Question: Is gay marriage sinful?

  • Thread starter Thread starter chris.richmond.belch
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not quite sure what you’re trying to get at.

So polygamy existed and continues to exist in the world—so what? Are you seriously going to insist that a system the pits women against each other for the affections of a man is okay?

What I was getting at was when the classical Christian (one man/one woman until death do they part) model started to become eroded with the acceptance of divorce, serial marriages and living together. At that point, if you’ve already decided there is no sacredness to sex, anything goes.
Because why not.
 
Anything that goes against the Natural Law of God is a sin.
Moreover, the primary and most essential purpose of marriage is procreation, and that could only happen within the union of a male and female.
 
I was saying sex seems to be a great thing with many benefits. It was someone else that compared it to manure.

I’m saying that marriage exists and has existed in many forms well before matrimony. So saying a form of marriage is mocking matrimony makes no sense.
 
I guess since it is ordered against God’s design it is sinful.
 
Alex337 said:
That is only the primary goal for some marriages, not all.
Click to expand...
According to the Bible (for the one who believes in it), it was and still is the primary goal for all marriages, as it was commanded by God Himself, besides the actual love that is shared between the two partners. (Gen 1:27-28)
 
CatholicTurk said:
40.png
Alex337:
That is only the primary goal for some marriages, not all.
Click to expand...
According to the Bible (for the one who believes in it), it was and still is the primary goal for all marriages, as it was commanded by God Himself, besides the actual love that is shared between the two partners. (Gen 1:27-28)
Click to expand...
Sure, but not everyone does.
 
Hi There is no such thing as gay marriage as it is only a state recognised condition for monitory stability etc. A marriage is not valid until it is blessed by God ONLY then are you married. The state can not marry anyone so all marriages that are state blessed are not valid in the eyes of the church and a sin against God for trying to take his role away and play god man again.
 
Thank you all for your well thought out replies! I appreciate it!

I get that for a sin to be mortal or grave that it has to meet the three criteria. I guess what I really am saying is that I don’t think that has anything to do with changing the fact that something is sinful or night. Masturbation, Murder, Child Abuse, etc. etc. remain sinful and evil things regardless of your state of mind, knowledge, or anything else. Just because your culpability may remove or lesson your judgement for that sin, it still remains a sin.

This all stemmed from a discussion where certain devote friends and small time Catholic apologists they follow stated regarding the recent SC case ruling that “Jesus would not only have baked a cake, but he would have baked two and gone to their wedding” and that “there is nothing wrong with gay marriage in itself. That there are many good things about it. And that lack of knowledge understand removes all sin. And that we should go and support them at their wedding (though they draw the line at being part of the wedding part, doing a reading, etc. etc)”.

I guess I have trouble seeing that. There may be good things in many sinful and evil things. It doesn’t mean we should do them. You could argue that any kids that come out of premarriage sex or an adulterous relationship are good, nay a great blessing as all kids are. But that doesn’t mean you should do either sinful action just because blessings may come from it.

For example in the CCC “1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral”. That last part where it says “It remains no less an evil, etc.” seems to (at least to me) that it still is really bad.

But their argument is that culpability removes all moral sin and that only physical sin remains and therefore, it isn’t really a sin.

Thanks! God Bless you all!
 
So called “gay marriage” is objectively a mortal sin.
 
sevenswords said:
The state can not marry anyone so all marriages that are state blessed are not valid in the eyes of the church and a sin against God for trying to take his role away and play god man again.
Click to expand...
That’s not correct. Catholics are obliged by canon law to follow canonical form for marriage (i.e., Catholics must come to the Catholic Church for the sacrament of marriage, rather than going to a justice of the peace or a non-Catholic minister). But for non-Catholics, the Catholic Church recognizes the validity of any marriage, whether it is officiated by a Protestant minister, or a justice of the peace, or a Jewish rabbi, etc. – provided that it meets the normal conditions for validity – for example, neither the bride nor the groom is already married to someone else, the bride and the groom are not closely related to each other, neither the bride nor the groom is being forced to marry against his will, and so on. (And in today’s world, perhaps I need to mention that there must actually be a female bride and a male groom.)
 
chris.richmond.belch said:
This all stemmed from a discussion where certain devote friends and small time Catholic apologists they follow stated regarding the recent SC case ruling that “Jesus would not only have baked a cake, but he would have baked two and gone to their wedding” and that “there is nothing wrong with gay marriage in itself. That there are many good things about it. And that lack of knowledge understand removes all sin. And that we should go and support them at their wedding (though they draw the line at being part of the wedding part, doing a reading, etc. etc)”.

I guess I have trouble seeing that. There may be good things in many sinful and evil things. It doesn’t mean we should do them.
Click to expand...
I’m with you. People may have diminished culpability, but that doesn’t change the fact that things which are morally wrong are still morally wrong. And we should certainly be loving and kind toward all people, but I don’t see celebrating something that is morally wrong as a truly kind and loving act, even though it might appear to be one on the surface.
chris.richmond.belch said:
For example in the CCC “1793 If - on the contrary - the ignorance is invincible, or the moral subject is not responsible for his erroneous judgment, the evil committed by the person cannot be imputed to him. It remains no less an evil, a privation, a disorder. One must therefore work to correct the errors of moral”.
Click to expand...
This sums it up very well. (But your quote is missing one word. The last word of that paragraph is “conscience.”)
 
Alex337 said:
I don’t think marriage and matrimony are the same, they have enough differences to be unique.
Click to expand...
I’m not surprised that you see differences, given what you say about marriage in the next quote below:
Alex337 said:
Marriages can be formed up of multiple men, multiple women, same sex or opposite sex. Through history and across culture we have seen a tonne of different formats.
Click to expand...
History – even recent history – doesn’t bear out your “multiple men” or “multiple women” marriage formats, if by “multiple” you include more than two. Even in today’s most liberal nations, I don’t think that there are any legally recognized marriages that involve three or more men or three or more women. And through all of history up until about the past 25-30 years, you would have to search very hard to find anything that even looks like an example of marriage between two men or between two women. I have been over the historical arguments with others. I have seen the few isolated examples that same-sex “marriage” advocates use in order to try to claim a historical basis for same-sex “marriage,” and the examples are few and far between, and not very convincing.
Alex337 said:
In terms of sex; homosexual sex has also been going on for as long as we can trace. It happens in nature, it happens all across cultures and times. I don’t think it can be a mockery when it’s likely as old as the thing it’s mocking.
Click to expand...
How old a thing is does not determine whether it is morally right or whether it comports with the natural law. Murder goes back to Cain and Abel. (Even if you don’t believe in the Biblical account, would you agree that murder is nearly as old as the human race?) And prostitution is often referred to as “the world’s oldest profession,” probably for good reason. Surely we can agree that murder and prostitution are both very ancient, and that there are abundant examples of both throughout history. But we can’t conclude from those facts that murder and prostitution are morally acceptable or in accord with the natural law. (I’m using the term “natural law” in the philosophical sense, not in the sense of merely describing what happens in nature.) And if someone described murder as a mockery of God’s gift of life, I would understand how it could be seen that way.
 
Last edited:
Check out this video, it’s got a really good example:
🙂 and you say yourself you’ve seen other examples, so I’ll spare you some time.

Now as to the next bit; I was clearly debating the word “mockery” as being incorrect. So you seem to be arguing against a thing I didn’t say.
 
Thanks Paul,

I guess what I am looking for is something from the church on the subject. I’ve been reading the CCC and different church documents and while different Pope’s and documents have touched upon gay marriage as being wrong and sinful, I have yet to find something that deals with this exact question.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top