Report: "Massachusetts Town Legalizes Polygamy Using Same Arguments For Gay Marriage,"

[Abrosz]

Marriage, a public announcement, is a proclamation to the community of commitment, one to the other, and their progeny of care and responsibility.

Whether there is a PUBLIC announcement or a private commitment is irrelevant.

As for tribal arrangements or different kinds of marriages, study some history. The so-called sacramental marriages did not exist before the church declared them. And they are not superior to any other kind of mutually accepted and reinforced arrangement. Of course they are not inferior either… they simply do not matter.

 

[K9Buck]

Government should NOT be in the marriage business. Marriages should be a private matter. Government, through the judicial system, can enforce contracts regarding marriage, but it should NOT be in the role of defining it and determining who is eligible.

 

[Freddy]

AFAIK, according to the Church, it is the intent that matters, and if two people have the fuill intent to lead a married life and go into a marriage ceremony in the full belief that they are getting married legally, and come out fully believing they are legally married, then they are married in the eyes of the Church. If the state deems years later that there was some legal problem, then that does not render the marriage void in the eyes of the Church.

That was my understanding. I’m sure from something I read in the catechism. Which matches my view entirely. If you ask someone to get married and they say yes then you are entering at that point into a lifetime committment. The ceremony is just a celebration of that committment. And any legal documentation is simply that - a means to have it legally recognised. And naturally there is a spiritual element (which may be the most important) for those who have a belief.

So from that surely we could agree that it’s the committment that’s the important aspect. Not whether you are traditionally married.

And from that I would argue, but wouldn’t expect most to agree, that an honest committment to another without that being a lifetime committment is sufficient to consider sex quite acceptable.

This is the situation we took with our children. That sleeping around and jumping from partner to partner was not acceptable. But if you honestly believed that you were in a serious long term relationship then…be careful.

 

[o_mlly]

Most Americans live with a girlfriend or boyfriend before they get married (if they do eventually get married at all) and don’t usually think of themselves as “fornicators” or attempt to keep their relationships a secret.

They should think of themselves as fornicators. What else could they be? Their sex act is depraved but not unnatural.

I’m not sure why someone should necessarily strive to conceal the fact that they struggle with these disorders or with any other disorders for that matter if they don’t have to.

I agree. Acknowledge the disorder and seek help. But do not attempt to persuade yourself and others that the disorder is somehow not a disorder and act on it.

In general, I think that if someone can safely do so, it’s better to be open and authentic about themselves and the things they struggle with than to keep secrets about themselves. Keeping secrets takes far too much energy and I’m glad not to have many of them anymore.

I agree. We are all spiritually sick in one way or another. We ought to acknowledge our sinful inclinations but not act on them. And, we must not deny such acts as evil.

 

[o_mlly]

Whether there is a PUBLIC announcement or a private commitment is irrelevant.

Now you’re just being nonsensical.

 

[Freddy]

Thorolfr:

Most Americans live with a girlfriend or boyfriend before they get married (if they do eventually get married at all) and don’t usually think of themselves as “fornicators” or attempt to keep their relationships a secret.

They should think of themselves as fornicators. What else could they be? Their sex act is depraved but not unnatural.

This is quite an odd position. You are saying that having sex before marriage is (literally) depraved. So having sex the morning of the marriage is morally corrupt but not having sex in the evening.

 

[o_mlly]

This is quite an odd position. You are saying that having sex before marriage is (literally) depraved. So having sex the morning of the marriage is morally corrupt but not having sex in the evening.

Look up “depraved” for the answer to your confusion.

de·praved

/dəˈprāvd/

adjective

adjective: depraved

1. morally corrupt; wicked.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

This is quite an odd position. You are saying that having sex before marriage is (literally) depraved. So having sex the morning of the marriage is morally corrupt but not having sex in the evening.

Look up “depraved” for the answer to your confusion.

Yes, I know what it means. But don’t you think that it sounds odd to have the same act move from depraved to morally acceptable simply because you have a ceremony in between those two acts to publicly announce your committment?

As Abrosz said, whether the committment is private or public is meaningless as regards the committment. And we have Catholic posters in this thread who consider a common law marriage sufficient for that committment.

 

[Abrosz]

Now you’re just being nonsensical.

Really? I am interested in the substance. Mutual commitment is important, even if it is never expressed formally and/or officially. And that is “nonsensical” according to you. Tells me everything I need to know about you.

 

[o_mlly]

As Abrosz said, whether the committment is private or public is meaningless as regards the committment.

Public or private is a false dilemma. Marriage is a private, personal and public act.

We have in civilized societies the requirement for a marriage license, i.e., permit to marry. Ipso facto, acknowledges that the right to marry is not unconditional. Age, relationship, current marital status, health status among other things must be evidenced to assure the community that the couple are free to marry. Marriage is the business of the community.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

As Abrosz said, whether the committment is private or public is meaningless as regards the committment.

Public or private is a false dilemma. Marriage is a private, personal and public act.

We have in civilized societies the requirement for a marriage license, i.e., permit to marry. Ipso facto, acknowledges that the right to marry is not unconditional. Age, relationship, current marital status, health status among other things must be evidenced to assure the community that the couple are free to marry. Marriage is the business of the community.

But you are avoiding the point. That you are intent on claiming that an act before the public committment is literally depraved before the event and fine afterwards.

I’ve no interest in convincing anyone that my view is the correct one. It really is up to the individual. But I don’t know anyone at all who would take your view seriously.

 

[Rau]

…don’t you think that it sounds odd to have the same act move from depraved to morally acceptable simply because you have a ceremony in between those two acts to publicly announce your committment?

Oh well, driving a car is illegal just prior to registering the car, and legal just after. Go figure!

 

[Cirdan_XII]

Oh well, driving a car is illegal just prior to registering the car, and legal just after. Go figure!

Burying your grandmother on the morning before she dies is immoral. Burying her on the evening of the same day is quite OK.

 

[Cirdan_XII]

Yes, I know what it means. But don’t you think that it sounds odd to have the same act move from depraved to morally acceptable simply because you have a ceremony in between those two acts to publicly announce your committment?

The difference is that in the Catholic perspective, the marriage ceremony is not primarily about announcing the union to the public at large, but it is about forming a covenant before God.

If you are not catholic, the marriage is just a piece of paper, not really fundamentall different to buying a house or receiving a professional qualification or some other form of civil agreement. You become a good dentist by going to dentistry school. The diploma you get at the end of it is just a formal act of closure but the molecules in the piece of paper itself don’t in any way make you a better dentist.

But for Catholics a marriage means much more than that.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

Yes, I know what it means. But don’t you think that it sounds odd to have the same act move from depraved to morally acceptable simply because you have a ceremony in between those two acts to publicly announce your committment?

The difference is that in the Catholic perspective, the marriage ceremony is not primarily about announcing the union to the public at large, but it is about forming a covenant before God.

Sure. From a religious perspective it might make some sense. You’re making the committment to God. But for those who don’t? No sense at all. And all we get in any case are arguments about abortions and stds.

 

[Cirdan_XII]

Sure. From a religious perspective it might make some sense. You’re making the committment to God. But for those who don’t? No sense at all. And all we get in any case are arguments about abortions and stds.

It doesn’t just make some sense, this is a pivotal concept of what Catholicism is about.

But IMHO Church law only applies to those who are members of the Church.

The Church may be opposed to things like abortions on principle, as it doesn’t matter from the Church’s perspective if the babies being killed are Catholic or not. Murder is either wrong or it isn’t. There isn’t much scope for a grey area there. Anything else would imply that Catholic lives are more valuable than non Catholic lives, which of course is nonsense.

But if somebody outside of the Church wants to marry in a certain way, but still be responsble about it, I don’t think that must automatically open the door to STDs or abortions.

I think it’s important to keep some perspective here, as it’s only by keeping that perspective that we can also keep the door open to dialogue. If we want an inter-faith dialogue we need to talk primarily about the values we share with other faiths rather than the things that divide us.

 

[o_mlly]

But I don’t know anyone at all who would take your view seriously.

Why am I not surprised? Solution: get some other friends.

 

[27lw]

27lw:

I’ve decided that a certain poster here is doing a very good job wasting my time. Since time is given to me from God, and I don’t know how much I’ve got, I won’t be replying to his arguments. I think he is not coming from the faith perspective and I wonder why he spends so much time here.

You should ask him. Or perhaps her.

Okay, I’ll bite.
I get the sense that you spend a fair amount of time / energy hanging around here. I believe you are not Catholic, and I think you are arguing at cross purposes to many people here, since you do not share the same bedrock beliefs in major areas (I could be wrong).
Just wondering why you hang around the Catholic website so much?
Maybe I have assumed many wrong things. Please fill me in if you care to.

 

[Freddy]

Freddy:

27lw:

I’ve decided that a certain poster here is doing a very good job wasting my time. Since time is given to me from God, and I don’t know how much I’ve got, I won’t be replying to his arguments. I think he is not coming from the faith perspective and I wonder why he spends so much time here.

You should ask him. Or perhaps her.

Okay, I’ll bite.
I get the sense that you spend a fair amount of time / energy hanging around here. I believe you are not Catholic, and I think you are arguing at cross purposes to many people here, since you do not share the same bedrock beliefs in major areas (I could be wrong).
Just wondering why you hang around the Catholic website so much?
Maybe I have assumed many wrong things. Please fill me in if you care to.

I’m not Catholic. Bought up as an Anglican. Now an atheist. And I’m quite interested in how other people see the world. Particularly people who hold different views to mine. So I enjoy forums - it’s an opportunity to discuss life, the universe and everything as Douglas Adams said.

 

[Abrosz]

Just wondering why you hang around the Catholic website so much?

Just as Freddy explained, some of us are interested in a view, which is different from ours. After all how can anyone learn from talking to a mirror?