid and real as me anointing myself King of Israel. I can delude myself all I want, but that doesn’t make it so…

 

[Dale_M]

Gay marriage? not possible, you have to be a Man and Woman to be Man and Wife… I knew this in kindergarten… only in this age of confusion is it an issue now. Oh you can call it marriage, but it would be as valid and real as me anointing myself King of Israel. I can delude myself all I want, but that doesn’t make it so…

Except, gay marriage is recognized by the governments of some countries and some states of the US. In those places, gay marriage brings a host of financial and legal benefits.

Declaring yourself King of Israel is unlikely to be recognized by any government, or bring any legal benefits. And probably no financial benefits unless you can work out a media deal.

You cannot be Catholic and be for gay Marriage, it is not possible.

Yes, the Catholic Church is opposed to gay marriage, and teaches that Catholics are to oppose it as well. But, its entirely possible for a Catholic individual to ignore that teaching and remain a Catholic. Similarly, something like 95% of US Catholics ignore the teaching on contraception, yet still remain Catholic. This puts them in a state of sin, however, and unworthy to receive the Eucharist.

 

[Aquinas62]

Except, gay marriage is recognized by the governments of some countries and some states of the US. In those places, gay marriage brings a host of financial and legal benefits.

Declaring yourself King of Israel is unlikely to be recognized by any government, or bring any legal benefits. And probably no financial benefits unless you can work out a media deal.

.

I was speaking strictly in the theological sense. I agree with your point regarding contraception. if you disregard catholic teaching on faith and morals, are you still really catholic? I don’t know, that is between them and their priest and Jesus. I guess that my beef is with those catholics who are very public with their dissent on Catholic doctrine, and very public affirmation of SSM. now about that media deal… do you know anybody?

 

[Cathy]

If protecting the rights of children is “the only logical rationale for marriage,” then infertile and elderly couples have no right to marriage.

So children who are adopted by non-biological parents have no rights to be protected?

You appear to have little no respect for adopted children.

If you really have respect for marriage, work for the outlawing of divorce.

A) Only a male and female can procreate. It would be ridiculous to make sure each couple is fertile before allowing them to marry.

B and C) It is a common good for every person to have two arms, but some without an arm are deprived and must live without one. It is a common good for every child to know and be known by his mother and father, but some are deprived of that good, and good people come to their aid and try to fill that void which can never be completely filled.
It is wrong to purposely deprive a child of his arm without a grave reason, and wrong to purposely deprive a child of his biological mother or father except for a grave reason. The desire to have a child is not a grave reason to deprive a child of his biological mother and/or father.

D) I am Catholic. There is no divorce in the Catholic Church. I work to promote Catholic principles, which are based on natural law.

 

[Stjudeprayforus]

You spit out “liberal” as if it’s a dirty word. If there is a huge difference between California and the rest of the country, perhaps it’s because more Californians know LGBT people and treat them as fellow human beings, not as “intrinsically disordered” sad cases.

Uh… it is liberals who are all for abortion and gay marriage.

Are you saying people outside of California treat homosexuals bad? Who are you to judge? You obviously have no idea how people are treated here.

Having lived in California and now the midwest… there is a huge difference to me what is taught in Catholic churches here and there. HUGE.
We are told abortion is evil. We are told why gay marriage is wrong. Not because we hate homosexuals and see them as less than human. Quite the contrary.

A former Priest who taught RCIA blew off abortion as if it was a non issue. I would call that liberal.

 

[sedonaman]

… only in this age of confusion is it an issue now.

Mega .

Oh you can call it marriage, but it would be as valid and real as me anointing myself King of Israel. I can delude myself all I want, but that doesn’t make it so…

From a former homosexual:

…Ralph McInerny once offered a brilliant definition of the gay rights movement: self-deception as a group effort. Nevertheless, deception of the general public is also vital to the success of the cause. And nowhere are the forms of deception more egregious, or more startlingly successful, than in the campaign to persuade Christians that, to paraphrase the title of a recent book, Jesus Was Queer, and churches should open their doors to same-sex lovers. The gay Christian movement relies on a stratagem that is as daring as it is dishonest. I know, because I was taken in by it for a long time. Like the owners of Lobo’s, success depends on camouflaging the truth, which is hidden in plain view the whole time. It is no wonder The Wizard of Oz is so resonant among homosexuals. “Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain” could be the motto and the mantra of the whole movement.

“The Truth About the Homosexual Rights Movement”
By Ronald G. Lee
New Oxford Review
February 2006
virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=3650

---

“Madness, once unleashed, knows no bounds.” – Winston Churchill

 

[sedonaman]

Fallout from the homosexual movement. [More proof that “marriage” is not the last of their demands.]

UK Secularists and Gays Demand Marginalization of Christians
lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/apr/07040408.html
By Hilary White

LONDON, April 4, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Triumphing after last month’s passage of the Sexual Orientation Regulations, the UK’s secularists and homosexual activist groups are demanding the curtailing of Christian influence in British society.

Terry Sanderson, head of the National Secularist Society, has produced an editorial calling Cormac Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor’s assertions that public expression of religious belief is under attack in Britain, “breathtakingly manipulative.”

The Cardinal gave a lecture March 28, in which he warned that the secularizing trend will marginalize Christians. He said that religious freedom is more than the freedom to worship, “It is the freedom to serve the common good according to the convictions of our faith. It seems to me we are being asked to accept a different version of our democracy, one in which diversity and equality are held to be at odds with religion.”
…

Sanderson writes, “The Catholic Church has happily allied itself with just about every totalitarian regime that has emerged over the centuries in Europe.” He suggests, “It’s time for the Catholic Church – and all the other religious bodies that seek to impose their will on democratic governments – to be firmly put in their place.”

The Gay and Lesbian Humanist Association (GALHA) has issued a press release saying that the Catholic Church is “not fit” to run schools. The statement comes as a response to a House of Commons Select Committee report claiming that Catholic schools are not doing enough to counter “homophobic bullying”.
…

---

“Madness, once unleashed, knows no bounds.” – Winston Churchill

 

[sedonaman]

You spit out “liberal” as if it’s a dirty word. …

Well,

A Gay Man Trapped in a Woman’s Body – and Other Nonsense
by Matt Barber
chronwatch-america.com/articles/2191/1/A-Gay-Man-Trapped-in-a-Womans-Body–and-Other-Nonsense/Page1.html
12/22/2007

Talk radio host Michael Savage doesn’t mince words. He often says that “liberalism is a mental disorder.” He’s right. Liberal ideology and political correctness, infused with public policy, begets social insanity.

Case in point: A recent report on a popular homosexual “news” site declares: “A transgendered student says he is the victim of discrimination at a small Massachusetts community college because he is biologically female.”

Say what? "He” is “female”? Welcome to PC-ville. Come for the oxymoron, stay for the cognitive dissonance.

In other news, “French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte says he is the victim of discrimination because he is biologically Bob from Detroit.”

Apparently, this clearly confused 20-year-old woman who “presents as a male and wears male clothing” is upset that Northern Essex Community College in Haverhill, Massachusetts, will not allow her to undress, shower, or otherwise cavort with the fellows in the men’s locker room. She’s reportedly filed an “affirmative action complaint” against the school.

Even Haverhill’s local newspaper, the Eagle-Tribune, plays along, saying that she was “denied the use of the men’s locker room … because of his female anatomy.”

“His female anatomy”?
…
But it gets worse. The paper goes on to explain that this young woman – er, man … whatever – actually identifies as a “gay male.” It explains that her, “public unveiling as a transgender gay male happened as an adult two years ago. His designation means he has a female body, but identifies as a male and is sexually attracted to men.”

Great Scots! My head hurts. Can this be for real? How can any newspaper that wants to be taken seriously report this with a straight face? A “gay” man trapped in a woman’s body? …

Who else comes up with this kind of madness? Conservatives? I don’t think so.

---

“Madness, once unleashed, knows no bounds.” – Winston Churchill

 

[StAnastasia]

Uh… it is liberals who are all for abortion and gay marriage.

Wrong!

Are you saying people outside of California treat homosexuals bad? Who are you to judge? You obviously have no idea how people are treated here.

Yes. I have gay friends from Youngstowm, Ohio. I asked them what you do in Youngstown if you discover growing up that you are gay. Their response: “You get out of Youngstown.” The hostility they experienced drove them to move to a more loving, accepting region.

Having lived in California and now the midwest… there is a huge difference to me what is taught in Catholic churches here and there. HUGE.

Wrong – I’ve been in many parishes in California and elsewhere in the country. The “huge” difference you paint is imaginary.

We are told abortion is evil. We are told why gay marriage is wrong.

As are Californians by California priests…

Not because we hate homosexuals and see them as less than human.

Are you sure about that?

A former Priest who taught RCIA blew off abortion as if it was a non issue. I would call that liberal.

No - you don’t understand what “liberal” means.

 

[StAnastasia]

Who else comes up with this kind of madness? Conservatives? I don’t think so.

Conservatives. Conservatism is in a sense a mental disorder just as powerful as liberalism.

 

[StAnastasia]

The statement comes as a response to a House of Commons Select Committee report claiming that Catholic schools are not doing enough to counter “homophobic bullying”.

Homophobic bullying is strictly forbidden at my kids’ Catholic school.

 

[StAnastasia]

I am sorry, you are inside out on this one, You cannot be Catholic and be for gay Marriage, it is not possible. Also, catholics do not allow divorce in canon law, only an annulment. there are many threads on this so I won’t go into details, but I am going through the process myself. Do I like it? no I don’t but I must do this in order for my current marriage to be considered valid in the church and the eyes of God where it really counts. Gay marriage? not possible, you have to be a Man and Woman to be Man and Wife… I knew this in kindergarten… only in this age of confusion is it an issue now. Oh you can call it marriage, but it would be as valid and real as me anointing myself King of Israel. I can delude myself all I want, but that doesn’t make it so…

If you have read my posts, you will see that I am not arguing for gay marriage. I explicitly said that the state should only grant civil unions, leaving marriage up to the churches and synagogues and mosques.

My point is that if you want to see what is threatening marriage, look around you. It is not the fact that more people want to participate in this venerable institution, but that many who have entered into it now want out, whether by divorce or by annulment, which is just a Catholics convenient trick to get out of a tiresome marriage. They call it “annulment” to weasel around the word “divorce.” If you want to protect marriage, fight to outlaw divorce and annulment.

 

[larkin31]

Cafeteria Catholicism is a rampant problem in the US.

At my parish, we had an after-Mass discussion (informal) that included about a dozen people all randomly ending up at a local coffee shop together, and one of the younger priests (in a CASSOCK! I hope when I enter Seminary, the Bishop confirms my call so I can wear one! I know…I’m lame…) sat down with us. Somehow we got on the subject of contraception, and one woman tried to explain that “in the interest of preventing wars for resources and overpopulation, God would understand if one used contraception. But only if they were concerned with sustainability.” I’ve never seen a priest almost fall out of his chair. Come to think of it, I’ve never seen a dozen people simultaneously almost fall out of their chairs. This woman is on the board for CCAD and RCIA. I’m fairly certain she won’t be for much longer.

But seriously, Cafeteria Catholicism should be addressed to a greater extent. There are a few beliefs that I have trouble completely conforming my mind around, but knowing that I call myself Catholic, I also know that I cannot speak my mind about these things because, to do so, I would not be conforming myself as a Catholic.

From my outsider’s view of what many Catholics say and actually practice, they left the church teaching on contraception a long time ago. The church argument for a moral distinction between NFP and a condom (or other artificial method) is rather unpersuasive for many otherwise steady Catholic churchgoers.

The argument against homosexuality still has more traction in the Catholic community, but it is losing ground too. And in 2006, the Church put out a document that clearly stated that the homosexual “tendency” is not a sin to the extent that it cannot be controlled. Even the Church position is openly softening in some ways (the act is still considered a sin).

 

[larkin31]

If you have read my posts, you will see that I am not arguing for gay marriage. I explicitly said that the state should only grant civil unions, leaving marriage up to the churches and synagogues and mosques.

My point is that if you want to see what is threatening marriage, look around you. It is not the fact that more people want to participate in this venerable institution, but that many who have entered into it now want out, whether by divorce or by annulment, which is just a Catholics convenient trick to get out of a tiresome marriage. They call it “annulment” to weasel around the word “divorce.” If you want to protect marriage, fight to outlaw divorce and annulment.

When I wrote the same thing here, but in softer words, just a few days ago, I was excoriated.

Let’s see how they respond to a Catholic writing the same thing…

 

[larkin31]

Uh… it is liberals who are all for abortion and gay marriage.

Are you saying people outside of California treat homosexuals bad? Who are you to judge? You obviously have no idea how people are treated here.

Are you kidding me?

Are you suggesting that the pervasive cultural, religious, and macho or feminine currents are NOT running counter to homosexuality? That families no longer basically despair when their children come out? That gay teen suicide rates are falling?