S
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Poll saying white Catholics embrace same-sex marriage than other Americans
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
A
Angels84
Guest
That depends on what you consider secularism.Secularism IS a religion. Just not a very formal one.
The Truth isn’t bigotry.
And if you’re “truth” involves telling homosexual people that their families are inferior or flat out “Oxymorons” (i’ve seen that said here), yes, that is bigotry.
I’ve asked this question many times on this forum and have yet to get a real answer:
What do you say to the Gay couples that have been together for years in a monogamous relationship who are now raising children? You would honestly tell them, and their children, that they aren’t a real family?
My (name removed by moderator)atience stems from the fact that I never get real answers to questions like these. I only get quotes from the Bible or the catechism.
H
Havard
Guest
We are not fundamentalists, and we won’t call you a bigot if you’re not saying bigoted things.All of my claims come from personal experience on this forum along with what I have witnessed.
And yes, call me a bigot. That’s another thing I find fascinating lately. After decades of bigotry coming from religious institutions (not just the catholic church), the social tide has turned. More and more people are able to understand why denying a monogomous gay couple the same rights as every other couple is so blatantly wrong and without any solid secular evidence (yes, secular. Religious arguments hold no credibility). So, in response, fundamentalists are attempting to now call THEIR opposition bigotry. It’s so hypocritical that it’s laughable.
No one here wishes ill on you, contentious topics just get heated. When I see people getting hot under the collar, I try to remind them of their intentions. If that doesn’t work, it’s best ignoring that poster, at least for that time.
C
christus_vincit
Guest
Your worldview is contingent upon the whims of society.All of my claims come from personal experience on this forum along with what I have witnessed.
And yes, call me a bigot. That’s another thing I find fascinating lately. After decades of bigotry coming from religious institutions (not just the catholic church), the social tide has turned. More and more people are able to understand why denying a monogomous gay couple the same rights as every other couple is so blatantly wrong and without any solid secular evidence (yes, secular. Religious arguments hold no credibility). So, in response, fundamentalists are attempting to now call THEIR opposition bigotry. It’s so hypocritical that it’s laughable.
The Christian worldview is grounded in the Truth of Jesus Christ.
You have established that the Word of God means nothing to you. But to us on this forum, it does. The Church will never conform to the whims of the world. Your coming onto this forum to incite argument through personal attacks on beliefs that we hold sacred will not help advance your cause.
A
Angels84
Guest
Certainly not everyone here is a fundamentalist, there are many who self-proclaimed that they are. And as I said before, I know that many people here really do mean well in their heart is in the right place. But, again, telling someone their family isn’t real? There’s no way to back that up.We are not fundamentalists, and we won’t call you a bigot if you’re not saying bigoted things.
No one here wishes ill on you, contentious topics just get heated. When I see people getting hot under the collar, I try to remind them of their intentions. If that doesn’t work, it’s best ignoring that poster, at least for that time.
A
Angels84
Guest
Another case of hypocrisy: getting upset when your religion is cast in a negative light while you mock families that differ from your own. I see that happen all the time here too.
H
Havard
Guest
Okay, I think I understand. Someone, or some people, are attacking the people you care about most. If this is happening, it has no place here. Report them.Certainly not everyone here is a fundamentalist, there are many who self-proclaimed that they are. And as I said before, I know that many people here really do mean well in their heart is in the right place. But, again, telling someone their family isn’t real? There’s no way to back that up.
But I strongly advise against engaging them in discussions. You will have much more fruitful discussions with people who exhibit their goodwill in their posts.
E
Eternal_One
Guest
The longevity of the relationship between homosexuals is not relevant and does not change the fact that their relationship is not ordered toward procreation.That depends on what you consider secularism.
And if you’re “truth” involves telling homosexual people that their families are inferior or flat out “Oxymorons” (i’ve seen that said here), yes, that is bigotry.
I’ve asked this question many times on this forum and have yet to get a real answer:
What do you say to the Gay couples that have been together for years in a monogamous relationship who are now raising children? You would honestly tell them, and their children, that they aren’t a real family?
My (name removed by moderator)atience stems from the fact that I never get real answers to questions like these. I only get quotes from the Bible or the catechism.
People can live their entire lives being anorexic. That still doesn’t make anorexia healthy or normal.
A
Angels84
Guest
Ah. Okay. So homosexuality is a disorder then. Okay.The longevity of the relationship between homosexuals is not relevant and does not change the fact that their relationship is not ordered toward procreation.
People can live their entire lives being anorexic. That still doesn’t make anorexia healthy or normal.
The procreation argument is invalid. I don’t think I have to explain why.
Besides, while I get a gay couple may not be able to procreate, they are still fully capable of raising a family. You can’t deny that.
A
Angels84
Guest
Also, I think mentioning the longevity of many gay relationships is important, because so often I hear the argument that gay couples are not able to maintain a long-lasting, monogamous relationship. Which, obviously, is totally false.
It is an argument I hear on the forefront of every debate against gay marriage, and it’s full of holes. So yes, I think it’s worth mentioning.
It is an argument I hear on the forefront of every debate against gay marriage, and it’s full of holes. So yes, I think it’s worth mentioning.
C
christus_vincit
Guest
The relationship must be ordered towards procreation, even if the couple cannot procreate (perhaps for medical reasons, or old age). A homosexual relationship can under no circumstance be ordered towards procreation.The procreation argument is invalid. I don’t think I have to explain why.
S
SquallLeonheart
Guest
There’s a reason that now OVER 50% of Catholics believe and are embracing same sex marriage and it’s quite evident throughout this thread for many reasons. Take the first gay couples who got married in Vermont years ago. Anyone can believe their marriage is meaningless/a grave sin/a travesty/an evil thing/not natural in the eyes of God, but that couple should have the right to disagree, and not believe that. Whose TRUTH is correct? Ahh, that’s the great thing about Freedom baby. However, to expound further, we, as Catholics, do not have that right to impose legislation banning gays from getting married. Sure, the Church does not have to recognize it, but from a purely legal secular perspective, this is bigotry and discrimination. So it’s quite inevitable that same sex marriage will become legal in every state, and that quite soon.
H
Havard
Guest
There’s misunderstanding and overreaction here, yes. It exists on both sides. We need to calm down the rhetoric and foster more understanding.Another case of hypocrisy: getting upset when your religion is cast in a negative light while you mock families that differ from your own. I see that happen all the time here too.
A
Angels84
Guest
I agree. A gay couple cannot procreate together.The relationship must be ordered towards procreation, even if the couple cannot procreate (perhaps for medical reasons, or old age). A homosexual relationship can under no circumstance be ordered towards procreation.
But what their relationship is “ordered to”? Well, that’s according to your faith. Not them.
A
Angels84
Guest
[BIBLEDRB][/BIBLEDRB]
Agreed.There’s misunderstanding and overreaction here, yes. It exists on both sides. We need to calm down the rhetoric and foster more understanding.
E
Eternal_One
Guest
The point about procreation is not invalid. Obviously there are validly married heterosexual sterile couples, but their sexual intercourse is still ordered towards procreation, even if they lack the capability. In other words, if that capability was restored, they’d be capable of procreating. There is nothing that can be restored in a homosexual relationship that would render it procreative.Ah. Okay. So homosexuality is a disorder then. Okay.
The procreation argument is invalid. I don’t think I have to explain why.
Besides, while I get a gay couple may not be able to procreate, they are still fully capable of raising a family. You can’t deny that.
I cant agree that homosexual couples are “fully capable” of raising a family. Sure, there are exceptions of homosexual couples who do their best, but the ideal and rule of children being raised by a loving father and mother can never be topped.
A
Angels84
Guest
But there is an urgency to this situation because so many people, millions of taxpaying Americans, aren’t able to have the same rights as their heterosexual counterparts. Then you see politicians using their religious beliefs as reasoning against said rights. I find that wrong.
Everyone, including politicians, of course has the right to their religious beliefs. But using them from a political standpoint is the very definition of “imposing”.
Everyone, including politicians, of course has the right to their religious beliefs. But using them from a political standpoint is the very definition of “imposing”.
H
Havard
Guest
You’ve combined a few different ideas that don’t necessarily go together.There’s a reason that now OVER 50% of Catholics believe and are embracing same sex marriage and it’s quite evident throughout this thread for many reasons. Take the first gay couples who got married in Vermont years ago. Anyone can believe their marriage is meaningless/a grave sin/a travesty/an evil thing/not natural in the eyes of God, but that couple should have the right to disagree, and not believe that. Whose TRUTH is correct? Ahh, that’s the great thing about Freedom baby. However, to expound further, we, as Catholics, do not have that right to impose legislation banning gays from getting married. Sure, the Church does not have to recognize it, but from a purely legal secular perspective, this is bigotry and discrimination. So it’s quite inevitable that same sex marriage will become legal in every state, and that quite soon.
Yes, we shouldn’t impose belief. Yes, we shouldn’t police bedrooms.
But the marriage aspect to your post is actually very different. You see, civil governments theoretically don’t have to get involved in marriage at all. It is not a binary issue of same-sex marriage being legal or not. It is about what relationships, if any, the government chooses to lift up and promote, and why they choose to do so.
A
Angels84
Guest
But see, you are presenting your religious views as fact. They are not. They are opinions when used outside of the church.The point about procreation is not invalid. Obviously there are validly married heterosexual sterile couples, but their sexual intercourse is still ordered towards procreation, even if they lack the capability. In other words, if that capability was restored, they’d be capable of procreating. There is nothing that can be restored in a homosexual relationship that would render it procreative.
I cant agree that homosexual couples are “fully capable” of raising a family. Sure, there are exceptions of homosexual couples who do their best, but the ideal and rule of children being raised by a loving father and mother can never be topped.
And yes, gay couples are absolutely capable of raising children. It has been proven time and time again; the opposition just refuses to acknowledge it.
E
Eternal_One
Guest
If the DMV started licensing blind drivers and you argued against that and then there were those who disagreed, who’s truth would be correct?There’s a reason that now OVER 50% of Catholics believe and are embracing same sex marriage and it’s quite evident throughout this thread for many reasons. Take the first gay couples who got married in Vermont years ago. Anyone can believe their marriage is meaningless/a grave sin/a travesty/an evil thing/not natural in the eyes of God, but that couple should have the right to disagree, and not believe that. Whose TRUTH is correct? Ahh, that’s the great thing about Freedom baby. However, to expound further, we, as Catholics, do not have that right to impose legislation banning gays from getting married. Sure, the Church does not have to recognize it, but from a purely legal secular perspective, this is bigotry and discrimination. So it’s quite inevitable that same sex marriage will become legal in every state, and that quite soon.
There is only one truth and the one who speaks for it, is correct. Whenever we go against the truth, disastrous consequences always follow. Study some history.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.