What Should We Do If Gay "Marriage" Becomes Legal?

[livingwordunity]

Straight, married, Catholic women use IVF and other fertility treatments, more than gay women.

And it’s objectively mortal sin when they do it, too. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

 

[just_came_back]

Firstly, to Corki, that has nothing to do with same-sex marriage, even if it were true, and I don’t think it is. I Googled what you’re talking about, and I didn’t come up with anything solid in the first 3-4 pages (which is all of the effort I was willing to give for something I didn’t care that much about in the first place) put forward in a scholarly article or legitimate news article that wasn’t written by a ministry or from a rightwardly-biased or religious news source; and, even if it were true, it wouldn’t alter my position in the slightest.

Secondly, to everyone else, I’m sorry, and this is probably my last post in this thread, possibly this forum altogether (since I only hung around because I wanted to have a question answered about being an Episcopalian at a Catholic religious ceremony that is, in fact, this morning, so I’d better put the coffee on or I’ll be late), but I’ve supported same-sex marriage since way before it was the cool thing to do, and try as I might, I can’t even make myself understand or even comprehend how someone could, even using the Levitical codes and the Bible, oppose marriage equality for same-sex couples. I just can’t do it. We’re talking about civil and secular marriage rights through the government and just because their families may not mirror your own and simply because you don’t believe them to be families in the first place does not mean that they aren’t families; loving couples, thousands of whom have children, who deserve their due recognition as such and the same rights and equal treatment under the law as every other family receives.

I cannot say to someone, “You deserve to be less of a citizen, have fewer dreams, fewer chances at happiness and a full life than I do simply because you’re gay and the person you love is the same gender as you.” I refuse to do it. I could never do it. To do so would go against what every fiber in my being tells me is true, moral, fair and just.

Thank you all for an illuminating discussion, but I think that’s pretty much it for me, at least for this thread. I don’t think this is the place for me.

God’s peace be with you all, and I pray that wherever your lives take you that you find happiness and health.

Casey

So says the member of the church who endorses homosexual behavior among their clergy. I spent 3 months in an episcopal church. Honey, does your church even know what SIN is?

 

[just_came_back]

Trevor, Wow, someone 37 recognizes the slide in his lifetime and I, older than you are, certainly see the same slide just from a little further back in time. It’s neat; we’re on the same page, not quite intergenerationally even though I know there’s stuff that I remember that was gone by the time you began collecting memories.

I agree with the posters who’ve said we can expect much more from this over time. Ultimately, the anti-life agendas won’t win. We will be tested but we wn’t be found wanting.

Here here. I’m 38 and I’ve seen it as well. Now that Neal and Bob can flaunt their anti-God “marriage” to all, what is left for the liberals to do to spit in God’s face. Liberals, Planned Parenthood, gays, Obama, etc. THEY ALL HATE GOD!

 

[Personanongrata]

And it’s objectively mortal sin when they do it, too. Two wrongs don’t make a right.

Just pointing out that it is NOT a gay issue. That’s all. And I suspect, that like getting one’s tubes tied, women who undergo this procedure do so not knowing what the Church teaches. After all this subject (IVF) is NEVER discussed during Mass.

 

[Faithdancer]

Diocesan leaders had better think long and hard about continuing to rent out their properties to non-Catholic and non-parish groups. There is no legal defense for refusing to rent a parish hall out to a lesbian couple, for example, unless there is a documented policy in place wherein it is explicitly stated that said hall is not rented out to any non-parish groups.

Think there aren’t homosexual activists who won’t try to sue Catholic parishes for not renting their hall to homosexuals, if the hall is rented to other outsiders? Wake up!

Having said that, I’m saddened to say that I live in a diocese which recently rented out a Church property for the making of “Behind the Candelabra” the biopic about Liberace and his sordid homosexual activity.

 

[WingsOfEagles]

Diocesan leaders had better think long and hard about continuing to rent out their properties to non-Catholic and non-parish groups. There is no legal defense for refusing to rent a parish hall out to a lesbian couple, for example, unless there is a documented policy in place wherein it is explicitly stated that said hall is not rented out to any non-parish groups.

Think there aren’t homosexual activists who won’t try to sue Catholic parishes for not renting their hall to homosexuals, if the hall is rented to other outsiders? Wake up!

I think the Church would still have legal standing that they are a private group and can choose who gets to use their property. If not, they need to get something in writing that states as such.

 

[Faithdancer]

Here here. I’m 38 and I’ve seen it as well. Now that Neal and Bob can flaunt their anti-God “marriage” to all, what is left for the liberals to do to spit in God’s face. Liberals, Planned Parenthood, gays, Obama, etc. THEY ALL HATE GOD!

Yep, and same sex “marriage” is the anti-Sacrament they want to force us all to accept as something benign.

 

[Faithdancer]

I think the Church would still have legal standing that they are a private group and can choose who gets to use their property. If not, they need to get something in writing that states as such.

In writing and in documented practice, yes. Other private groups have been sued for refusing to provide services to homosexuals including photographers, operators of bed and breakfast establishments, and even a Methodist Church which refused to rent their property to a lesbian couple for a same-sex celebration. As soon as a Catholic parish says “no, we won’t rent our facility to you for a same-sex marriage celebration/ reception/ gay dance party, etc.” they can most definitely be sued, and successfully sued, if the parish rents it to other non-parish groups.

 

[Faithdancer]

So says the member of the church who endorses homosexual behavior among their clergy. I spent 3 months in an episcopal church. Honey, does your church even know what SIN is?

Of course they don’t know, any more than the Friends General Conference knows. Oh, wait, that’s right- sin is anything that makes you “feel bad.” Because it’s all about how you feel. So if homosexual activity makes you “feel good” it must be good!

 

[Faithdancer]

This thread is a good indication you’ve already started what you must do…learn to live in a world where same sex marriage is accepted.

Some of your dialog here offers some hope…“if gay marriage becomes legal reality?” It’s legal reality in 9 states and counting…in numerous countries and counting…one of the first things that would help you to “deal”…let “if” go by the wayside…it’s not “if” it’s “when.”

And you’re happy about this, because?

 

[Corki]

Straight, married, Catholic women use IVF and other fertility treatments, more than gay women.

That’s not the point. The person to whom I responded claimed that abortion was a** non-issue** for same sex couples. Since ALL reproductive activities by a same-sex couple involve alternate fertility treatments, the proportion of same-sex couples using IVF, selective reduction or embryo freezing/destruction is much more than for “straight” couples.

 

[Casey123]

That’s not the point. The person to whom I responded claimed that abortion was a** non-issue** for same sex couples. Since ALL reproductive activities by a same-sex couple involve alternate fertility treatments, the proportion of same-sex couples using IVF, selective reduction or embryo freezing/destruction is much more than for “straight” couples.

No, I beg to differ. With all due respect, it was someone else that brought abortion into the marriage discussion. What I’m saying is that it has nothing to do with a secular, state-recognized right to marry someone. No matter what one’s opinion is on the purpose or definition of marriage itself, the state does not take into account the intention to reproduce or have children as a prerequisite for marriage. If it did, a lot of ordained Elvis impersonators in Las Vegas would be out of the job.

Two very separate issues.

 

[Corki]

No, I beg to differ. With all due respect, it was someone else that brought abortion into the marriage discussion. What I’m saying is that it has nothing to do with a secular, state-recognized right to marry someone. No matter what one’s opinion is on the purpose or definition of marriage itself, the state does not take into account the intention to reproduce or have children as a prerequisite for marriage. If it did, a lot of ordained Elvis impersonators in Las Vegas would be out of the job.

Two very separate issues.

I think you lost track of the thread of discussion. I was replying to your statement in this post (#20, section bolded)

But… you kind of just did use that fallacy you said you weren’t going to use… and you admitted it’s a fallacy…

fallacy. Noun. 1., a deceptive, misleading, or false notion, belief, etc.: That the world is flat was at one time a popular fallacy; 2., a misleading or unsound argument.

**Abortion? Gays have no need for it. **Contraception? Again, no need for it. Pre-Marital sex? Pre-marital sex has been around well before same-sex marriage first became legal. Pedophilia? Not the same thing as homosexuality, at all. We’re talking about consenting adults here. Which brings me to bestiality, my favorite fallacy of all…

I would really love to see the statistical numbers that say that gay marriage leads to more people who say that because same-sex couples can get married that they now suddenly find dogs and cats very, very attractive and marriage worthy.

I’d also love to meet the cat that has opposable thumbs and cognitive thought, and is capable of acknowledging consent to a marriage and has the ability to hold a pen and sign a legal document. Then again, I might be frightened that, should such a circumstance arise, that it would effectively mean that cats are evolving before our very eyes, and will one day soon rise up against us (any cat owner knows they’ve been plotting this all along) in a Planet of the Apes style uprising of cat-astrophic proportions, in an attempt to overthrow humanity as the rulers of Earth. It will be like Battlestar Galactica, except the Cylons are all cats and much, much more dangerous…

This is why using fallacies is a bad idea, because you can easily follow an illogical statement to its logical conclusion.

Same sex couples try to have children all the time. Unless they adopt, they must use an alternate fertility method. If that method is IVF, there is a high chance that abortion or embryo destruction will be involved. So, yes, “gays” do have a “need” for abortion and use it frequently.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

[T]o everyone else, I’m sorry, and this is probably my last post in this thread, possibly this forum altogether (since I only hung around because I wanted to have a question answered about being an Episcopalian at a Catholic religious ceremony that is, in fact, this morning, so I’d better put the coffee on or I’ll be late), but I’ve supported same-sex marriage since way before it was the cool thing to do, and try as I might, I can’t even make myself understand or even comprehend how someone could, even using the Levitical codes and the Bible, oppose marriage equality for same-sex couples. I just can’t do it.

The way you frame the issue is result-oriented. You’ve blown right by the real question - should marriage be redefined so that it no longer is an institution that connects a man and a woman to any children that they produce. That is what marriage is, and has always been. Secular institutions embrace marriage because it is a social good to unite parents with their offspring legally as well as socially. So called “gay marriage” completely severs this purpose from the institution - whether it is secular or religious. That is the real question. It is not a “gay” issue. Marriage is, and always has been, a family issue. It is not cruel to deny same-sex couples entry into an institution that by its very nature simply does not apply - unless it is redefined to exclude the connection of father and mother to children.

Casey123:

We’re talking about civil and secular marriage rights through the government and just because their families may not mirror your own and simply because you don’t believe them to be families in the first place does not mean that they aren’t families; loving couples, thousands of whom have children, who deserve their due recognition as such and the same rights and equal treatment under the law as every other family receives.

The Church’s objection to so-called “gay marriage” is not based on any lack of good faith with respect to gay couples. It concedes that all people want a close connection with those who they love. What it posits is that redefining marriage is not the panacea for this angst, nor should marriage be redefined to advance political agendas or social acceptance of the gay lifestyle. Rather, marriage has a specific role in society that is not applicable to a same-sex couple - no matter how loving, and regardless of the fact that they may have children from some other male-female union.

Casey123:

I cannot say to someone, “You deserve to be less of a citizen, have fewer dreams, fewer chances at happiness and a full life than I do simply because you’re gay and the person you love is the same gender as you.”

Of course, that’s NOT what the Church is saying to same-sex couples. No one is barring them from citizenship, happiness, or a full life. The Church is saying that marriage - by its nature - is not applicable to even the most loving same-sex union because the union does not bond the couple to children that are the product of the union. Rather, same-sex marriages ultimately deprive children legally tied to that union of at least their mother or their father. It is not discrimination to say to a man, “You cannot be a mother, you can only be a Father.” Is the man “less of a citizen” because he is denied motherhood? Do we need to redefine motherhood to include male parents? What impact would doing so have on our understanding of “motherhood” in 5 years? In ten years? In a generation? Would motherhood lose it’s meaning and become simply a synonym for “parent.”

Why is it that emotional arguments like Casey’s always look right past the children who are negatively effected by so-called “same-sex marriage.” It guess because it’s all about “personal happiness,” and children are only seen in the abstract at the outset of a marriage?

I wish you well Casey123. I hope you find light and truth wherever life takes you.

Peace,
Robert

 

[Monte_RCMS]

If inheritance issues become an argument, then the obvious solution is to abolish / end inheritance taxes and estate taxes and gift taxes … for everyone.

They raise very little money for the government and were intended as a form of social engineering.

Because of their subjectivity [the estate needs to be appraised and that is highly subjective] … estate taxes can be more than 60 or 70% of the estate, when you add up Federal and state taxes. Whether posters think it is reasonable or not, the estate-type “death taxes” have outlived their usefulness … time for them to be sunsetted, abolished, wiped off the books. Serve absolutely no useful purpose.

 

[CaliLobo]

Celebrate the civil rights victory. Celebrate equality for gay couples. Celebrate it as a new chapter of the civil rights movement heralded by Martin Luther King. Celebrate the fact that people will not be persecuted for their private conduct.

Celebrate that the government will not intrude into our bedrooms.

Show disgust for those Americans in our previous history who have misapplied Biblical teaching to justify hatred for gays for so long.

Be an example to other countries in the world who still reject equality for gays. Show them that Jesus would never want to have gay people suffer for the way God created them.

 

[Publisher]

Celebrate the civil rights victory. Celebrate equality for gay couples. Celebrate it as a new chapter of the civil rights movement heralded by Martin Luther King. Celebrate the fact that people will not be persecuted for their private conduct.

Celebrate that the government will not intrude into our bedrooms.

Show disgust for those Americans in our previous history who have misapplied Biblical teaching to justify hatred for gays for so long.

Be an example to other countries in the world who still reject equality for gays. Show them that Jesus would never want to have gay people suffer for the way God created them.

This friend speaks my mind!!!

 

[Lion_IRC]

Homosexuals already have equality.

They are allowed to vote just like EVERYBODY ELSE in this democracy.

SSM lobbyists have 1 vote each just like every single one of their ideological opponents. Being in a minority does NOT entitle you change the law. Being in the majority does.

 

[livingwordunity]

**Pray. Fast. Fraternal Charity. Protest

The reason I say protest is because SSM will be one of the undoing cornerstones of this society. I don’t intend to use the slipper slope fallacy however, once homosexuality is ok, then it opens the pandora box to higher percentages of abortion, contraception, pre maritial sex, pedophilia, beastiality, etc. Add to the fact that it undermines not only the institution of heterosexual matrimony, but the SACRAMENT as well. SSM is a MOCKERY to the beautiful and wonderful Sacrament that is Heterosexual Matrimony. I can’t believe that the married couples on this forum are NOT inflamed by this. I certainly would be. Imagine, the fundamental building block of society, the cornerstone of life, the source and fountain of vocations (By extension even the EUCHARIST would not be possible without Marriage, because you got to have male offspring that have vocations to become Priests, without this, no Priest, No Priest, No EUCHARIST, or any other Sacrament for that matter, except Baptism and emergency Matrimony which brings me back to my point…) is undermined and trodden upon for the sake of two men or two women exchanging deviant pleasure between each other. How disgusting. **

 

[livingwordunity]

Homosexuals already have equality.

They are allowed to vote just like EVERYBODY ELSE in this democracy.

SSM lobbyists have 1 vote each just like every single one of their ideological opponents.