Same-Sex Marriage

  • Thread starter Thread starter T1Catholic
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hey ortho, Your running out of my posts to comment on…I really have nothing to say, but I’ll put this here so you can have something to do.:whistle:
 
40.png
kaymart:
Exactly:thumbsup: let one group have their way and we can only imagine what would happen next. They can’t seem to get it, Felra, as you, I and a few others try to point out it’s a break down of decency in society. They claim we are throwing Religion around but its not, there are certain strandards people have to abide by, otherwise this would become a totally lawless world that everyone would just do what feels good and not care who or what it hurts.
Click to expand...
A couple can now get married for any reason and purpose they choose. They can use any standard. They can get married for fun, profit, love, kids, insurance, spite, property rights, lust, religion, payment, or citizenship. They can get married for a long time, short time, or over night. They can have sex, no sex, sex with others, group sex, or sex with their camel.

There are already no standards. And all this without gay marriage.

The catholic Church has even increased the number of annulments from 300 in 1960 to 60,000 last year. Standards?
 
john ennis:
You know, I think we’ve gotten to a pont here where it’s clear that two very different perspectives are trying in vain to use logic to persuade the other.

On one hand, there’s a perspective that private sexual behavior is so separate from moral questions that, were our society to formally accept incest, it would not be any danger with regard to our children’s upbringing.

On the other side, we see the laws that the society holds hered directly affecting the perceptions our children have with regard to their sexuality.

Those accepting the first view: I don’t know how we can communicate.

Peace, though;
John
Click to expand...
Well face up to it. The kids look around and see no problem with gays. Any poll on the subject shows support for gay rights and marriage increasing with youth. And the support of a given cohort does not decrease as it ages. Demographics are the most powerful weapon the gay marriage folks have.
 
john ennis:
40.png
felra:
I’m interested, too. Regarding private sexual partnerships being condoned under “civil unions,” people supporting SSM have to be consistent. They can’t deny unions to incestual partners, or they’d be discriminating.

Yet, if they consider there own children…C’mon people–do you really say that you’d have no moral problem if you discovered that your own kids—(use your imagination
Click to expand...
)—???

And don’t you think a society that officially recognizes such behavior is failing to support you in the reasonable upbringing of your kids?

Peace.
John

Sexual activity does not have to be condoned now. Just get it on.
Click to expand...
 
40.png
Libero:
Because these judeo christian laws are no longer appropriate, the majority of the civilians of this society do not follow them, thus it is stupid to try and impose them. Further more, many of the views are out dated and impractical, there would be outcry if it became illegal to shave yourself or to eat shellfish.

Further more, it is not christianity that founded our modern day democratic attitudes.
Click to expand...
I’d add that we really don’t see a long history of the Church championing democracy. Given the fate of the Church in many democracies, I understand why.
 
john ennis:
40.png
BillP:
The curiosity–sincerely–is killing me. What I asked above–you really wouldn’t feel any moral problem about your kids living in a social frame that officially sees no difference between them getting married in the traditional view, and having an ongoing sexual relationship with each other?

You don’t have a moral problem with your kids actually doing this? Or is it that you would, but wouldn’t feel that the society would then be forcing you to swim against the tide in the upbringing of your kids?

Peace.
John
Click to expand...
I think the kids are having ongoing sexual relationships with each other, and without marriage, right now. Look around.
Click to expand...
 
40.png
luvmykids:
And why do you think it is that the ancient Chinese codified marriage between a man and a woman and not a man and a man or a man and a woman?

What I see is that it’s hard for you to understand that it is not MY definition. This is the definition given to marriage when it was originally instituted. See?
Click to expand...
When was marriage originally instituted?
 
40.png
luvmykids:
That very strange atmosphere you were talking about will be our society if SSM is legal and some of these children are brought up by people in SSM. And since you are a child still, you really do not see the problem it could have on our society since you obviously do not have children and do not recognise a lot of the not so obvious harms. There are things I didn’t think about at 24 when I didn’t have children.
Click to expand...
Children are now being brought up by gay couples. Would the marriage of the two adults harm those kids?
 
40.png
luvmykids:
That’s great that you have that relationship with your parents, but just the fact that you have to go ask them something, proves my point that you are not mature enough to be having this discussion right now. Your (name removed by moderator)ut coming from a 15 year olds point of view is greatly appreciated, but I do not think you can speak on matters of raising children and how that might impact them.
Click to expand...
I’d say Libero is giving youy a run for your money.
 
40.png
Consecrated:
Ultimately the Truth should rule on the matter of same sex union.

If it doesn’t, then the problem is that the majority has rejected the Truth. And that is the definition of a corrupt society. We should not stand by and accept it.
Click to expand...
What is the Truth? Is it different from the truth?
 
Charlie Chautin:
Although homosexuality has been around, and sometimes excepted by society, for thousands of years, it has never been an acceptable substitute for hetrosexual marriage. Contrary to modern myth, biologically speaking, marriage is not about love or self-fullfillment, it is about children. The begretted and raising, to be exact. Sound familiar? Now we all know that naturally homosexuals can not have children, that eliminates the primary reason for marriage. But also, no matter how much love or support a gay couple can give a child, that does not make up for the lack of a parent of the opposite sex. Studies have found that for children, especially boys, to develop into healthy adults they need a parent of both sexes. It is a crucial part of development.

Of course gay supporters will often say that a child is better off with a loving gay couple than a disfunctional straight one. To this tell them that in order for a comparison to be valid it must be of equal parts. In other words, a loving gay couple and a loving straight couple or a dysfunctional gay couple and a dysfunctional straight one. In this light of equality the child is always better off with the straight parents.

So if gay people can not beget or successfully raise children, they can not, biologically speaking be married.
Click to expand...
U CNT RILI TELL WHS BAD AND WHS BETTER U KNW. I BELEIVE DAT DER SHLDN’T BE GAY MARRIAGE BUT ISN’T THAT A DISSERVICE TO THEIR RYTS BECAYSE NOT ALL OF THEM ARE CHRISTIANS OR CATHOLICS? :confused:
 
40.png
Ortho:
When was marriage originally instituted?
Click to expand...
I don’t know, you tell me. Ask BillP, he claims it was 1800 years before Christ with Hammurabi’s code, which stated it was a man and woman, and also mentions God quite a few times. What is your point?
 
40.png
T1Catholic:
I’m not sure if this is the right forum to post this question but I’ll give it a go anyway. I need non-religious reasons why same-sex marriage is not good for society. In Canada it is legal but with our new Conservative government elected yesterday, the issue is going to be re-opened. I have been challenged today by someone who said that we should no re-open the issue and that it doesn’t harm anyone if two gay people choose to get married. I absolutely cannot argue with this person on religious grounds. Does anybody have anything they can equip me with?

T1 Catholic
Click to expand...
The OP did not ask for us to “debate” reasons why SSM is wrong, I’m sure this person already feels this way, which is why the OP asked for some ideas on seculars reasons to be equipt with. We have tried to do that and got sucked into debate. What I don’t understand is why Catholic people can know the Truth and not stand up for it. The Catholic Church teaches abortion is wrong, and it is wrong for us to just sit here and let it happen, or condone it by making it legal. It should be the same for SSM.

That is what is very frustrating to me. God put us here and it is our responsibility to do what we can to spread the Truth. And the Truth in this matter is that homosexuality is wrong. Read the bible. We cannot just sit here and watch the family unit, the marital union, be degraded into something that is just meaningless, between ANY 2 individuals who want to enter into it. It is a sacred union, religiously, or secularly. It has the potential to bring forth life, and as for the two 70 years old that “ortho?” cannot seem to stop thinking about, they are a man and a woman. That is the way God meant it to be. It is not meant to be just about procreation, although that is a large part of it, but it is unitive as well. If you are going to argue that it can be unitive with SSM it cannot. It was not meant to be that way. We were not meant to be that way. If you do not understand this, read John Paul II’s “Theology of The Body” or Christopher West. They do a very good job explaining it.

Now, before you go on to talk about how this is all religious mumbo jumbo and so on and so forth, this is our belief as Catholics. Instead of debating this, which I know you are doing not just to play devils advocate and because you think that we have no secular arguments, but because you truly believe in the idea that they have a right to be married, I think you should try harder to understand what the Catholic Church teaches. (since you are Catholic right?) For those of you who believe that SSM should be legal, there will be no argument, religious, or secular that will convince you otherwise. I think before you even listen to a word that is said you are already trying to figure out what you can say to argue against it.
 
A couple can now get married for any reason and purpose they choose. They can use any standard. They can get married for fun, profit, love, kids, insurance, spite, property rights, lust, religion, payment, or citizenship. They can get married for a long time, short time, or over night. They can have sex, no sex, sex with others, group sex, or sex with their camel.
Click to expand...
There are already no standards. And all this without gay marriage.
Click to expand...
The catholic Church has even increased the number of annulments from 300 in 1960 to 60,000 last year. Standards?
Click to expand...
The entire idea of marriage was destoryed long before this, trying to pin the blame on homosexuals, or the youth is not going to acheive anything. Society has just lost all respect for the idea of “marriage”, be is homosexual or not.

To be noted, I am not implying homosexuals can get married. I shall use the correct terminology of civil union 🙂
 
40.png
Ortho:
Society has no obligation to order itself according to your views on natural law. Natural law arguments rely on who defines what is natural.
Click to expand...
This would be true if I was spouting “my” views. But I’m not. I’m just reiterating what The Church teaches traditionally and Traditionally. Christ is the King of heaven and earth, and even if society chooses not to recognize His Kingship, this does not change the fact that society does indeed have an obligation to order itself after His Law. And we as believers have the obligation to do what we can by word and example to make this happen. This starts by ordering our little micro-societies (our families) with Christ as King. Two men/women in “civil union” does not conform to the natural or Supernatural concept of family.

I agree with luvmykids. For every secular arguement that we can find against SSM, there is 10 more secular arguements in favor of it. So, ok. The religious reasons against it trump the secular ones, even if there was not one person left on earth to believe them.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top