Prop 8 found to be unconstitutional...struck down!

[Adam1986]

xixxvmcm85:

I was under the impression that you were arguing for Sacramental same-sex-marriage, so pardon the mix up.

Oh no! No, lol.

And I can say that THERE IS NO PUSH FOR SACRAMENTAL MARRIAGE IN THE GAY COMMUNITY. Trust me I know, lol.

We’re not here to push our beliefs on ANYONE. All we want are the exact same legal benefits and for it to just be called the same thing. That’s all.

 

[eagle_eye222001]

That is the truth when gay people do find their soul mate, they do stay together more often then straight people do.

Why?

In a lot of ways more same sex marriages are more based on love then their straight counter parts.

NOW I AM NOT SAYING ANYONE ON HERE, OR EVEN MOST CATHOLICS IN GENERAL.

But there is a higher ratio of people marrying for money, power, etc in the straight community. Almost all same sex marriages are based on true love.

That’s a pretty outlandish claim. Source? Evidence?

 

[eagle_eye222001]

…We’re not here to push our beliefs on ANYONE. All we want are the exact same legal benefits and for it to just be called the same thing. That’s all.

So you want to FORCE this nation to recognize you? That’s pushing beliefs down someone’s throat, and forcing us to change a deep historically backed definition!

All you want is to force beliefs on us…you can’t say that your not trying to do that.

 

[Adam1986]

I mean this as a serious question and I truly want an answer to my question.

Since the Catholic Church would never see my marriage as valid, what’s the big deal?
If it’s not a marriage then we really didn’t win or get anything then, right?
All we got was a different term for our civil union. Right?

 

[Corki]

Oh no! No, lol.

And I can say that THERE IS NO PUSH FOR SACRAMENTAL MARRIAGE IN THE GAY COMMUNITY. Trust me I know, lol.

We’re not here to push our beliefs on ANYONE. All we want are the exact same legal benefits and for it to just be called the same thing. That’s all.

This is just plain false. There has been a push for Sacramental marriage in the Episcopal, Presbyterian and even the Baptist Chuch just to name a few that have been in the headlines recently. I personally know at least one Catholic same-sex couple that obtained a simulated Catholic marriage by a priest. The push, for years, has been to have same-sex marriage equal IN EVERY WAY to normal marriages and that includes a push for religious recognition.

“Trust me” just doesn’t carry any weight. Just a few years ago the mantra was “why should anyone care what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own bedrooms?” People who predicted that Lawrence v. Texas would lead to a call for same-sex marriage were absolutely right! Sometimes a slippery slope is real and not a logical fallacy.

 

[Adam1986]

Why?

Why what? Please expand.

That’s a pretty outlandish claim. Source? Evidence?

More then half of the marriages in the country end in divorce.
How amny times have you heard the word “golddigger” etc.?
How many times are their battles over pre-nups?
How often are children used as leverage in things?
How often do people get married to fast when they are really only basing their marriage on their physical attraction rather then real love?
Do you want me to continue?

 

[Corki]

I mean this as a serious question and I truly want an answer to my question.

Since the Catholic Church would never see my marriage as valid, what’s the big deal?
If it’s not a marriage then we really didn’t win or get anything then, right?
All we got was a different term for our civil union. Right?

Your answer is here:

vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20030731_homosexual-unions_en.html

 

[Suudy]

I’m not sure exactly what the process is, but for someone to be excommunicated it takes A LOT MORE than a PERSONAL feeling. And you can ask anyone else on here who is more knowledgeable in this manner. Being excommunicated is a HUGE deal and is not taken lightly. For anyone to be truly excommunicated, they need to be informed in writing from I think the Pope, though it might be through a council of bishops. Not really sure on this manner. I’m sure someone else can shed more light and correct any mistakes.

See CCC 838:

838 "The Church knows that she is joined in many ways to the baptized who are honored by the name of Christian, but do not profess the Catholic faith in its entirety or have not preserved unity or communion under the successor of Peter."322 Those "who believe in Christ and have been properly baptized are put in a certain, although imperfect, communion with the Catholic Church."323 With the Orthodox Churches, this communion is so profound "that it lacks little to attain the fullness that would permit a common celebration of the Lord’s Eucharist."324

Perhaps excommunication is too strong. But is seems clear that one is not in full communion if one rejects the teachings of the Church. And while nor a formal excommunication, it is perhaps equivalent in effect.

 

[Stylites]

I hear that laws against thievery hurt the feelings of other “behavioral minorities” known as “thieves.” No man or woman is denied marriage in California because of who they are, just for what they do.

 

[estesbob]

By what evidence do you conclude that Judge Walker ruled due to his sexual orientation? Or is this nothing more than a cheap shot at the man’s character?

Not a cheap shot at all. He should’ve recused himself . The questions he asked during the trial indicated that he could not separate his sexual behavior from his professional life. It was a gross conflict of interest and the fact did not recuse himself speaks volumes about his character.

 

[Dee_Dee_King]

We’re not here to push our beliefs on ANYONE. All we want are the exact same legal benefits and for it to just be called the same thing. That’s all.

when europe was catholic, anyone who would promote such insanity or practice it, would be handed over to the state and put away or even sentenced to death. obviously, things were different in the middle ages. nonetheless, society was inspired by an entirely catholic ethos. if it were still, this judge would be thrown in prison. you’re opinion is antithetical to catholicism and the explicit teachings of Christ.

 

[estesbob]

That is the truth when gay people do find their soul mate, they do stay together more often then straight people do. In a lot of ways more same sex marriages are more based on love then their straight counter parts.

There is no evidence whatsoever to back this up. However it is evident that that in states where homosexual marriage has been forced upon the populace only a miniscule number of homosexuals avail himself of their newfound “right”

NOW I AM NOT SAYING ANYONE ON HERE, OR EVEN MOST CATHOLICS IN GENERAL.

But there is a higher ratio of people marrying for money, power, etc in the straight community. Almost all same sex marriages are based on true love.

Again you’re making a statement with no basis in fact

 

[Stylites]

This is just plain false. There has been a push for Sacramental marriage in the Episcopal, Presbyterian and even the Baptist Chuch just to name a few that have been in the headlines recently. I personally know at least one Catholic same-sex couple that obtained a simulated Catholic marriage by a priest. The push, for years, has been to have same-sex marriage equal IN EVERY WAY to normal marriages and that includes a push for religious recognition.

“Trust me” just doesn’t carry any weight. Just a few years ago the mantra was “why should anyone care what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own bedrooms?” People who predicted that Lawrence v. Texas would lead to a call for same-sex marriage were absolutely right! Sometimes a slippery slope is real and not a logical fallacy.

When will the normal people reach that promised land known as “leave us alone to do our own thing in private”?

 

[j1akey]

Adam1986:

I mean this as a serious question and I truly want an answer to my question.

Since the Catholic Church would never see my marriage as valid, what’s the big deal?
If it’s not a marriage then we really didn’t win or get anything then, right?
All we got was a different term for our civil union. Right?

That’s not the point. It doesn’t matter that the church doesn’t recognize it and you like anyone else can now just go down to the courthouse to get married. What matters is that a group of people that the church has labeled “sinful” or “immoral” now are on the road to having the same rights as them and they’re afraid of it. It doesn’t matter that gay marriage doesn’t actually affect them on anything other than an emotional level, they’re just unable to legislate their religious morality in California anymore. Power has been taken away and that’s a threat.

 

[estesbob]

I mean this as a serious question and I truly want an answer to my question.

Since the Catholic Church would never see my marriage as valid, what’s the big deal?
If it’s not a marriage then we really didn’t win or get anything then, right?
All we got was a different term for our civil union. Right?

The big deal is the state sanctioning of a grevious sin puts souls at risk. What you got was a slap in the faces of 7 million California who have twice said they did not want the definition of marriage changed to embrace homosexual behavior. There will be hell to pay come this November. You reap what you sow

 

[Adam1986]

So you want to FORCE this nation to recognize you? That’s pushing beliefs down someone’s throat, and forcing us to change a deep historically backed definition!

What I shouldn’t be recognized as a person? That’s what it seems when you say ‘recognize you’. If you meant something else; please tell me. Otherwise it seems as if you don’t even value me as a person. And the one thing that I can say for certain is that God does recognize me as a person. He made me and he loves me. That I know.

All you want is to force beliefs on us…you can’t say that your not trying to do that.

No I’m not. All I am doing here is giving my honest personal beliefs on this matter. Not once have I said ANYTHING ABOUT YOU MUST CHANGE YOU MINDS or anything like that. That would be forcing beliefs on people. This is America and I do not have to agree with everything that everyone says on here. I’m sure that you have at least one time disagreed with one thing that someone said on here, no matter how small. If they countered your arguments, would you say they are forcing their beliefs on you if they were just saying their feelings in a calm, polite way? I doubt it.

I find it a little stereotypical that you feel that just because I am a gay man I am trying to change you. I am not. I respect both you and your opinions. All that I ask is that you do the same. We can disagree and still be civil and not accusing.

 

[xixxvmcm85]

Not a cheap shot at all. He should’ve recused himself . The questions he asked during the trial indicated that he could not separate his sexual behavior from his professional life. It was a gross conflict of interest and the fact did not recuse himself speaks volumes about his character.

The questions he asked were necessary given what the plaintiffs were arguing, namely that strict scrutiny must be applied given the alleged immutability of sexual orientation and that reasonable state interest must be demonstrated. If the defendants in the case were arguing that children do not fare well in same-sex parented homes (which they were!) then surely it’s reasonable for the judge (whether gay or straight!) to ask for the psychological evidence thereof.

Why exactly should he have recused himself? Does being a member of the group alleging to have had their civil rights impinged upon necessarily make the judge unworthy to serve? Would you say the same if the plaintiffs were Catholics and the judge likewise was one?

 

[eagle_eye222001]

I mean this as a serious question and I truly want an answer to my question.

Since the Catholic Church would never see my marriage as valid, what’s the big deal?
If it’s not a marriage then we really didn’t win or get anything then, right?
All we got was a different term for our civil union. Right?

The big deal is that I will not sit idly by, and let someone else force their moral beliefs on me. That is what you and others are doing.

Why what? Please expand.

Directed to quoted claim.

More then half of the marriages in the country end in divorce.
How amny times have you heard the word “golddigger” etc.?
How many times are their battles over pre-nups?
How often are children used as leverage in things?
How often do people get married to fast when they are really only basing their marriage on their physical attraction rather then real love?
Do you want me to continue?

Your claims are baseless. They apply to homosexual “marriage” as well.

More then half of the marriages in the country end in divorce.

Oh, so we should all become homosexuals (because your **assuming **conclusion is that homosexual marriages will NOT end in divorce at near the rate) and end the human race since their will be no new generation? That doesn’t make any sense.

How amny times have you heard the word “golddigger” etc.?

Almost never. In fact I can make the same argument for a homosexual couple. No reason it is limited to heterosexual marriages.
**
How many times are their battles over pre-nups?**

Again, this could be turned right back at a homosexual couple.
**
How often are children used as leverage in things?**

Ah, so homosexual couples will never adopt kids? Please! There is a push for homosexuals to adopt kids…and if there is a divorce…I see a leverage battle.

How often do people get married to fast when they are really only basing their marriage on their physical attraction rather then real love?

Serious? I say the same argument against homosexual couples.

*The bottom line is that you offer NO proof or evidence to support your claims…and even all your claims can be turned right back at a homosexual couple…which invalidates your whole argument.

There may be a 50% divorce rate…but homosexual marriages surely are NOT the cure!*

 

[Adam1986]

This is just plain false. There has been a push for Sacramental marriage in the Episcopal, Presbyterian and even the Baptist Chuch just to name a few that have been in the headlines recently. I personally know at least one Catholic same-sex couple that obtained a simulated Catholic marriage by a priest. The push, for years, has been to have same-sex marriage equal IN EVERY WAY to normal marriages and that includes a push for religious recognition.

OK. Fine. Maybe I was a little to quick to say that their is NO PUSH for that. You’re right. That was an unthought out argument. I was going off of people whom I know personally. People who range from Catholics to atheists. And out of everyone I know, we just want the oppurtunity to marry in a court. That’s all.

Though it is a VERY SMALL percentage of people who want a Sacramental marriage.

 

[Adam1986]

See CCC 838:

Perhaps excommunication is too strong. But is seems clear that one is not in full communion if one rejects the teachings of the Church. And while nor a formal excommunication, it is perhaps equivalent in effect.

That’s all that I’m saying excommunication was too strong of a word.