Same Sex Wedding

[IGCampbell]

But to prevent the thread from de-railing, the point that I am trying to make is that God tells us that homosexuality is the abuse of the body. Either we believe this, or we reject this. If we believe this, it is not different than heroin and dysfunctional, addictive relationships. In fact, it is very much like both heroin and abusive relationship.

I think your point is vastly oversimplified, but I’m not sure what the use would be in either of us trying to browbeat each other further!

 

[YipYupYep]

And why do they have to make a mockery of marriage to declare their commitment to each other?

Its a Satanic Rite with evil prayers and a false Gospel. Believe me, God wont be there. Why then would you or any Catholic?

They would not.

 

[Angels_Unaware]

I think your point is vastly oversimplified, but I’m not sure what the use would be in either of us trying to browbeat each other further!

How so? Do you disagree with the Church’s position on homosexuality? I am sincerely interested in your perspective and how it can be questionable whether or not to condone a homosexual union.

 

[IGCampbell]

How so? Do you disagree with the Church’s position on homosexuality? I am sincerely interested in your perspective and how it can be questionable whether or not to condone a homosexual union.

I don’t disagree with the Church at all on homosexuality. I disagree with your perspective that attending a same-sex “wedding” is explicit support for homosexuality, and with your perspective that it’s the same as drug addiction and should be treated the exact same. Is the act wrong, and potentially dangerous? Sure. Does it involve pleasure, and possibly addiction? Sure. But you cannot treat the two states (homosexuality and drug addiction) in the same fashion and expect to help lead someone back to God. This is the practical reality of the matter, and it must be taken into account. Did Jesus first chastise the Samaritan at the well, or did he first connect with her on a level necessary to dialog?

 

[larsegarots]

So you believe they are expressing their commitment to each other while at the same time vowing to be celibate?

They are expressing their commitment to each other at the wedding. I don’t know the specific details of their wedding, so I don’t know if they are vowing to remain celibate or not. If they are Catholics, they may very well abstain from any homosexual acts. Even straight couples sometimes abstain from sex in marriage, especially in cases where one person is diabetic or has heart failure. But I think that is a separate matter, and the wedding isn’t making a comment about their sexual life. So attending the wedding isn’t saying that you’re supporting gay sex.

And why do they have to make a mockery of marriage to declare their commitment to each other?

I don’t think they see it that way. I think they are concerned about two matters. The first, they want to express their commitment to each other. The second, they want to obtain rights that are afforded to straight couples, such as a couple’s fishing license. A more important example would be visitation rights if their partner is in the hospital.

 

[YipYupYep]

Again, I don’t think this is necessarily a proper analog, but I would absolutely go to the wedding, so that she knows I’m there for her regardless, and will protect her as much as I can. I would also be there to bring a very clear message to her husband. Not going would make her rely even more on her abuser, much like not going to the wedding would make my brother rely even more on his homosexual partner.

Well, maybe you can go to the wedding, but maybe you should not. There may or there may nor be sin. I don’t know. But you can not go to a homosexual marriage ceremony. It would be a grievous sin that would wound your sole.

Here is another issue. By attending, you may be inviting a curse to alight upon you. To be present to hear evil prayers may create hooks for unclean spirits to attach themselves to you. Turn from those agreements brother.

 

[Angels_Unaware]

I don’t disagree with the Church at all on homosexuality. I disagree with your perspective that attending a same-sex “wedding” is explicit support for homosexuality, and with your perspective that it’s the same as drug addiction and should be treated the exact same. Is the act wrong, and potentially dangerous? Sure. Does it involve pleasure, and possibly addiction? Sure. But you cannot treat the two states (homosexuality and drug addiction) in the same fashion and expect to help lead someone back to God.

Why not? How exactly do you believe the two are different? This is not the prima facie issue you think it is. Homosexuality = sexual addiction (at least to many apologists). If you do not agree homosexuality = sexual addiction, then perhaps you could share what aspects of homosexual desire are not based on dependencies of the flesh.

This is the practical reality of the matter, and it must be taken into account. Did Jesus first chastise the Samaritan at the well, or did he first connect with her on a level necessary to dialog?

This is very irrational, and really makes no sense. I said nothing about chastising anyone. You are reading way too much into the act of not going to a wedding.

 

[Annn]

How? Is homosexuality not abusing the body?

Or is being married to someone who is abusive somehow acceptable in your eyes?

People do not consent to being “beaten by their spouse.”

 

[IGCampbell]

Why not? How exactly do you believe the two are different? This is not the prima facie issue you think it is. Homosexuality = sexual addiction (at least to many apologists). If you do not agree homosexuality = sexual addiction, then perhaps you could share what aspects of homosexual desire are not based on dependencies of the flesh.

The apologists that believe that are wrong. Homosexual relationships do go deeper than just sex; remember, we’re speaking of the type of homosexuals preparing to “marry”, not the ones looking for random hookups at the club. What leads them to relationships with people of the same sex, I can’t really say. There are many reasons, few of them as simple as “they’re horny.” There are also many, many heterosexual sex addicts out there, so we can see that homosexuality is entirely distinct (but not mutually exclusive) from sexual addiction.

This is very irrational, and really makes no sense. I said nothing about chastising anyone. You are reading way too much into the act of not going to a wedding.

I’m reading into it exactly what the brother would read into it; a severe, incommunicative chastisement of his lifestyle with a clear message that your love and involvement in his life is conditional.

 

[Angels_Unaware]

The apologists that believe that are wrong. Homosexual relationships do go deeper than just sex; remember, we’re speaking of the type of homosexuals preparing to “marry”, not the ones looking for random hookups at the club. What leads them to relationships with people of the same sex, I can’t really say. There are many reasons, few of them as simple as “they’re horny.” There are also many, many heterosexual sex addicts out there, so we can see that homosexuality is entirely distinct (but not mutually exclusive) from sexual addictionn.

Perhaps a more precise way of phrasing this would be to call it a relationship addiction, which acknowledges that the homosexual tendencies are not simply acted upon as some kind of lustful fetish. (I am thinking of the Senator who was caught in the bathroom of the airport. He, probably, considered himself a heterosexual in terms of relationships but with a homosexual lustful addiction.)

Going back to the analogy of the abusive relationship- we know (I hope we know this) that abusiveness between people does not honor God. An abusive relationship can also be addictive, (co-dependency) and yet not necessarily sexually addictive. Psychological dependencies that are not healthy and do not honor God form the basis of that addiction.

So, I think there is still a basis for examining homosexual relationships as being addictive and of the flesh while acknowledging that we are not talking about a purely physical sexual addiction.

Men (and women) are called to either consecrate themselves to God or to their spouse, and to live their lives for God or for their spouses.

So, the question becomes can homosexuals consecrate themselves to each other. Because that is what happens in the sacrament of marriage- a spouse consecrates themselves body, soul and spirit to living a pure life in union with their spouse in service to God’s will.

If they cannot, then they can only desecrate themselves in relationships to each other. Desecrate is a very harsh word, but I use it as loosely being analogous to an “addictive relationship” that is of the flesh, and not consecrated by God.

 

[elvisman]

I think you are comparing apples to oranges. In your example, you are planning to steal, cause harm, and kill, which is obviously wrong. In a wedding, you are not planning to cause harm on, or kill anyone. You are not planning to perform any homosexual acts. Two people are expressing their commitment to each other - simple as that.

I actually had to read this ridicuouls response 3 times before I came to the realization:
You’re nothing but a baiter.

I’m actually paying you a compliment because the only other alternative is that you’re an ignoramus. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.

**I say this because I’m not saying that I’m planning on killing anybody - or that I intend to perform homosexual acts at their wedding. **
On the contrary, I was informing you that the gravity of the actual robbery or murder does not nullify the sin of the person or persons who cooperated in or aided and abetted the act.

I’ll say this one last time because I already know you’re going to come back with an equally silly reponse as your last one:
Supporting a homosexual “marriage” (and I use the term loosely) is to partake in the grave sin of the homosexual act. These are not men who intend to stay celibate. Nowhere does the OP even suggest this.
They intend on living together as spouses, enjoying all of the connubial fruits that are meant for a wife and husband alone.

I equated planning a robbery or murder as an equally gravely sinful act. You chose to confuse the analogy.

 

[larsegarots]

I actually had to read this ridicuouls response 3 times before I came to the realization:
You’re nothing but a baiter.

I’m actually paying you a compliment because the only other alternative is that you’re an ignoramus. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.

I’m not sure why you’re accusing me of either being a baiter or an ignoramus, but I’m neither of those. If you feel aggravated by my posts and by my tolerance, then I’m sorry you do, but I am most sincere in my statements.

Supporting a homosexual "marriage" (and I use the term loosely) is to partake in the grave sin of the homosexual act. These are not men who intend to stay celibate.

As I’ve mentioned before, since neither you nor I know the individuals involved, we are in no position to know their intentions beyond of the scope of the wedding. As I’ve also mentioned before, a wedding is an expression of their commitment to each other. So, attending a wedding is not endorsing homosexual behavior. If you personally feel that attending such a wedding is an endorsement, then don’t attend - but don’t force someone else to boycott their brothers wedding because of your narrow interpretation.
elvisman;4331693:

I equated planning a robbery or murder as an equally gravely sinful act. You chose to confuse

the analogy.

I think it is a gross mistake to compare a murder (hateful, harmful) to a wedding ceremony.

 

[tm30]

I think it is a gross mistake to compare a murder (hateful, harmful) to a wedding ceremony.

A gay wedding/commitment/“going steady” ceremony (whatever you want to call it) is hateful towards God. It is an act of violence against God. It directly violates the natural order which God ordained. It is one of the sins that cries out for the vengeance of heaven. What don’t you understand about this?

If you think that a “commitment” ceremony doesn’t automatically include sexual activity within that relationship, you’re beyond naive. I don’t usually like to throw out pejoratives, but in this case, it’s entirely appropriate.

 

[tm30]

I’m reading into it exactly what the brother would read into it; a severe, incommunicative chastisement of his lifestyle with a clear message that your love and involvement in his life is conditional.

I submit that supporting this grave sin is an act of self-absorption and pride, not love. Going to the wedding isn’t about love, it’s about the fear of confrontation - and that goes right to pride.

The loving act here would be the spiritual work of mercy - admonishing the sinner.

How on earth can you categorize the celebration of someone’s spiritual suicide as an act of love?

 

[elvisman]

I’m not sure why you’re accusing me of either being a baiter or an ignoramus, but I’m neither of those. If you feel aggravated by my posts and by my tolerance, then I’m sorry you do, but I am most sincere in my statements.

As I’ve mentioned before, since neither you nor I know the individuals involved, we are in no position to know their intentions beyond of the scope of the wedding. As I’ve also mentioned before, a wedding is an expression of their commitment to each other. So, attending a wedding is not endorsing homosexual behavior. If you personally feel that attending such a wedding is an endorsement, then don’t attend - but don’t force someone else to boycott their brothers wedding because of your narrow interpretation.

I think it is a gross mistake to compare a murder (hateful, harmful) to a wedding ceremony.

First of all I am not forcing anybody to do anything.
I called you a baiter because I cannot believe that after all of the detailed explanations that have been presented to you, you still do not understand the point.

Secondly, nobody is comparing a wedding to murder. BUT the legal union of 2 homosexuals is not a marriage. I****f the law states that it IS - we, as Christians cannot accept this. Just as we cannot acquiesce to the legality of abortion. Abortion is grave sin. Homosexual union is grave sin. It is a repudiation of the law of God - who created marriage for a man and a woman. It is a mockery and an abomination to God. Get it?

The bottom line is that grave sin is grave sin. To endorse, conspire in or otherwise support grave sin is to take part in it.

Does that finally make sense to you? I don’t expect you to accept it, given your posts, but I DO - at this point - expect you to understand what I’m telling you.

 

[YipYupYep]

A gay wedding/commitment/“going steady” ceremony (whatever you want to call it) is hateful towards God. It is an act of violence against God. It directly violates the natural order which God ordained. It is one of the sins that cries out for the vengeance of heaven. What don’t you understand about this?

You have this identified the Gay wedding for what it is. Well said. Well done.

The Gay Agenda in America is even present here at this supposedly Christian web site. I fear that State sanctioned abortion combined with State recognized same sex unions will bring down upon America harsher judgements from God. He will not be mocked.

 

[IGCampbell]

On a somewhat related note, I have a question. And** I promise** it’s a question. It’s not a veiled insult, it’s not a shot, it’s an honest-to-goodness question.

It is an act of violence against God.

Now, I was originally going to go into law. Did a lot of studying. Have a very actively legal mind. I’m trying to wrap my head around the idea of homosexuality being an act of violence against God. I understand it violates His laws, and I understand it’s not in the natural order, but when I see a statement like “It’s an act of violence against God” your argument tends to weaken ever-so-slightly in my mind. Is there an actual foundation for this statement, or is it just descriptive rhetoric? I understand the two participants are doing acts of spiritual violence against each other when they engage in homosexual sex, but is there a basis to saying that it’s also an act of violence against God beyond it violating his laws?

I’m probably wording this quite badly. Let me give you an example, albeit a worldly one: say Joe shoots FBI Agent Jack. Now, admittedly it’s an act of violence against Jack (a federal crime). But we don’t count it as an act of violence against the legislators who illegalized shooting FBI agents, or an act of violence against the President, who signed the bill. So I’m having a hard time really accepting statements like “It’s an act of violence against God.” Is it a rhetorical device, or is there an argument behind it that I haven’t encountered yet (keep in mind, I’m new to all this).

 

[larsegarots]

A gay wedding/commitment/“going steady” ceremony (whatever you want to call it) is hateful towards God. It is an act of violence against God. It directly violates the natural order which God ordained. It is one of the sins that cries out for the vengeance of heaven. What don’t you understand about this?

Please explain to me how expressing commitment to a partner is hate or violence towards God.

If you think that a “commitment” ceremony doesn’t automatically include sexual activity within that relationship, you’re beyond naive. I don’t usually like to throw out pejoratives, but in this case, it’s entirely appropriate.

Please read my posts above on this topic. There are straight marriages where people abstain from sex. A wedding doesn’t make any comment about sex, at least none that I’ve been to. Attending a wedding isn’t endorsing any kind of sexual behavior.

 

[YipYupYep]

You can approach it theologically, and drive him further away from the church, or theologically and psychologically, which will keep him open to conversation

You can not have possibly have heard all that you have, and specifically directed at your posts and continue these ludicrous responses.

I believe that the you are no more than a provocateur, harassing us with half truths of our Christian beliefs to promote a Gay agenda.

The posters on this thread would be well advised to ignore you as I now will. Get yourself some help.

 

[IGCampbell]

I’m sorry you feel that way. I’m also disappointed that you won’t be answering the genuine question I posted above. I do hope someone else can shed some light on the subject, though.