Should gay marriage be legalised?

[Serap]

Can’t see how it is fair unless you view marriage as arbitrary.

How do you know how anyone views marriage?

Just because someone is pro-gay marriage doesn’t mean they lack the integrity in their own wedding vows or their personal belief in the sacrament of marriage.

There’s a difference between a man and woman getting married in the CC and a civil secular legal ceremony called “marriage” between same sex couples.

Most of us here are not saying that a gay couple should be married in the CC; we are talking about basic human rights under contract law.

 

[Tosk]

Yes, I think that it should be. It would grant same-sex couples the same tax exemptions and legal status as other married couples, which is only fair.

I guess as long as you made the same legal benefits available to anyone and everyone that would be fair. But why even call that kind of union “marriage” and make a big fuss about nothing more than a contract? Congratulations on your tax exemption status, I am sure you two will be very happy together.

 

[fix]

How do you know how anyone views marriage?

I know that poster said he wants same sex “marriage” legalized that is how I know.

Just because someone is pro-gay marriage doesn’t mean they lack the integrity in their own wedding vows or their personal belief in the sacrament of marriage.

Do you not find this position contradictory?

There’s a difference between a man and woman getting married in the CC and a civil secular legal ceremony called “marriage” between same sex couples.

Sure, one is legitimate and one is illegitimate and contradicts the natural law.

Most of us here are not saying that a gay couple should be married in the CC; we are talking about basic human rights under contract law.

There is no right to homosexual marriage. Rights come from the creator. The state that usurps His rights is acting unjustly.

 

[Justin_A]

I don’t condem anyone. I’m sorry if I gave that impression. I wouldn’t mind even having a gay friend so long as he kept himself to himself. Gays can be some of the best people out there. What I do not agree with is in gay marriage being legalized. You can be gay, there is nothing wrong with being gay. What is wrong is that a gay marriage gose against the laws of life and (sorry but it dose) love. As I said before, for marriage to contain true love it must be fruitful. Gay marraige can’t.

And as much as you hate the “adam and steve” joke, you must see the trueth in it.
If God had created us to be with the same sex, don’t you think it would have been adam and steve and not adam and eve?

Justin, How big of you" You wouldn’t mind having a gay friend as long as he kept to himself". What does that mean? As long as he doesn’t try and touch you or something because you know how those sex fiends are… or as long as he doesn’t share any part of his life with you, anything that might make you feel “icky”?
Man, I just can’t believe the bigoted,superior atitudes that pass for social intercourse.

Laws of life and love. Are you high?! My partner and I have two children, one with Downs syndrome and one who was so abused when we got her she slept in a corner of her bedroom with a pillow over her head so she would not be beaten in her sleep. We have two dogs, three cats, and a hamster. That is not fruitful? How dare you! What are you doing with your day after sitting in Judgement!

The only thing I worry about is my rights by LAW. We should ALL BE EQUAL as far as partnership rights are concerned. Your reply just drips with self righteous homophobia and you don’t even see it. Why is it that one little verse in Leviticus gets you all so riled up? Is it just because we won’t sit down in the back of the bus? I don’t see screaming mobs trying to bring about the end of divorce, something that our Lord ACTUALLY MENTIONED.
How about banning shellfish which according to the good book is also an anomination. Why don’t you get some of your like minded mob to torch a Long John Silvers? It would make just as much sense as talking smack about people who are just trying to do the best they can with the cards that they are dealt in this life and try to treat with love all who we meet on our path as we are commanded.

Ok, it is clear to me that I have offended you. I’m very sorry. What I meant was that a gay marriage can’t bring forth NEW life. I think it’s awesome that you have kids. They are lucky to have a stable home and some one who loves them. It was never my intention to get people angry at me or any one ells. I said so at the beginning of my thread.
And as were I disagree with the idea and practice of gay marriage, I still like the people.
And as to me saying: “as long as he keeps himself to himself”. All I meant was that as long as he didn’t make any advances past friendship, or as you said, touched me in inappropriate way, I would be completely fine in having a gay friend. In having 100!
I very sincerely apologies for angering or upsetting you.

 

[Tosk]

How do you know how anyone views marriage?

Just because someone is pro-gay marriage doesn’t mean they lack the integrity in their own wedding vows or their personal belief in the sacrament of marriage.

There’s a difference between a man and woman getting married in the CC and a civil secular legal ceremony called “marriage” between same sex couples.

Most of us here are not saying that a gay couple should be married in the CC; we are talking about basic human rights under contract law.

except a same sex union isn’t a marriage. So why not just avoid the confusion? I wouldn’t want what the CC calls an isosceles triangle and what the secular state calls an isosceles triangle to be two different things. Randomly reassigning the meaning of words doesn’t change there inherent meaning. We could all just randomly agree that from here on out all doors will be referred to as windows, and it wouldn’t change a thing. A door would still be something I use to enter and exit my house with and not something I open to let a cool breeze in.

A marriage by its very nature is something that can only exist between one man and one woman. It isn’t a legal union that we just randomly assign meaning to.

 

[Serap]

except a same sex union isn’t a marriage. So why not just avoid the confusion? I wouldn’t want what the CC calls an isosceles triangle and what the secular state calls an isosceles triangle to be two different things. Randomly reassigning the meaning of words doesn’t change there inherent meaning. We could all just randomly agree that from here on out all doors will be referred to as windows, and it wouldn’t change a thing. A door would still be something I use to enter and exit my house with and not something I open to let a cool breeze in.

A marriage by its very nature is something that can only exist between one man and one woman. It isn’t a legal union that we just randomly assign meaning to.

unfortunately, the secular world is on a different tangent.

as long as the state recognizes that the CC will never marry a gay couple, then what’s the big fuss? it won’t be recognized by the CC and will never be a sacrament.

 

[edwest2]

unfortunately, the secular world is on a different tangent.

as long as the state recognizes that the CC will never marry a gay couple, then what’s the big fuss? it won’t be recognized by the CC and will never be a sacrament.

The big fuss is that right after gay marriage, multiple partners, the man-boy love association and those who practice bestiality. And we’re all supposed to think and say, it’s OK. This is a Catholic Forum, I suggest all Catholics become familiar with Church teaching about this.

 

[edwest2]

The big fuss is that right after gay marriage, multiple partners, the man-boy love association and those who practice bestiality. And we’re all supposed to think and say, it’s OK. This is a Catholic Forum, I suggest all Catholics become familiar with Church teaching about this.

firstthings.com/on_the_square_entry.php?year=2006&month=8&title_link=robert-george-beyond-gay-marri

Peace,
Ed

 

[fix]

The big fuss is that right after gay marriage, multiple partners, the man-boy love association and those who practice bestiality. And we’re all supposed to think and say, it’s OK. This is a Catholic Forum, I suggest all Catholics become familiar with Church teaching about this.

And I would add the Church is interested in all humanity not only members of Her Church.

 

[Shredderbeam]

Can’t see how it is fair unless you view marriage as arbitrary.

Well, it’s fair because it extends the same benefits towards same-sex couples.

I guess as long as you made the same legal benefits available to anyone and everyone that would be fair. But why even call that kind of union “marriage” and make a big fuss about nothing more than a contract? Congratulations on your tax exemption status, I am sure you two will be very happy together.

It wouldn’t just be tax exemptions, though. They’d also have access to the same procedures as married couples for when one or both die, the right to make important medical decisions for each other in case one couldn’t consent, and so on. The legal establishment of marriage already has all of these functions built in, so to create a whole new establishment with identical functions, taking the time to replicate all of the legal precedents, etc., seems like a very energy-intensive thing to do.

By the way, a rose by any other name would smell as sweet - this new establishment would be identical to marriage, but without the name.

 

[Tosk]

By the way, a rose by any other name would smell as sweet - this new establishment would be identical to marriage, but without the name.

No, it would be nothing like marriage. It would be between any number of adults just like any other contract. They would also define their own relationship so they could be madly in love, platonic non-sexual, or just in it for the benefits.

Why do you think that marriage or these civil unions should be restricted to people who are in a sexual relationship? Every person I ask about this assumes that marriage must be about sex. It is as if they believe there is a essential part to a union that makes it a marriage. Like without sex what you have is not a marriage at all, but is something else entirely. But as long as what we are concerned with is being fair and there is no inherent meaning to marriage other than the one we give, why shouldn’t brothers and sisters, or BFFs be able to marry each other? Seems like discrimination to deny all of these people the right to marry just like everyone else.

 

[phoebe3029]

I’m sure someone will correct me where I’m mistaken, as I am a convert, and not especially knowledgable. The Catholic Church does not condone the lifestyle, and can not be forced to perform a ceremony, not just between two men or two women, but between any two people it doesn’t feel should marry for whatever reason. Any priest, minister, rabbi, whatever has the right to not perform a ceremony for whatever reason. Because of the separation of church and state, I don’t see how any church could be forced into performing a ceremony that goes against their faith. So, maybe it will be made legal, and maybe some religions will even perform the ceremony, but I believe the Catholic Church will hold firm in their faith. I have cousins who are in the lifestyle, and I love them dearly, but I don’t agree with their lifestyle. I don’t treat them any differently than I ever did, and we do not discuss their lifestyle, or our beliefs. Maybe that’s wrong of me, not to try to explain my belief to them, maybe it means I’m covering my eyes, but it’s the only thing I feel comfortable doing when at family gatherings. As far as civil ceremonies, well, I’m of two opinions there. No, it’s not a marriage, BUT, if two people have been together forever (ok, many years) perhaps they do have the right of inheritance, I don’t know. I know that one of my cousins has domestic partner insurance, and it’s been a blessing for them. Does that make it right? Well, I still don’t like it, but calling it a domestic partnership doesn’t make it a marriage. Bottom line for me, no I don’t think gay marriage should be legalized.

 

[mesurman]

No & poor spelling should be outlawed!

 

[fix]

Well, it’s fair because it extends the same benefits towards same-sex couples.

But we are not comparimg equal issues. If two, or more, people want to allow others to inherit their money, make medical decision, or anything else then can draw up a private contract.

All the arguments are nothing but an attempt to legitimize homosexual unions as equal to heterosexual marriage.

 

[Shredderbeam]

No, it would be nothing like marriage. It would be between any number of adults just like any other contract. They would also define their own relationship so they could be madly in love, platonic non-sexual, or just in it for the benefits.

You hadn’t mentioned that multiple people would be allowed to marry, or that there would be different grades of marriage. I thought that we were just discussing whether to allow same-sex couples wed.
"Tosk:

Why do you think that marriage or these civil unions should be restricted to people who are in a sexual relationship? Every person I ask about this assumes that marriage must be about sex. It is as if they believe there is a essential part to a union that makes it a marriage. Like without sex what you have is not a marriage at all, but is something else entirely. But as long as what we are concerned with is being fair and there is no inherent meaning to marriage other than the one we give, why shouldn’t brothers and sisters, or BFFs be able to marry each other? Seems like discrimination to deny all of these people the right to marry just like everyone else.

I don’t think that having a sexual relationship should be a requirement for marriage.

You’re right, it does seem like discrimination to deny family members the right to marry each other, though personally, I wouldn’t have a problem if they did.

But we are not comparimg equal issues. If two, or more, people want to allow others to inherit their money, make medical decision, or anything else then can draw up a private contract.

Hey, you’re right. We might as well abolish the institution of heterosexual marriage too, I suppose.

fix:

All the arguments are nothing but an attempt to legitimize homosexual unions as equal to heterosexual marriage.

I can’t speak for others, but I only want to see same-sex marriage legalized because I believe that it’s fair.

 

[Swamp_Yankee]

Wait a minute. Did the government start the push for gay marriage?

Give me a break. By making marriage a private contract then there is an end run around the natural order and every mix and match ‘marriage’ combination gets in.

Who is trying to redefine marriage? The government?

And what happens to the bedrock instution of marriage when multiple people get involved or the Man-Boy Love Association or those people who refer to their practice of ‘mammal to mammal’ love?

Peace,
Ed

Um, no I don't think the govt made the push for gay marriage.  Although it is the State govts and courts that are making it the law without the votes of the local populations.  And yes, it is the govt that, through its actions, is redefining marriage.

I’m not sure I understand your last paragraph, but is " mammal to mammal love" the same thing as animal husbantry? HAHAHAHAHAH ! I crack myself up.

 

[Serap]

The big fuss is that right after gay marriage, multiple partners, the man-boy love association and those who practice bestiality. And we’re all supposed to think and say, it’s OK. This is a Catholic Forum, I suggest all Catholics become familiar with Church teaching about this.

I am well aware of the CC teaching. Have you not read my earlier posts on this thread? I stated bluntly that gay marriages will never be recognized in the CC nor should they ever be allowed in the CC.

I am looking at this from a human rights issue. I’m not talking about polygamy, mammal to mammal, sister and brother…two non related people in-love who are the same sex.

In polygamy, 14 year old girls are being abused - shouldn’t be legalized
Brother to sister - birth defects as a result - shouldn’t be legalized
Mammal to mammal - not going there.

I follow church teaching…I’m not a cafeteria Catholic. Same sex gay couples often have children and are living a married life. They need to have rights given in secular marriage now that there are children involved. It’s not going away. Something needs to be done; whether it be “marriage” which is not how we Catholics define marriage; but something has to be done for these children.

Do you not see where I am coming from???

 

[fix]

Hey, you’re right. We might as well abolish the institution of heterosexual marriage too, I suppose.

That is the argument those make who want the government to stop protecting the family unit. I find it a terrible position.

I can’t speak for others, but I only want to see same-sex marriage legalized because I believe that it’s fair.

It is not fair. In fact it is extremely unfair.

 

[Justin_A]

The problem I see with the human rights argument is that no mater how leagal you make it, it will alway be illeagal under Gods rules. And HE is the one we are all ultimatley going to acount to.

 

[Serap]

The problem I see with the human rights argument is that no mater how leagal you make it, it will alway be illeagal under Gods rules. And HE is the one we are all ultimatley going to acount to.

But remember that mortal sin is only mortal sin if a person truly understands the graveness of a matter.

Persons in a same sex marriage union with children, will likely truly believe that they are being holy and are in good standing with God. God is very merciful and can look into the hearts of individuals. It is for this reason that I believe that gay couples can be accepted by God (despite what is seen as ignorance) and enter into Heaven just like practicing Catholics.

Catholics need to be careful of having the “holier than thou” attitude. We are acting like the Pharisees if we refuse to open our hearts and see that these people are just trying to live a peaceful life and they are not pushing to be able to marry in the CC. They just want the same legal rights that are given in marriage by the government.