We Have to Remember That the Catholic Magisterium is Binding on all Catholics

  • Thread starter Thread starter BlessedSacraments
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Oh, I thought you meant that we are protecting sodomy via hate crime legislation that makes it especially illegal to cause violence on homosexuals. I believe that’s a mistake.

Marriage is an enticement. It is a bundled package of special protections and benefits in law that entice people to be married and bear children. Traditional marriage benefits the State and the Common Good in obvious ways. That’s why the State encourages heterosexuals to be married and protects those who aren’t really, such as via Common-Law arrangements. The State protects community property, it protects divorced people via alimony, custody arrangements, and other legal means, and it generally strives to make Marriage safe, legal, and ubiquitous.

As for sodomite same-sex relationships, I fail to see why they should be encouraged and enshrined in law with the same alacrity. They do nothing for the Common Good, they cannot actually bear children (other than swipe them from other people) and they are an objectively inferior way to raise and educate children. So why???
 
…and now we see how easily a pope or a presidents words can be misconstrueded when only a snippet is conveyed…The magisterium that is a different matter…
 
Anesti33 said:
So why???
Click to expand...
Because they, too, are human beings, pay taxes, love their partner, keep society more stable than them bar hopping. Because they don’t want to grow old all alone and have to hide their love life because others are offended. Because it helps more people have health insurance. Because it stops a lot of legal battles over who makes decisions for them. Because no one should live in fear of being beaten up or killed just because others think it’s ikky. Because these people are our friends, family and neighbors. Because some people don’t like seeing Muslim women wearing their burka but manage to tolerate it and can learn to tolerate two people of the same sex being in love.

You don’t have to approve of it. You don’t have to like it. You can call them sodomites in your head. But, they exist and should be treated with the same respect every other sinner deserves.
 
Anesti33 said:
Oh, I thought you meant that we are protecting sodomy via hate crime legislation that makes it especially illegal to cause violence on homosexuals. I believe that’s a mistake.
Click to expand...
No, I wasn’t arguing for or against hate crime legislation. With that aside would you agree with me that it’s ok for a state to not ban sodomy?
Marriage is an enticement. It is a bundled package of special protections and benefits in law that entice people to be married and bear children. Traditional marriage benefits the State and the Common Good in obvious ways. That’s why the State encourages heterosexuals to be married and protects those who aren’t really, such as via Common-Law arrangements. The State protects community property, it protects divorced people via alimony, custody arrangements, and other legal means, and it generally strives to make Marriage safe, legal, and ubiquitous.
Click to expand...
By your reasoning we should not allow marriages for people who are not of age or are sterile since you see the only benefit of marriage being children. There are a great many couples (heterosexual and homosexual) who don’t have kids and are productive members of society. They work everyday. They protect us by serving as police, fire, or in the armed services. They work with community groups. Some are provide jobs for many others. It’s not too much to allow them the comfort of offering the protection of love and marriage when they are not benefiting society. Heck, my aunt and her partner have the best darn chocolate shop in South Jersey and they’ve never had kids 😃
As for sodomite same-sex relationships, I fail to see why they should be encouraged and enshrined in law with the same alacrity. They do nothing for the Common Good, they cannot actually bear children (other than swipe them from other people) and they are an objectively inferior way to raise and educate children. So why???
Click to expand...
It’s not encouraged, as I detailed in my previous post. They are simply allowed. The legal state of same-sex marriage isn’t going to convince a heterosexual person to join one. It’s not a special privilege, just give equal privileges to all. One’s discomfort with it should in no way allow for rights to be vastly uneven.
 
The aim of an argument or discussion should not be victory, but progress…and finding sources of truth…or information…being informed…Perhaps we might try again next week…
 
Maximian said:
Its a Catholic news agency said to be supported by the Legeonnaires of Christ.
Click to expand...
Thank you very much! I assumed it was something Catholic related and I’m pleased I wasn’t the only one clueless! 😂😂😂 . I may never hear the word used again but I’ll always remember what it is…now!
 
JoeFreedom said:
So…too bad this site doesn’t allow users to block jerks.
Click to expand...
You can actually block people here. Click on a profile, and go to the profile’s summary page. There’s a drop down next to the message button. Select “Muted”.
 
Anesti33 said:
Everyone is protected from abuse and violence.
Click to expand...
Everyone where?
Remember those men acused of being homosexuals that were tied up and thrown off a roof to their death in Iran or Iraq recently?
 
umamibella said:
40.png
Anesti33:
Everyone is protected from abuse and violence.
Click to expand...
Everyone where?
Remember those men acused of being homosexuals that were tied up and thrown off a roof to their death in Iran or Iraq recently?
Click to expand...
Was that a lynching, or as a criminal sentence?
 
Anesti33 said:
Was that a lynching, or as a criminal sentence?
Click to expand...
Did you see the clip, Taliban clip I think, I wont post it here. Homosexuals are still executed for being homosexual in the world today. If Pope Francis is speaking out, it will in a global context. My own country threw homosexuals in jail right up until 1997. Brave new world we are now.

Here is a list of countries you can and will be thrown in jail
https://www.outlife.org.uk/which-co...MIncudgtrO7AIVz7WWCh1HHQoMEAAYAiAAEgKWvPD_BwE
 
Last edited:
For “being” homosexual or for actively performing homosexual acts? Not enjoying your spin here. Also, I don’t have any particular objection to the criminality of acts of sodomy. Capital punishment is pretty harsh on the scale of things.
 
Last edited:
These countries carry the death penalty for being homosexual

Countries that carry the death penalty:

:mauritania:Mauritania - for Muslim men

:nigeria:Nigeria - northern states that approve Sharia Law

:qatar:Qatar - for Muslims, for extra-marital sex

:somalia:Somalia

:iran:Iran

:saudi_arabia:Saudi Arabia

:yemen:Yemen

:iraq::afghanistan:Islamic State of Iraq and the Levent Afghanistan - where controlled by Al-Qaeda
 
Last edited:
Anesti33 said:
For “being” homosexual
Click to expand...
For being or being suspect of being homosexual. Probably depend on the trial and the ‘judge’

Now searching for execution numbers and doing a bit of reading, I am now going to include those tortured before ‘admitting’ to homosexual acts.
 
Last edited:
Anesti33 said:
Once again, I suspect that that’s not what’s in the law and you’re being disingenuous. What does the law say is outlawed?
Click to expand...
Are you disputing the fact you can get thrown in jail, fined, or killed for being homosexual in certain countries?
Lets see if we can find some numbers for homosexual execution last year.
 
Last edited:
Code Pénal (Mauritania) –

Penal Code of 1984 61
―ART. 308. - Any adult Muslim man who commits an impudent act against nature with an individual of his sex will face the penalty of death by public stoning. If it is a question of two women, they will be punished as prescribed in article 306, first paragraph‖.


Somalia

Penal Code, Decree No. 5/1962 (Effective April 3, 1964) 89 Article 409 Homosexuality
―Whoever
(a) has carnal intercourse

(b) with a person of the same sex
shall be punished, where the act does not constitute a more serious crime, with imprisonment from three months to three years.
Where
a) the act committed
b) is an act of lust different from carnal intercourse, the punishment imposed shall be reduced by one-third.‖
Article 410 Security Measures
―A security measure may be added to a sentence for crimes referred to in Articles 407, 408, and 409.‖
Somalia has not had a functioning central government since the fall of the dictator Mohamed Siad Barre in 1991, and the enforcement of the national Penal Code can be questioned. In the southern parts Islamic courts rule, having imposed Islamic Sharia law punishing homosexual acts with death penalty or flogging. However, Somaliland in the north has declared itself independent, and it still applies the Penal Code.

Yemen

Penal Code 1994 115
Article 264. ―Homosexuality between men is defined as…Unmarried men shall be punished with 100 lashes of the whip or a maximum of one year of imprisonment, married men with death by stoning.‖

Irán


 
Last edited:
There is the result of the search.
Now I am asking you: if death by stoning or flogging or imprisonment is a fair decision in their Penal or Criminal Codes,for these “ bed inspectors” because that is what they are doing or attempting to do, inspecting what people do in their bedrooms , to determine the most humiliating and harshest of punishments,what tone do you think it sets vis vis these, to integrate the mere presence of a homosexual person into the society he/she himself/ herself belongs to?
 
Last edited:
Anesti33 said:
Once again, I suspect that that’s not what’s in the law and you’re being disingenuous. What does the law say is outlawed?
Click to expand...
Why do you care? If you really think we should crinimalize gay sex then at least be consistent and criminalize premarital sex and masturbation.
But posting that you don’t immediately see an issue with the way gays are treated in other countries is reallllyyy telling.
 
Mike_from_NJ said:
Marriage is an enticement. It is a bundled package of special protections and benefits in law that entice people to be married and bear children. Traditional marriage benefits the State and the Common Good in obvious ways. That’s why the State encourages heterosexuals to be married and protects those who aren’t really, such as via Common-Law arrangements. The State protects community property, it protects divorced people via alimony, custody arrangements, and other legal means, and it generally strives to make Marriage safe, legal, and ubiquitous.
Click to expand...
By your reasoning we should not allow marriages for people who are not of age or are sterile since you see the only benefit of marriage being children.
Click to expand...
I don’t think the point is that only childbearing marriages deserve protection… rather, because marriage is the route to children & the growth of a country’s population, it behooves the country to entice its citizens to marry. A few marriages will not produce children but that is not the norm. The many which do need protections and assistance afforded by legal blessings. Children are the treasures of a country because they allow it to live for another generation.
 
But in every case these are penalties for “acts” not for being homosexual. A homosexual who goes to one of these countries and does not commit any homosexual acts has not broken the law.

This is the distinction anesti is drawing and it is not intellectually honest to pretend otherwise.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top