Same-sex marriages: Let it be!

[theCardinalbird]

Many out LGBT people feel like they are being pushed away from their own Church (and yes, the Catholic Church is just as much their Church as it is to any baptized Catholic) because of intolerance, homophobia and a lack of will for open dialog.

Really? I’d like to see the proof please (not sarcasm).

I’m a guy who struggles with SSA and a very conservate Catholic. I don’t see the church pushing me away, but rather bringing me closer to Jesus. Contrary to popular opinion on social media and how society portrays the church, the Church in fact loves same sex attracted individuals and wants to help them and doesn’t alienate them but rather wants to give them the compassion they deserve.

Also if you’ve heard of Courage, the Catholic Apostolate, you would know that This Apostolate is all about helping people with SSA to live chaste lives and live the Gospel

 

[Rau]

as I said, intolerance, homophobia and a lack of will for open dialog is pushes our LGBT brothers and sisters away from their Church.

How is the Church intolerant or homophobic? I realize many describe the Church’s moral teaching in those terms, though I assume you don’t mean that?

Where are we seeing a resistance to dialogue?

 

[Rau]

[SSM] is legal in many countries, and while we Catholics should disagree with it, it would be more fruitful if we Catholics would spend as much effort bringing LGBT individuals into the fold as we do trying to reverse legal marriage.

How would you like LGBT to be brought into the fold? Helping them to grow in Understanding and acceptance of the moral law that defines “the fold” would be an important step I think. For consistency - as you point out - we can hardly favour SSM.

 

[anikins]

The Church is not promoting intolerance, some of our fellow Catholics are. I’m glad to read that there are gay individuals here who have not dealt with any alienation or brash judgments, but that is not the reality for many others, especially those who are not yet fully ingrained in spiritual life and are unaware of what support the church does have to offer. Voices of opposition and hate often sound louder than those of love, eapically to the marginalized. It’s our job to counter that by reaching out in as many ways we can.

 

[theCardinalbird]

The Church is not promoting intolerance, some of our fellow Catholics are.

I don’t know who these individuals are, nor would I encourage you to start pointing them out. But please explain what they are promoting that is intolerant?

 

[anikins]

Rau, I am not making an argument to support same sex marriage.

I’m arguing that there’s a more fruitful way to combat it; by winning over the hearts and minds of our LGBT brothers and sisters and leading them to a chaste life within the Church.

 

[Rau]

I am not making an argument to support same sex marriage.

Good to know - it appeared earlier that you took issue with persons who opposed SSM.

I’m arguing that there’s a more fruitful way to combat it; by winning over the hearts and minds of our LGBT brothers and sisters and leading them to a chaste life within the Church.

Yes - Love you neighbor.

 

[anikins]

I take issue with people prioritizing repeals of marriage for all over leading individuals to (or back to) the Church.

 

[Rau]

I take issue with people prioritizing repeals of marriage for all over leading individuals to (or back to) the Church.

In my country, SSM is a proposal, so we are in the phase of expressing views and desires. And in my case, my opposition to SSM is not strictly even a religious matter. Nevertheless, it would be contradictory to lead people to the Church by supporting SSM, right?

I don’t see that supporting SSM would assist people back to the Church, do you? It would seem to encourage them in the wrong direction.

Those steps that can be taken to encourage persons back to the Church (such as friendship, pastoral care, the COURAGE Apostalate, and so on) do not appear to be undermined by taking the view that SSM is not a good thing.

 

[anikins]

Once more, I am not arguing for, nor have I ever argued for, same-sex marriage. My statements are in no way calling for support for same-sex marriage. I’m not quite sure how much clearer I can be on my preference for directing one’s energy towards witnessing for the Church versus involving oneself in a federal legal debate happening outside of the Church.

 

[Rau]

Once more, I am not arguing for, nor have I ever argued for, same-sex marriage. My statements are in no way calling for support for same-sex marriage.

I understand you do not favour SSM. We agree on this.

I’m not quite sure how much clearer I can be on my preference for directing one’s energy towards witnessing for the Church versus involving oneself in a federal legal debate happening outside of the Church.

I understand. Happily, both matters are consistent with each other.

 

[philipl]

If same sex couples want to marry in. A civil marriage fine. But the church can NEVER EVER accept same sex marriage.

 

[Rau]

If same sex couples want to marry in. A civil marriage fine. But the church can NEVER EVER accept same sex marriage.

Clearly the Church can never accept it, but whether such a practice in our society is “fine” is open to debate on various grounds. The furthering of societal endorsement of broadening sexual behaviours has implications. How does sex education stick to the birds and the bees - an inclusive syllabus would be required I imagine. Were you the maker of beautiful wedding video mementos, would you be free to decline SSM? Perhaps not. Are all these things fine too?

 

[JimG]

We don’t yet have “marriage equality” for all, though that is the logical conclusion of the trend.

Under many existing civil laws, a man can marry a woman, a man can marry a man, a woman can marry a woman, but that’s not full marriage equality. Marriage equality requires that anyone be able to marry anyone else:

A man could marry many women (at once).
A woman could marry many men (at once.)
A brother could marry his sister. (No sex need be involved.)
A sister could marry her sister.
A brother could marry his brother.
Five siblings could marry one another.

Two widows could marry each other.
Business partners could marry for the tax benefits.
Roommates of either sex could marry for convenience.

A daughter could marry her elderly mother.

If procreation, sex, or sexual activity is not a factor,
why should anyone be prevented from marrying?

 

[SuperLuigi]

They aren’t. Since so-called gay “marriage” first become legal, the following “marriages” have occurred:

1. Fantasy character
2. Ferris Wheel
3. Oneself
4. Laptop (more of a joke)
5. Robot
6. Pizza

But I guess they’re just part of the rainbow and it’s “love”.

 

[Robert_Sock]

“Fighting evil is a very noble activity when it must be done. But it is not our mission in life. Our job is to bring in more light.”

• Tzvi Freeman

I believe that the above quote best describes my thoughts in having created this thread. I never meant that we should sit back and condone same-sex marriages, God forbid, but that we should fight it by bringing more light into the world. Hold as many protests as you wish, and harbor deep resent towards same-sex marriages, and I believe you’re wasting your precious time. Again, what is needed is to shed the light of Bible, most importantly, the Gospels. You can yell and scream all you want, but it will probably be to no avail until those in the gay community see the light of Christ! I can’t remember who said it, but it was once said that: “If a fool persisted in their folly they would become wise!” I agree, and I believe that allowing SSM will allow that to happen! Not that I support SSM, but again, that we should be focusing our attention on preaching the Holy Bible in the hope that through the power of the Holy Spirit, many in the gay community will see the light and have a change of heart!

 

[Cruciferi]

sure let’s do whatever we please! Who cares anyway?? Oh… yeah God does.

 

[Raxus]

If all a marriage is about is love between two individuals, the government needs to keep out of it. Governments should not be in the business of rubber-stamping emotions.

Gay folks can already live with and love each other, and adequate legal protections already exist for things like shared property and inheritance.

All making it a legal marriage does is give them access to things that were designed to help couples that can have children. (And no, it’s not as healthy to have gay parents as it is to have traditional ones.)

Anyone who disagrees with the above is simply bullying others into accepting what they don’t want or need to accept. The gay agenda is just that, and was never about equality, but dominance over religion.

I say they can go take a long walk off a short pier. I’m done being bullied, and folks like me will continue to put folks like Trump in office as long as it takes the Bully Lobby to back off and quit cramming agendas down our throats.

No more. Period.

 

[simpleas]

1. Your pet.

http://www.marryyourpet.com/

 

[frobert]

If all a marriage is about is love between two individuals, the government needs to keep out of it. Governments should not be in the business of rubber-stamping emotions.

You are 110% correct and religions can take advantage of that immediately.

The government will not prevent religions from blessings couples to live together and calling it a marriage and any couple that wants the civil benefits of marriage can op for a civil marriage license.