Rebuttals for same sex marriage PLEASE!

  • Thread starter Thread starter theCardinalbird
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
No! Most of them mock parents as being stupid compared to the babe in the woods kids. The disrespect if rampant because evolutionary theory tells them each successive generation is superior to the former. They got it backwards.
 
Dysfunctional families and unmarried male-female sexual situations are depicticted on TV and in movies as normal, good or average. The families I grew up with were, most of them, stable, stay at home mom types. And neighbors, aside from a few bad apples, were really kind and willing to lend a hand. I admired the Cleavers. I knew they were actors but I grew up with people just like them. For miles around, my house looked a lot like everybody else’s house inside. I was made to feel welcome. I had adult friends as role models who joked around and listened to some kid talk about what fascinated him. A few were like family.
 
When the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified in 1868, every State limited marriage to one man and one woman, and no one doubted the constitutionality of doing so. That resolves these cases. When it comes to determining the meaning of a vague constitutional provision—such as ‘due process of law’ or ‘equal protection of the laws’—it is unquestionable that the People who ratified that provision did not understand it to prohibit a practice that remained both universal and uncontroversial in the years after ratification.” Justice Scalia

If the court continues with these types of decisions it will render them obsolete as most Americans will not respect their rulings. They should tread carefully and stick to the constitution.
 
Right. They took advantage of our trust as it happened starting in the late 1960s. We were lied to about so many things and some of us even got caught up in doing things that I know some now regret. But the the new preachers said their gospel would make us and them free. Far from it.
 
Well said. The date on the calendar means nothing. Only people create the conditions for the change they desire - whether it’s right or wrong. Showing no respect for anyone was and is heavily marketed. Turn 18 and forget anything mom and dad told you. Look at the number of Catholic kids going to college and losing their faith.
 
Last edited:
I lost respect for the US Supreme Court in 1973 with the abortion decision, and again with the deny the family as only one man and one woman decision. I refuse to accept either decision as good or reasonable.
 
I apologize; I can’t find the Post I was responding to.

I had said I had read about three cases, but two turned out to be the same, and one the person(s) involved were found not guilty, or not prosecuted.
 
As a non-Christian, the Christian arguments has only led me to believe that marriage between heterosexuals is the best option. I mean, men and women not only compliment each other physically (sexual anatomy, procreation, etc) but also psychologically in some aspects. I think this paints a good biological case for why heterosexual marriage is the best option.

However, being the best option, does not mean the lesser option is wrong. That’s where the Catholic arguments fall short.

I’m actually for polygamy, as well. I think once we get polygamy legalized, as was attempted in your country, then all of this gay marriage topic will die down. And I am eager to see how the gay community reacts to polygamy between consenting adults.
 
AgnosticBoy said:
And I am eager to see how the gay community reacts to polygamy between consenting adults.
Click to expand...
Whenever I’ve heard it come up in debate, the SSM advocates completely rejected polygamy. Personally, if two men can marry, I don’t see why a trio should be deemed out of the question. The essential element of marriage (as I understand marriage) is equally absent in both those scenarios.
 
AgnosticBoy said:
However, being the best option, does not mean the lesser option is wrong. That’s where the Catholic arguments fall short.
Click to expand...
I’m impressed by your thoughtfulness. What would you say about gay couples raising children, AgnosticBoy?
 
Prodigal_Son said:
I’m impressed by your thoughtfulness. What would you say about gay couples raising children, AgnosticBoy?
Click to expand...
Well I would follow the same logic from my previous post. The hetero couple would be the best option to raise children. Gay couples raising children would be the lesser option. The latter would leave the children missing out on some of the advantages of having real mom/dad and the qualities that both sexes bring to the table. I’m sure gay couples can do some things to compensate for this, but it’s certainly better than having a single parent or an unstable hetero couple raise kids. I would change my view if there was some inherent harm with gay couples raising children - something that applied to all gay couples.
 
Last edited:
AgnosticBoy said:
Well I would follow the same logic from my previous post. The hetero couple would be the best option to raise children. Gay couples raising children would be the lesser option. The latter would leave the children missing out on some of the advantages of having real mom/dad and the qualities that both sexes bring to the table. I’m sure gay couples can do some things to compensate for this, but it’s certainly better than having a single parent or an unstable hetero couple raise kids. I would change my view if there was some inherent harm with gay couples raising children - something that applied to all gay couples.
Click to expand...
This is not all that different from my own view. I think that, in ordinary circumstances, children who need a home could be placed with a gay couple, and I would not have objections – certainly no more objections than I have when a couple otherwise engaged in some immoral activity adopts children.

I have a lot more hesitations about a gay couple intentionally “conceiving” children. I don’t know what to do about this, practically, because I don’t want it illegal for single people to get pregnant, nor am I utterly opposed to single people adopting infants. Nevertheless, I find it DEEPLY worrying that people who say that it’s best for a child to grow up with a mom and a dad are now considered bigots. As an agnostic, would you feel courageous enough to speak up for this position, among liberals and gay marriage advocates? I’m not saying to oppose gay people having kids, but to courageously insist that people who consider such an option relatively bad for children are not bigots. Would you speak out on that topic to your friends?
 
Last edited:
I would have no problem telling liberals or even gay couples that a hetero couple raising children is the best option or at least has the potential to be. Starting with conception itself, hetero couples would be reproducing with someone they love (both partner’s genes are involved). Even gay couples would want that if it were possible. I would disagree with this being bigotry unless they want to also point to nature as being bigoted which makes no sense of course.
 
This argument does not lead to social stability but social anarchy. Children are and will be harmed. I would never vote for any of the sexual options and refuse to respect any law put into place. I have no political affiliation whatsoever.
 
CatholicGearSolid said:
That is exactly what the Church and faith in God does.

Everywhere I look in churches, I see countless united couples, many with 25, 30, 35+ marriage anniversaries.

They have something that unbelievers don’t have: Faith in a third party, who happens to be the one who created everything and everyone they know
Click to expand...
My husband and I have been happily married to each other for 31 years and have been atheist/agnostic the entire time.
 
NiceIsAsNiceDoes:
CatholicGearSolid said:
Some would say “hah, but I know some unbelieving couples who were united their entire lives”.

Sure, it is easy to point 2 or 3 examples, and of course many unbelievers are good, patient people…

But these countless couples I’m referring to all have one thing in common, the Church, and they themselves profess that it is because of God that they’re still united.
Click to expand...
You should’ve kept reading.
Btw congratulation, keep at it.
 
Last edited:
I read the entire post. I just always think it is important to let people know there are plenty of godless couples who have wonderful marriages, when it is relevant to a conversation.
 
“Joe1 said:
As a Canadian Citizen who lives in such a multicultural society, where the views on gay “marriage” are different. I need facts to support why, as a Catholic, the Church cannot accept gay “marriage.” Also why gay marriage is wrong. The only reason (so far) why I think gay marriage is wrong is because it prevents procreation. Also didn’t God make it clear that same sex intercourse is wrong?

Any more reasons?

REPLY

It ought to obvious that God CREATED His own method for Birth Control for at least ONE very easy to understand reason.

That REASON being that GOD desires; DEMANDS his Sovereign RIGHT as our Creator the only sustainer of ALL life forms; Both life and death issues; ALL of them are God’s EXCLUSIVE domain.

Catechism: #2335 Each of the two sexes is an image of the power and tenderness of God, with equal dignity though in a different way. The union of man and woman in marriage is a way of imitating in the flesh the Creator’s generosity and fecundity: “Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh.” All human generations proceed from this union.

Rev.22: 15 “Outside [in hell] are the dogs and sorcerers and fornicators and murderers and idolaters, and everyone who loves and practices falsehood.”

Gen. 1:28 “And God blessed them, [Adam and Eve] and God said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”

THIS MESSAGE OF BE FRUITFUL & MULTIPLE APPEARS ABOUT 30 TIMES IN THE BOOK OF GENESIS [mean s "Life"

ONAN
Gen.38: 6-10 And Judah took a wife for Er his first-born, and her name was Tamar. But Er, Judah’s first-born, was wicked in the sight of the LORD; and the LORD slew him. Then Judah [the Father of both sons] said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife, and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his; so when he went in to his brother’s wife he spilled the semen on the ground, lest he should give offspring to his brother.[And what he did was displeasing in the sight of the LORD, and he slew him also” MEANING GOD KILLED HIM BOTH PHYSICALLY AND SPIRITUALLY [condemned to ETERNAL Hell!]

PRAY MUCH about this
Genesis 4:1 The man had intercourse with his wife Eve, and she conceived and gave birth to Cain. ‘I have acquired a man with the help of Yahweh,’ she said.

Birth is Controlled by God
John.1 Verses 12 to 14: “But to all who received him, who believed in his name, he gave power to become children of God; who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. “

Eph.5: “Be sure of this, that no fornicator or impure man, or one who is covetous (that is, an idolater), has any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.”

God Bless you, if TRUTH is insufficient, all that remains is Prayer

Patrick
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top