The Marriage Amendment

[Elsa1]

Elsa is talking about what many have said, take marriage away from the government.

In the past, I would suppose married couples were given tax breaks because they could give society new citizens.

But what we don’t need to see happen is the government totally redefining marriage.

Broom, anyone can give society children. One need not be married by the state to do that. And, married couples are still provided with whole host of benefits, both legal and financial, by the STATE. Now, if a truly single person (ie a person who is not coupled with another) wants even half of those same benefits, they typically would have to hire an attorney at great monetary expense to set up the legal framework through contracts and other legally binding means to access these same things. Complicated and expensive. That is unethical and immoral. Why should a single person be denied the right to have this litany of benefits through the simple purchase of a state document? Now, if the government created a similar procedure for the same price ( about 80 dollars as stat marriage licese roughly costs) and made that available to single persons, then we could say that the system was at least attempting to be ethical. Unless that happens, we need to abolish civil marriage completely!

 

[maryj]

I understand you mean well, but we have been praying for a miracle and continue to pray for a miracle, but if we believe God can create life without the usual requirements (egg, sperm, uterus), as He did with Mary and Jesus, then we could go so far as to say that same sex couples likewise could pray for a miracle. I’m not saying God would grant that miracle, but we do not know why God chooses to bless some with children and others He doesn’t.

Also, if we can say that priests and religious are metaphorically fruitful, and hence we can call theirs a marriage to the church or Christ, then I don’t understand why we can’t call it a marriage when two individuals commit to each other. I’m not trying to be difficult, I’m just trying to ask the right questions to see if I can get to a place on this issue where I understand the church’s teaching.

Am I understanding you correctly that you are comparing the overshadowing of the Blessed Mother Mary, by the Holy Spirit, with same sex marriage couples praying for a child? And you are comparing a Priest of the catholic church who in persona christi, confects the Most Holy Eucharist within the sanctuary of the church, thereby making it fruitful…with calling same sex unions marriage? Would you be so kind as to clear those questions up.

 

[BroomWagon]

Broom, anyone can give society children.

Actually it takes a couple to give citizens to society. Not just anyone.

One need not be married by the state to do that. And, married couples are still provided with whole host of benefits, both legal and financial, by the STATE. Now, if a truly single person (ie a person who is not coupled with another) wants even half of those same benefits, they typically would have to hire an attorney at great monetary expense to set up the legal framework through contracts and other legally binding means to access these same things. Complicated and expensive. That is unethical and immoral. Why should a single person be denied the right to have this litany of benefits through the simple purchase of a state document? Now, if the government created a similar procedure for the same price ( about 80 dollars as stat marriage licese roughly costs) and made that available to single persons, then we could say that the system was at least attempting to be ethical. Unless that happens, we need to abolish civil marriage completely!

Yes, the above could appear immoral but these laws were established at a different time.

Until then I still think States should have a right to decide these issues. Respect the rights of the individual and to respect society as a whole as well.

 

[Elsa1]

Actually it takes a couple to give citizens to society. Not just anyone.

Yes, the above could appear immoral but these laws were established at a different time.

Until then I still think States should have a right to decide these issues. Respect the rights of the individual and to respect society as a whole as well.

Time to change the laws!

As for the “anyone” point, of course it takes male and female, but each of these can come from any group or segment of society. They need not be married with a civil 80 dollar marriage license between them.

 

[maryj]

osservatoreromano.va/portal/dt?JSPTabContainer.setSelected=JSPTabContainer%2FDetail&last=false=&path=/news/vaticano/2012/059q12-Benedetto-XVI-ai-vescovi-americani–Difesa-.html&title=Reasoned%20defense%20of%20Christian%20marriage&locale=en

usccb.org/issues-and-action/marriage-and-family/marriage/love-and-life/upload/pastoral-letter-marriage-love-and-life-in-the-divine-plan.pdf

minnesotaformarriage.com/

a virtual overload of information for catholics. Fast, pray, repent…and vote yes

 

[BroomWagon]

Time to change the laws!

As for the “anyone” point, of course it takes male and female, but each of these can come from any group or segment of society. They need not be married with a civil 80 dollar marriage license between them.

States have long regulated marriage, there are some distinctly different “cousins marriage” laws between states. Couples raise children and have a right to some tax benefits for doing so. At the least, I believe the people of a state should have a right to determine what is marriage in a state through voting should they see fit.

Though it may change this November, every State, 33 or 32 of them that have votetd on Marriage have voted in favor of Traditional Marriage. The public has voted for Marriage every time, traditional marriage that is. Same Sex Marriage has only passed in legislatures or by judges and never by a public vote yet.

I think the people have a right to decide this issue and the people of those states.

 

[Elsa1]

States have long regulated marriage, there are some distinctly different “cousins marriage” laws between states. Couples raise children and have a right to some tax benefits for doing so. At the least, I believe the people of a state should have a right to determine what is marriage in a state through voting should they see fit.

Though it may change this November, every State, 33 or 32 of them that have votetd on Marriage have voted in favor of Traditional Marriage. The public has voted for Marriage every time, traditional marriage that is. Same Sex Marriage has only passed in legislatures or by judges and never by a public vote yet.

I think the people have a right to decide this issue and the people of those states.

I believe that tax deducations for having children are also unethical and immoral. It simply means that the rest of society pays via their taxes, either personal or business, to make up for these deductions. If people can not afford children, they should not have any. If you have kids, they are your responsibility alone. There is no moral or ethical reason for child tax deductions.

 

[BroomWagon]

I believe that tax deducations for having children are also unethical and immoral. It simply means that the rest of society pays via their taxes, either personal or business, to make up for these deductions. If people can not afford children, they should not have any. If you have kids, they are your responsibility alone. There is no moral or ethical reason for child tax deductions.

There are moral and ethical reasons for child tax deductions, society needs citizens, families raise children who become citizens. It would be unethical not to help families. Other is in fact, anti-social and uncharitable.

 

[Cristiano]

…There is no moral or ethical reason for child tax deductions.

You are correct here, there is no moral or ethical reasons for tax deductions in general and for taxes too. Taxes and deductions are just a social decision out of public convenience.

 

[Ghosty]

The Church would not approve a marriage that is not also legal for the State. In most countries, you need to have a civil ceremony before you can have the Church ceremony. I am not aware of any place where the civil requirements of marriage are completely contrary to Church teaching (that is, there is no place where following civil law concerning marriage necessarily requires violating Catholic principles).

This is only a relatively recent development in Church practice. For most of history the State had no role in marriage; it wasn’t until after the Protestant Reformation, and even the French Revolution, that this changed in a widespread way.

There is nothing against Catholic teaching in saying that the State shouldn’t determine marriage. The modern Catholic practice is simply an accommodation to political realities.

Peace and God bless!

 

[maryj]

I understand you mean well, but we have been praying for a miracle and continue to pray for a miracle, but if we believe God can create life without the usual requirements (egg, sperm, uterus), as He did with Mary and Jesus, then we could go so far as to say that same sex couples likewise could pray for a miracle. I’m not saying God would grant that miracle, but we do not know why God chooses to bless some with children and others He doesn’t.

Also, if we can say that priests and religious are metaphorically fruitful, and hence we can call theirs a marriage to the church or Christ, then I don’t understand why we can’t call it a marriage when two individuals commit to each other. I’m not trying to be difficult, I’m just trying to ask the right questions to see if I can get to a place on this issue where I understand the church’s teaching.

From catholic answers home page…
catholic.com/video/how-redefining-marriage-affects-your-religious-liberty

 

[anilorak13ska]

Maryj, thanks for the link to the Catholic answers webpage. I think I will conduct the rest of my research there instead of on a forum, where it’s too easy to come across opinion presented as fact and too difficult to discern the difference.

I do fail to see how a metaphorical/spiritual marriage such as that between priests/religious and the Church/Jesus and the social marriage of two actual human individuals can be compared in the sense that the metaphorical/spiritual one is OK but the one between two individuals isn’t, if those individuals aren’t opposite sex. It opens up all sorts of cans of worms - what about folks who say they were born “in the wrong body” and self-identify as the gender that their body doesn’t reflect? Who should they be attracted to and it be OK? How can multiple religious all be married to the same one Christ? Isn’t that polygamy, if we’re using the marriage metaphor too literally? How can priests marry a non-person, namely the Church, which in spite of the use of the feminine pronoun “she” still doesn’t refer to any actual female?

There’s just too much muddle water there, imho, so I don’t want to go into it either to support or refute what I think, bc what I think isn’t really the point. I’ve been in error before, so I’m not out to try to find support for my opinion as if it were the truth. Rather, I’m using my current opinion as the starting point to ask the questions that will hopefully help me understand the Church’s stance, and the last link you provide sounds like a good place for me to shift my attention. So thanks

 

[fix]

I agree with you, but in this case, and more that I am aware of it would be giving into “THE MAN”. (government of all levels)
And I have to agree.

**Government should have no say as to who is married and who isn’t. ** and is why we have this discussion on if same sex should get married etc etc.

Myself, I will never be ‘married’ again if it means a certificate on the wall. If the occasion ever happens where I and a potential spouse consider it, I don’t know how the church feels about a marriage ceremony without a civil certificate.
THERE WILL NEVER BE ANOTHER MARRIAGE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY ANY GOVERNMENT WITH MY NAME ON IT.
I however would welcome one from the church.

Sorry, but this is no Catholic view. The governemnt is not simply some arbitrary organization that simply happens to be involved in our life. There is a duty for the government to protect marriage.

 

[onthisrock]

The State of Minnesota will be voting this November on the Marriage Amendment. The Amendment is designed to officially define marriage legally as being between one man and one woman. While the stereotypical view of Minnesota is a lot of Lutherans eating their lutefisk in the Church Basement (which really is entirely true…) it is a blue state that has very liberal leanings. I am truthfully concerned about this November vote.

We have a ‘Vote Yes: One Man, One Woman’ sign in our yard… but when I go to the sidewalk and look down the street, I am overwhelmed by the number of bright orange “Vote No!” signs. Having the sign in our yard has already identified us as hate filled bigots by some. It feels like a battle that can’t be won. Losing this nearly guarantees the legalization of same-sex “marriages” in our state.

Please pray. Please join me in prayer for my state, and the others who are voting this year on the same issue. I believe there are five states total that are voting on this issue.

In 31 states when there has been a referendum, ALL have chosen traditional marriage. I live in CA and all of these idiots out here, you would assume no on prop 8…well, It was an election year, not midterms, and the people came out and voted for traditional marriage. See…you’re a “hate group or a bigot” if you have your views and tolerant, peaceful, or even an "advocate if you’re for hedonistic lifestyles to change society for 2% of the population who can not even reproduce. Don’t worry, God loves us and won’t allow our country to rot. if CA can do it and actually vote obummer in, then Minnesota will surely cast the correct ballot. If all 31 states have proven traditional, then your’s will be 32

 

[maryj]

Maryj, thanks for the link to the Catholic answers webpage. I think I will conduct the rest of my research there instead of on a forum, where it’s too easy to come across opinion presented as fact and too difficult to discern the difference.

I do fail to see how a metaphorical/spiritual marriage such as that between priests/religious and the Church/Jesus and the social marriage of two actual human individuals can be compared in the sense that the metaphorical/spiritual one is OK but the one between two individuals isn’t, if those individuals aren’t opposite sex. It opens up all sorts of cans of worms - what about folks who say they were born “in the wrong body” and self-identify as the gender that their body doesn’t reflect? Who should they be attracted to and it be OK? How can multiple religious all be married to the same one Christ? Isn’t that polygamy, if we’re using the marriage metaphor too literally? How can priests marry a non-person, namely the Church, which in spite of the use of the feminine pronoun “she” still doesn’t refer to any actual female?

There’s just too much muddle water there, imho, so I don’t want to go into it either to support or refute what I think, bc what I think isn’t really the point. I’ve been in error before, so I’m not out to try to find support for my opinion as if it were the truth. Rather, I’m using my current opinion as the starting point to ask the questions that will hopefully help me understand the Church’s stance, and the last link you provide sounds like a good place for me to shift my attention. So thanks

May the Holy Spirit guide you, and bring you peace. God Bless you on your journey!! Praise God through whom all blessings flow.

 

[onthisrock]

I have no problem with domestic partnerships…they can go and get themselves in the legal mess the secular part of marriage is, but to change society for 2% of the population is ridiculous…I mean, people have the right to not be Catholic and live how they want but when they try to bring society down with them…forget it. Even in CA where I live when people voted for Obummer, they still voted for a yes on 8. Why? Many Obummer supporters are black and are big Bible thumpers…They may have voted for the first half black president, but they knew not to vote along with 2% of the population whom they believe are going straight to hell. I have a gay friend who had a domestic partnership for 18 years. He was a trust fund baby. Guess what…they broke up. Now, my friend has to buy his ex a new car close to the value of what he used to drive, every four years, and must guive him 150,000 per month for 9 years, half of their relationship since that’s a domestic partnership law…I say ha ha!!

 

[Jake_Parker]

I have no problem with domestic partnerships…they can go and get themselves in the legal mess the secular part of marriage is, but to change society for 2% of the population is ridiculous…I mean, people have the right to not be Catholic and live how they want but when they try to bring society down with them…forget it. Even in CA where I live when people voted for Obummer, they still voted for a yes on 8. Why? Many Obummer supporters are black and are big Bible thumpers…They may have voted for the first half black president, but they knew not to vote along with 2% of the population whom they believe are going straight to hell. I have a gay friend who had a domestic partnership for 18 years. He was a trust fund baby. Guess what…they broke up. Now, my friend has to buy his ex a new car close to the value of what he used to drive, every four years, and must guive him 150,000 per month for 9 years, half of their relationship since that’s a domestic partnership law…I say ha ha!!

This sounded so un-Christ like. Also, there’s way more than 2% of the population that wants same-sex marriage to be legal. Why? Because they are tired of gay people being treated as second class citizens. Canada legalized it, and so will the United States!

 

[nishkalank]

People belong to various religions, ideologies, nationalities, believers, non believers and so on. When any matter is taken up they give prominence to the ideology to which they belong or loyal. So we Catholics who believe in Jesus and His Church should put across our faith and point of view. It is lacking because some though call themselves Catholic, they have little faith in it.
I have recently read that a survey of 765000 people held in a European country revealed that only 2.4 percent are homosexuals. It was shocking for me as the country is thinking of legalizing gay marriage. It means the people have no courage of conviction. Marriage is not man made. The purpose of creating the humans as males and females is family and propagation of species. If it was for any other purpose like sexual pleasures or reduction of less tax etc , there was no need for gender difference. It is really ununderstandable that some ignore all traditions and natural laws which were formed with the experience of thousands of years , just to satiate their personal ego or the desire of the flesh. A deep thinking seems to be lacking. Materialism and the foolish concept that there is nothing beyond life drive some to all perverted

 

[Faithdancer]

Marriage is not man made. The purpose of creating the humans as males and females is family and propagation of species.

Correct. Marriage was made by God and blessed by Jesus Christ. Believing that same sex “marriage” is valid directly contravenes Catholic teaching and is heterodox. To obstinately refuse to accept a church teaching founded in doctrine or dogma is heresy: "“Heresy is the obstinate post-baptismal denial of some truth which must be believed with divine and catholic faith, or it is likewise an obstinate doubt concerning the same” (CCC 2089).

There is no equivocation or exception to this. In order to be Catholic, among many other things one must accept, one simply must accept that marriage is a Holy Sacrament between a man and a woman only.

 

[Faithdancer]

anilorak13ska, you give me hope! I’ve been on this forum for about a week now trying to see how Catholics view different issues, especially this same-sex marriage issue. I was very close to just leaving this site and forgetting about becoming Catholic. After seeing an answer like yours, I will still consider Catholicism.

It would be best not to consider opinions that are antithetical to Catholic teaching. In the Catholic Church, there is no such thing as same sex “marriage,” and never will be.