What is it that they want that they don’t already have? Most the marriage benifits are due towards a family. So why do they want family benifits and what exactly do they want?
Unlike some here, I don’t think there’s any deep psychological rationale. I think they’re sincere. (Wrong, but sincere. Falsehood is almost always sincerely held).
There is a major, major disconnect between the Catholic right and the modern left. They don’t just have different opinions about the same issues, they have entirely different worldviews. The result is that they can’t really discuss the same issues because they bring different language to the table.
For instance, for the Catholic right, “gay marriage” is not so much a moral error as a metaphysical one. Homosexuality of course is immoral; but gay “marriage” as such is an ontological impossibility, a total non sequitur. We oppose it because it’s impossible, and because the state’s say-so doesn’t make it any more possible than it could make possible redefining the value of pi. Pi is a mathematical constant; human nature is an ontological constant; marriage arises from human nature; therefore what is derisively called “traditional marriage” is a fact of reality, utterly unchangeable. In other words, we see legal marriage not as an institution the state arbitrarily invented but as something arising organically from human nature which the state chooses to recognize, and to which the state attaches its impetus.
For the modern left, there is no such thing as “human nature.” There is not really anything which transcends human will. So when they say they want their “marriages” recognized, they are incapable of recognizing the error. They honestly think marriage is something people invented, not merely a formalized recognition of a natural institution. Therefore they see no compelling reason why it can’t be “reinvented.” In fact it
must be reinvented, as a moral imperative – a moral imperative that somehow nobody noticed existed until like ten minutes ago.
Unfortunately, the rationale of the Catholic right does not prevail. It does not even prevail among most Catholics, the majority of whom are heretics. The “reasoning” (such as it is) of the left will prevail because modern discourse is conducted in the language of the modern left. We cannot effectively express our ideals in this language; it is an incompatible philosophy. You cannot be simultaneously a good Catholic and a good liberal; you must mutilate one to accommodate the other. If our religion has taught us anything, it’s that people are willing to kill God in order to be free. We should know. We celebrate His murder every Sunday.
So we are almost certainly going to lose this battle – barring a miracle.
to be accepted and loved as any sinner is in the community…though I don’t know what they want since I am not one and therefore be wrong to put my judgement of what they want.
Stop putting labels on people and start loving each other as Jesus has taught us to do.
Love requires willing what’s best for people. What’s best for people is naturally incompatible with sin. You cannot “love” a homosexual without recognizing the disorder of his desires and willing that he overcome them.
That was on topic! They all want different things, because they are individuals, just like anyone. They are far more than their sexual identity, as many tend to forget.
My answer to the question is that they all want different things. My answer in not off topic just because I refused to throw out a nasty generalization.
Really? So… what? Each and every individual gay person wants a different thing out of this movement and there is no overlap between any two? So there is no possible way to discern a general motive, intent, or end? So we may as well all not talk about it?
Pretty much. Not to be harassed, bullied, beaten up, murdered, discriminated against in employment, etc.
For some reason people think that’s a lot to ask for.
Surely, all this can be accomplished without embracing a vacuous ontological error like gay “marriage.”
