Pope restates gay marriage ban after California vote

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Wolseley said:
I
If nothing else, this certainly proves beyond all doubt that democracy is dead, at least in Kalifornya. .
Click to expand...
  1. The USA is a Republic, not a Democracy.
  2. As a Republic, we have the Bill of Rights PRECISELY to put limits on the ability of the majority to impose on a minority, as determined by the Courts.
  3. Did you bother to actually read the Judges opinions? (The vote was 4-3) Did you note that the four judges considered the anti-gay marriage law to be along the lines of the old miscegnation laws that forbade Whites to marry Blacks?
  4. You may not agree with any of this. Too bad. You might consider donating lots and lots of money to the group who is trying to put a Constitional Amendment on the November ballot.
  5. Grow up. It’s “America”, not “Amerika”, and “California”, not “Kalifornya”.
 
One thing is, the marriage the gay folks are gonna do is not considered valid, as little as a civil marriage is considered valid. If one if being intimate with one’s civil spouse, the church considers you a fornicator, even if one has lived with one’s spouse for many years and has a family and everything else, so who really cares if they get “married”…besides, after a few decades of “marriage” they may put a proposition on the ballot themselves to illegalize it again! 😛
As far a society accepting the homosexual lifestyle is ok and the rest, this is happening regardless…
and, why shouldn’t they have the benefits of heterosexual couples receive if they can stay “married” they deserve it, the majority of couples don’t stay married anyway, including “catholics”, so who really cares? I’m not pro gay marriage or anything, but I always like to argue the opposing viewpoint for one, and these are thoughts that do go through my head, so let’s see if anyone responds. :hmmm:
 
Andruschak said:
  1. The USA is a Republic, not a Democracy.
Click to expand...
Not quite; technically it’s a democratic republic. Or was, when the Constitution still had some force.
  1. As a Republic, we have the Bill of Rights PRECISELY to put limits on the ability of the majority to impose on a minority, as determined by the Courts.
Click to expand...
So, in your opinion, it’s better to allow the minority to impose on the majority? Less than 2% of the total population can decide what marriage consists of for the other 98%?
  1. Did you bother to actually read the Judges opinions? (The vote was 4-3)
Click to expand...
I know that all four have leanings towards the Anti-Christian Lunatics Union, which tells me all I need to know.
Did you note that the four judges considered the anti-gay marriage law to be along the lines of the old miscegnation laws that forbade Whites to marry Blacks?
Click to expand...
Did you know that interracial marriage is not morally condemned by Holy Mother Church, whilst a putated “marriage” between two homosexuals is?
  1. You may not agree with any of this.
Click to expand...
Thank you. I intend to exercise that privilege.
Too bad. You might consider donating lots and lots of money to the group who is trying to put a Constitional Amendment on the November ballot.
Click to expand...
I have little faith in governments or this society any more, I’m afraid. I’ll put my money into ammunition and other supplies needed for the day not long hence when the whole works collapses and we have anarchy until the Muslims and the Red Chinese occupy the country and establish order again.
  1. Grow up. It’s “America”, not “Amerika”, and “California”, not “Kalifornya”.
Click to expand...
For now.
 
Good for the Pope! 👍 I love our Pope. He is so wonderful! It’s too bad that the Pope can’t just take over California and declare this “gay marriage” as illegal or something.
 
rien said:
How disappointing. The Bishop of Madison soft pedaled this today of CAL. He beleives or accepts their sincerity in their decison. The Ca Supreme Court justices. Though he disagres with the decision. it. Like didn’t he have to say that. Lukewarmness from one of the more Orthodox US bishops like his is scary. Like do any of them beleive.?

I know many of you are asking hjst. keep doing so. And praying to be lead - even if out out the Roman church.

What a charade. Like the gay marriage marriage initiative makes the the ballot in in California look at the the witness of the evanngelical pastors. Look at the witness of the Catholic bishops Almoast totally not there.

This summer will play ou,t but if you are wavering as to who is preaching the truth. Just wait. My bet is the Catholic bisops in Ca. will finesse this.ZBut the evangelical pastors will preach Christ.

If this indeed plays then why do you remain Catholic?

Come November ask where the Bisho pof San francisco has been on this. Or LA.

An inivitaive brought forward by evangelicals that should have been brougth forward by Catholics.

IMO - you are being zoomed by the “church”. Again, JMHO.
Click to expand...
In my case I stay CATHOLIC because of the Eucharist. I follow not man but God.
 
Holly3278 said:
Good for the Pope! 👍 I love our Pope. He is so wonderful! It’s too bad that the Pope can’t just take over California and declare this “gay marriage” as illegal or something.
Click to expand...
A hospital near us fired all of its nurses and other staff. The small hospital was purchased by a much larger secular one. Those staff that the new mega-hospital were more in line with their “mission” in medical care were hired back. So it is too bad we can’t fire the all the Bishops. Then we could decide which ones to rehire or not rehire and go forward from that point.
 
For the longest time I thought the Church will not be affected by so called “Gay Marriage”. We have Holy Matrimony not just secular marriage. It only affects secular/natural marriage…False.

When “Gay Marriage” becomes legal and completely mainstream… We Catholics will be viewed as even more counter-cultural, and extremist, and intolerant.

Let me ask you(all)…Do you feel comfortable talking about the Church’s teaching about gay sex?( That it is disordered). Many Catholics believe it but they are too intimidated to speak up. They don’t want to be labeled ‘Homo-phobe’. Rein is right on one thing -even the Bishops are scared.

So when it comes to pass, not only in California but through out the USA, we will be labeled as “Haters”. More so than ever.(Example: ‘Hate is not a family Value’) Bumper sticker mentatlity.

Holy Matrimony=Hate Speech. Don’t think that the Hate-speech laws cannont extinguish freedom of religion–Look at Europe!

This is where we are headed.

p.s. just for the record Californians overwhelmingly reject Gay Marriage. What the country witnessed was a coupe. One person(4-3) overuled the will of the majority. A progressive/activist judge. Appointed by who—Democrats SHHH don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings.:rolleyes:
 
rien said:
Ain’t gonna happen. The evangelicals will carry on the war on this. Let’s get real, in some liberal dioceses priests and parishioners wouldn’t allow the petition in their Churches.

The witness for Christ and the family in Calif is with the Evangelicals and Hispanics who are converting in huge numbers. Philippines too. I have a co-worker friend who is Filipino who is on the front line for the initivr? and who has converted 3 years ago to Assemblies.

That is the fact, Jack. Sorry to put it that way but the church in Northern California is all about legalizing illegal immigrants and mostly nothing more.

Not prophetic in any way. Any wonder why the illegal immigrants exposed by the Catholic church increasingly embrace evangelicalism.

Its all a charade. They don’t believe. The bishops and priests. Why should you?
Click to expand...
I hope you don’t mind I ran your post through spell check so I could read it better.

So it seems that those in charge in California are continuing to go against Holy Mother Church teachings. It does not surprise me at all. It does sadden me to see that things have not changed since I lived in SF in the mid to late 1960’s.

Why should we care? Well because God has instructed us to care for the family and moral values. The fact remains that the EUCHARIST remains truly the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ and even if the priest behaves against Holy Mother Church the Eucharist does not. We have been told not to join the world in their unbelief and worldly ways.

It saddens me to hear that many might be leaving the Church because of what men do or do not do. God in Three Persons is whom we are to be following. I will continue to pray that those that walked away from the Church will one day return.
 
Franciscan said:
p.s. just for the record Californians overwhelmingly reject Gay Marriage. What the country witnessed was a coupe. One person(4-3) overuled the will of the majority. A progressive/activist judge. Appointed by who—Democrats SHHH don’t want to hurt anyone’s feelings.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Um…let’s be accurate here.

Voting to allow same-sex marriage:
Ronald M. George (appointed by Pete Wilson - R)
Joyce L. Kennard (appointed by George Deukmejian - R)
Kathryn M. Werdegar (appointed by Pete Wilson - R)
Carlos R. Moreno (appointed by Gray Davis - D)

Voting against same-sex marriage:
Marvin R. Baxter (appointed by George Deukmejian - R)
Ming W. Chin (appointed by Pete Wilson - R)
Carol A. Corrigan (appointed by Arnold Schwarzenegger - R)

So one out of the seven justices was appointed by a Democrat and somehow the Democrats are responsible for this decision? What about the three Republican appointees who voted for same-sex marriage?
 
SuscipeMeDomine said:
Um…let’s be accurate here.

Voting to allow same-sex marriage:
Ronald M. George (appointed by Pete Wilson - R)
Joyce L. Kennard (appointed by George Deukmejian - R)
Kathryn M. Werdegar (appointed by Pete Wilson - R)
Carlos R. Moreno (appointed by Gray Davis - D)

Voting against same-sex marriage:
Marvin R. Baxter (appointed by George Deukmejian - R)
Ming W. Chin (appointed by Pete Wilson - R)
Carol A. Corrigan (appointed by Arnold Schwarzenegger - R)

So one out of the seven justices was appointed by a Democrat and somehow the Democrats are responsible for this decision? What about the three Republican appointees who voted for same-sex marriage?
Click to expand...
Thankyou. You proved my point Republicans are just as bad if not worse them Democrats on this issue!.. Thankyou:o
 
I’m still trying to figure out how this is going to play out if nothing changes, from a Catholic perspective.

Currently, there are several Catholics who are involved in same-sex relationships. Are they participating in the sacraments? Maybe, maybe not. I suspect most have left the church to join more open Christian denominations, or left organized religion all together, but based on the rainbow sash group which comes out every year, there are probably quite a few who still attend Catholic mass. Whether or not they partake of the Eucharist, are there any statistics on this?

With this ruling, those same sex Catholic couples will enter into civil marriages, but those marriages will not be recognized by the Catholic Church. The marriages won’t be performed in Catholic churches or on Catholic holy grounds. They still can’t receive the Eucharist, so theoretically, one wouldn’t expect this ruling to have a change in Catholicism in CA.

However, I am curious to see how many Catholic parishes perform ‘blessing ceremonies’ for these civilly married same-sex couples. I should hope the number would be zero, but I’m concerned they will take place and then wonder what Rome’s response will be (if any). There is where the real confusion will arise - not in this CA supreme court ruling, but how the CA parishes maneuver around it.
 
GAHere said:
I’m still trying to figure out how this is going to play out if nothing changes, from a Catholic perspective.

Currently, there are several Catholics who are involved in same-sex relationships. Are they participating in the sacraments? Maybe, maybe not. I suspect most have left the church to join more open Christian denominations, or left organized religion all together, but based on the rainbow sash group which comes out every year, there are probably quite a few who still attend Catholic mass. Whether or not they partake of the Eucharist, are there any statistics on this?

With this ruling, those same sex Catholic couples will enter into civil marriages, but those marriages will not be recognized by the Catholic Church. The marriages won’t be performed in Catholic churches or on Catholic holy grounds. They still can’t receive the Eucharist, so theoretically, one wouldn’t expect this ruling to have a change in Catholicism in CA.

However, I am curious to see how many Catholic parishes perform ‘blessing ceremonies’ for these civilly married same-sex couples. I should hope the number would be zero, but I’m concerned they will take place and then wonder what Rome’s response will be (if any). There is where the real confusion will arise - not in this CA supreme court ruling, but how the CA parishes maneuver around it.
Click to expand...
I’m not sure the CA parishes will be maneuvering around it. Here is a quote from a homily by Eric Stoltz, an openly gay deacon in Los Angeles:
If we are each to be able to answer the question, “Who do I say that I am?” it must be an exercise in total honesty. This is when we come out of the closet of who others say I am and say, as did St. Paul, “By the grace of God, I am what I am, and his grace towards me has not been without fruit.” (1 Cor. 15:10) I bet you didn’t know that song from “La Cage Aux Folles” was quoting scripture!
Click to expand...
By the grace of God, I am what I am. A wonderful scriptural passage to reflect upon on today, when we gay and lesbian people celebrate who we are.
Click to expand...
And in the same way the gay and lesbian community comes to terms with who we are, our straight brothers and sisters are also asked to come to terms with who they are, for self-knowledge is something we all must approach on our road to holiness, to wholeness, to being whole. Everyone, gay and straight, must come out of the closet of trying to be what others expect us to be, and just be the person God wants us to be, to be truly ourselves as God envisioned each of us from before the beginning of time. It is my own face, your own face, that God wants us to present to the world, not a mask of others’ making.
Click to expand...
Sounds like he’s all ready to get the gay marriages processing down the aisle.
 
This was not a vote. This was an oligarchal decision running against the express will of Californians.
 
SuscipeMeDomine said:
Um…let’s be accurate here.

Voting to allow same-sex marriage:
Ronald M. George (appointed by Pete Wilson - R)
Joyce L. Kennard (appointed by George Deukmejian - R)
Kathryn M. Werdegar (appointed by Pete Wilson - R)
Carlos R. Moreno (appointed by Gray Davis - D)

Voting against same-sex marriage:
Marvin R. Baxter (appointed by George Deukmejian - R)
Ming W. Chin (appointed by Pete Wilson - R)
Carol A. Corrigan (appointed by Arnold Schwarzenegger - R)

So one out of the seven justices was appointed by a Democrat and somehow the Democrats are responsible for this decision? What about the three Republican appointees who voted for same-sex marriage?
Click to expand...
I would assume that the senate & house were the final decision on these appointments. So were they majority Democrat or Republican. No governor or president can make these appointments on their own. Just look at the number of open judgeships that go unfilled because the voting members of the chambers won’t allow votes on them.

Sorry the blame goes all around on the appointment of bad judges.
 
I don’t believe there will be changes in what Holy Mother Church teaches and allows. I do believe we (CATHOLICS) will be under great secular pressure to change. But the unchangeable teachings of the CHURCH can’t change.

There might be some parishes that will remove themselves from the Holy Catholic Church and take on names that appear to be Catholic without a true relationship to Rome. If this happens when you visit a parish that is not yours you would be best advised to see if the parish is in union with Rome.
 
Interesting posts. I can’t resist a couple of observations.

First, although it apparently appeals to some, I don’t want to live in a theocracy where the Pope can declare what is legal and what is not. Sounds like the ayatollahs in Iran.

Second, in the dozens, if not hundreds of posts I have read on this issue, not one poster has explained how gays living together or married (as in Massachusetts) has damaged his or her marriage.

Third, under our law, marriage is a civil contract under state law, no more, no less. As far as government is concerned, if you pay the license fee and have the return on the license completed and sent in, you are married.

Fourth, civil marriage should not equated with a sacramental marriage. A civil marriage is a contract under state law; a sacramental marriage is a vow - a promise to God.
 
OriginalJS said:
Interesting posts. I can’t resist a couple of observations.

First, although it apparently appeals to some, I don’t want to live in a theocracy where the Pope can declare what is legal and what is not. Sounds like the ayatollahs in Iran.
Click to expand...
Who has said that appeals to them. I haven’t read it anywhere on this forum. However, I do understand that in this country, we are able to support laws that are in accord with our beliefs. As Catholics, we look to our Pope and the Magisterium for guidance in our faith, our faith forms our conscience, and we vote our conscience. I fully expect people of other faiths (or no faith) to vote their conscience, as well.
40.png
OriginalJS:
Second, in the dozens, if not hundreds of posts I have read on this issue, not one poster has explained how gays living together or married (as in Massachusetts) has damaged his or her marriage.
Click to expand...
Who says that gay relationships have to damage someone’s marriage for someone to oppose gay marriage? You are presenting a requirement that no one needs to meet (aka strawman).
40.png
OriginalJS:
Third, under our law, marriage is a civil contract under state law, no more, no less. As far as government is concerned, if you pay the license fee and have the return on the license completed and sent in, you are married.
Click to expand...
No argument here.
OrigionalJS:
Fourth, civil marriage should not equated with a sacramental marriage. A civil marriage is a contract under state law; a sacramental marriage is a vow - a promise to God.
Click to expand...
And your point is what? I am against gay marriage because it holds no appreciable value for society and government should promote and encourage the foundational structure of society - the family: husband, wife and children.
 
Great article from IsideCatholic here’s an excerpt…

The most important thing to society is children. We have tremendous evidence that every child needs a mother and father who are married. The sense of wanting your mother and father to be married and to belong to you is so deep that as we eroded marriage, we lost a great deal. We have to understand that marriage is essential for the well-being of a child. So when we bring same-sex marriage into it, we lose this.

And when we add same-sex relationships, which are very unstable, we bring in a lot of divorce and all kinds of other things.

Children love the people who are their parents – the people who take care of them. And they don’t want to hurt them. And of course, parents love their children.

So we’re going to have the children feeling deprived – wanting the father and mother and stability. But they’ll also feel guilty, because the people they rely on have actually denied them this willfully. There’s an old saying that it’s better to have a dead father than a divorced father because there’s an element of willfulness in divorce that isn’t there when someone dies.

Now we’re seeing willful acts where people are producing babies for same-sex couples that are intentionally fatherless and motherless. And that’s a terrible form of child abuse.

more…
insidecatholic.com/Joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3679&Itemid=48
 
OriginalJS said:
The ruling has no affect on the Church and its rules about marriage. What’s to rise to? If you read that opinion, look at the last few pages and see all the people involved. Interesting.
Click to expand...
I would think “to rise to” is to “speak out against” this ruling which would reaffirm the Pope’s statement. To affect implies the action of a stimulus that can produce a response or reaction. You may feel as though you are removed from this ruling but it will have an affect on society at large. We’ve had a family situation that caused us to respond and react to a homosexual member in a loving manner that has saved our children from being brain washed into believing that it is o.k. to lead a homosexual life style. We have been very blessed to follow the church’s teachings on this matter. I would advise all families with young children to do the same!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top