Same Sex Wedding

[larsegarots]

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. If 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.

I understand your point but I don’t agree with it. I’m not arguing about the sinful nature of a sexual act. I disagree with anybody’s unsubstantiated claims that a wedding is sinful. Are you saying that God is so cruel as to create homosexual people and then say that they cannot have a life long commitment with a partner they love?

Furthermore, calling me a baiter for expressing my views doesn’t add any value to this conversation. I could say the exact same thing: “you are a baiter because I cannot believe that after all of the detailed explanations that have been presented to you, you still do not understand my point…”

 

[larsegarots]

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.

Why is somebody a provocateur because they disagree with you? Especially when your claims are unsubstantiated.

Get yourself some help.

It seems the harassing comments on this thread are coming from you, YipYupYep.

 

[Angels_Unaware]

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

Oh yes they do.

They also consent to shooting poison in their veins and they consent to ***descretion ***of their bodies in sexual sin.

Just because you have consented to desecrate yourself and you are living under a strong illusion that it is good for you does not change God’s law on homosexuality.

 

[Blade_and_Blood]

Thou Shalt Not Bear False Witness.

Period.

It’s not about lying. It’s about being there for someone you love and care about, but I’m not ordering him to attend. He does not have to if he truly does not wish to.

Ironically Yours.

 

[elvisman]

I understand your point but I don’t agree with it. I’m not arguing about the sinful nature of a sexual act. I disagree with anybody’s unsubstantiated claims that a wedding is sinful. Are you saying that God is so cruel as to create homosexual people and then say that they cannot have a life long commitment with a partner they love?

Furthermore, calling me a baiter for expressing my views doesn’t add any value to this conversation. I could say the exact same thing: "you are a baiter because I cannot believe that after all of the detailed explanations that have been presented to you, you still do not understand my point.

I understand your point but I don’t agree with it. I’m not arguing about the sinful nature of a sexual act. I disagree with anybody’s unsubstantiated claims that a wedding is sinful. Are you saying that God is so cruel as to create homosexual people and then say that they cannot have a life long commitment with a partner they love?

Furthermore, calling me a baiter for expressing my views doesn’t add any value to this conversation. I could say the exact same thing: “you are a baiter because I cannot believe that after all of the detailed explanations that have been presented to you, you still do not understand my point…”

"Unsubstantiated" claims that the homosexual union is sinful??
Maybe you should crack a bible open and see for yourself that there is PLENTY of condemnation for homosexual union:
Genesis 2:20-24
Leviticus 20:13
Leviticus 18:22
Romans 1:26-27
1 Cor. 6:9

What you’re doing is playing games with the situation – with the ceremony itself.
You’re saying that it is okay to support a homosexual “wedding” (for lack of a better term) because they’re not consummating the union in the presence of the guest. This is patently absurd. The “wedding” itself is an abomination to God because it flies in the face of his natural plan of the union between a man and a woman.** (Genesis 2:20-24)**

God is not cruel because somebody has a certain affliction. If this were the case, you could make that claim about any affliction. “God hates me because I have diabetes or cancer or epilepsy”. Nonsense! The challenges we are faced with in life should have a response that brings us closer to God. Our response should be a testament to his plan – not an abomination.

You want to have your cake and eat it too. You know that the homosexual act is sinful as explicitly laid out in scripture. In Sodom and Gomorrah, (Genesis 19:1-24) God struck them blind when they wanted to have homosexual relations with the 2 Angels in Lot’s home. They were subsequently destroyed for their sexual perversion, i.e., homosexual practices.

If you want to support this sin – do so at your own risk but don’t try to rationalize the word of God by telling me or anybody else that there is nothing wrong with it.

 

[Scottgun]

Ain’t no way around it: by showing up to a same-sex-ceremony-with-some-resemblence-to-a-real-wedding one is supporting it and legitimizing it and one has thus joined the ever-increasing ranks of Secular-Humanists-Who-Occassionaly-Show-Up-At-Mass.

 

[YipYupYep]

**"**Unsubstantiated" claims that the homosexual union is sinful\

 

[YipYupYep]

**"**Unsubstantiated" claims that the homosexual union is sinful??

I think your rebuttals and explanations have been right on from square one, however, I thought you had already figured this poster out.

Try Google searching “Brer Rabbit and the Tar Baby.” and read it. It will only take a few minutes. I can only guess what the real motives of this poster are, but in my judgement, you are in some sense feeding an unhealthy, and undisclosed actual agenda and by doing so, providing a stage for the acting out of the posters ridiculous comedy.

What do you think?

 

[elvisman]

I think your rebuttals and explanations have been right on from square one, however, I thought you had already figured this poster out.

Try Google searching “Brer Rabbit and the Tar Baby.” and read it. It will only take a few minutes. I can only guess what the real motives of this poster are, but in my judgement, you are in some sense feeding an unhealthy, and undisclosed actual agenda and by doing so, providing a stage for the acting out of the posters ridiculous comedy.

What do you think?

Maybe by proving our point by rebutting his ridiculous claims, others might have a better argument next time they’re confronted with this type of nonsense. But, I get your point.

 

[tm30]

“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?

All Christians comprise the body of Christ. All sin, in general, is an act of violence against the body of Christ. But some lashes are more profound, and tear deeper than others. Sins that violate the creative process are especially grave, according to the Church, because they do greater damage to God’s primary purpose - to exist (which we cannot change) and bring forth existence (which, by our free will, can impede). Not only that, but it has the capability of spreading like a virus among members of His body, causing disorder and disunity among the faithful. Thus, the importance of not giving rise to some kind of validation of homosexual weddings/commitments, etc. i.e., If it’s okay for one person to attend a gay wedding, then it must be okay for everyone.

The emphasis of the word “violence”, I use, to contrast the pedestrian belief that any kind of “wedding” is an act of “love”. It truly is violence against the body of Christ, Who is God, Who IS Love . We are parts of that body, and, consequently, suffer as well, by these sins.

 

[tm30]

Bade and Blood -

Of course it’s lying. One’s beliefs are proved in their actions. If someone believes gay marriage is wrong, but shows up anyhow - for whatever reason - then that person is living a lie. He is being inauthentic in his own beliefs and causing scandal by not practicing what others believe he represents by identifying as a Christian.

There’s all kinds of residual effects in actions like this.

The kind and loving thing is not to support someone’s spiritual suicide.

 

[IGCampbell]

All Christians comprise the body of Christ. All sin, in general, is an act of violence against the body of Christ. But some lashes are more profound, and tear deeper than others. Sins that violate the creative process are especially grave, according to the Church, because they do greater damage to God’s primary purpose - to exist (which we cannot change) and bring forth existence (which, by our free will, can impede). Not only that, but it has the capability of spreading like a virus among members of His body, causing disorder and disunity among the faithful. Thus, the importance of not giving rise to some kind of validation of homosexual weddings/commitments, etc. i.e., If it’s okay for one person to attend a gay wedding, then it must be okay for everyone.

The emphasis of the word “violence”, I use, to contrast the pedestrian belief that any kind of “wedding” is an act of “love”. It truly is violence against the body of Christ, Who is God. We are parts of that body, and, consequently, suffer as well, by these sins.

Reading the above brought an “Ohhhh!” moment for me. I get it now. Thanks for the explanation!

 

[tm30]

Thanks, IGC. A lot of good people are getting swept up in the secular wave, and don’t even question these things anymore.

Thank God, though, we have the totality of Truth in the Catholic faith.

 

[estesbob]

I think your rebuttals and explanations have been right on from square one, however, I thought you had already figured this poster out.

Try Google searching “Brer Rabbit and the Tar Baby.” and read it. It will only take a few minutes. I can only guess what the real motives of this poster are, but in my judgement, you are in some sense feeding an unhealthy, and undisclosed actual agenda and by doing so, providing a stage for the acting out of the posters ridiculous comedy.

What do you think?

Or one could pick up a copy of Tolkiens “The Hobbit” and see what creatures turn to stone when the sun comes up…

 

[YipYupYep]

Or one could pick up a copy of Tolkiens “The Hobbit” and see what creatures turn to stone when the sun comes up…

Got ya!

 

[Blade_and_Blood]

Bade and Blood -

Of course it’s lying. One’s beliefs are proved in their actions. If someone believes gay marriage is wrong, but shows up anyhow - for whatever reason - then that person is living a lie. He is being inauthentic in his own beliefs and causing scandal by not practicing what others believe he represents by identifying as a Christian.

There’s all kinds of residual effects in actions like this.

The kind and loving thing is not to support someone’s spiritual suicide.

True [to an extent], but hurting someone (emotionally, physically, or some other way) is also a sin.

Ironically Yours.

 

[tm30]

True [to an extent], but hurting someone (emotionally, physically, or some other way) is also a sin.

Ironically Yours.

It’s not a sin when it’s fraternal correction, passive or active. Did Jesus sin when He hurt the feelings of others? Christ surely hurt the feelings of the rich young man when He told him to sell all his things and leave behind His way of life as a condition of following Him. Christ surely hurt the feelings of Peter when He called Him “Satan” in order to set straight his error in logic.

You say “compassion”, I say “gross indifference” to the well-being of your neighbor’s soul.

 

[rinnie]

Like so many thing’s today there are too many thing’s that go against the law of Christ. I guess you have to ask yourself what is more important pleasing others or God.

If the Church say’s no, You either obey the Church and don’t go. or you go against the Church’s teachings and go. It really comes down to you, and what you choose. God or the Wedding that goes against the teaching’s of Christ. I think you have enough info. on the teaching’s of the Church now. Its up to you. Who will you choose, An easy choice no. never. Doing the right thing usually isn’t. God Bless, and I hope you do the right thing, and make the right choice. But I agree it is a terrible position to be in.

 

[YipYupYep]

You say “compassion”, I say “gross indifference” to the well-being of your neighbor’s soul.

Assuming we are all Catholic, the finer points you are putting on the table, although correct, are irrelevant for this reason. A Catholic can not go to the false gay wedding. Period. End of sentence.

One may be as gentile as could be, or straight up about it. Your not going to be there because it would be a grievous sin to do so. The decision is not in our hands.

Correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Blade_and_Blood]

It’s not a sin when it’s fraternal correction, passive or active. Did Jesus sin when He hurt the feelings of others? Christ surely hurt the feelings of the rich young man when He told him to sell all his things and leave behind His way of life as a condition of following Him. Christ surely hurt the feelings of Peter when He called Him “Satan” in order to set straight his error in logic.

You say “compassion”, I say “gross indifference” to the well-being of your neighbor’s soul.

I think you misunderstood… either that, or I forgot a word.

UNNECESSARY pain inflicted on others is sinful.

Now, as far as the whole “homosexual brother” goes, that depends on the person. I don’t think the guy who started this thread even went to his brother’s wedding (assuming that it’s already passed), but, again, it depends on him.

Now that I think on it, whether this person goes to their brother’s wedding or not, it won’t change the brother’s orientation; it won’t show him this orientation is “wrong”; it won’t show him that it’s “immoral”.

What’s done is done.

Ironically Yours.