Why do gays want marriage? What do they hope gain from it?

[Julia_Mae]

Please show me where the stuff I talked about had anything to do with federal funding. I never talked about it, so I’m wondering why are you on this “federal funding” thing.

The state said “thou shalt not disagree with our homosexual policy” Catholic Charities said “we practice the Catholic faith” and the state said “you are not allowed anymore”

This was nothing about federal funding. Zero. Nada. It was a state (not the Feds!!) shutting down the Catholic Charities.

Bob, Catholic Charities had a grant and contract with the Federal government to handle the adoptions. Maybe the contract was with the state, but the money was Federal Grant money. They list it in their 990s. When they wouldn’t comply, the Feds took back the money. Catholic Charities had most of their funding from government grants, like over 60%. That’s how they managed to do the adoption service program.

Now - if Catholic Charities had the money to run adoption services of it’s own and serviced only Catholics, the government would have no say in whether or not they gave children to gay people.

That’s why I talk about the money, because the grant money was the issue that closed them. Yes, they refused to comply. Then they lost their grant. So they stopped.

 

[Faithdancer]

To be seen as ‘normal?’ To have their lifestyle not just tolerated, but accepted as normal? Perhaps if they live like us, we’ll see them as actually being like us. After all… If it walks like a married couple, and it talks like a married couple… etc…

Yes. It seems that if they really thought their sexual orientation was normal, they wouldn’t be so concerned that heterosexuals perceive them as normal. However, since their sexual orientation is abnormal and deep down inside most of them must know it- rather than try to change it or accept the abnormality, they instead try to convince everyone else that homosexuality is just as normal as heterosexuality. Having all heterosexuals recognize their “marriages” as valid in every way is part of this effort to convince.

Homosexuality is abnormal. If nothing else, human anatomy, i.e. the perfect complementarity of male and female reproductive systems, irrefutably affirms this.

 

[interestedman]

Yes. It seems that if they really thought their sexual orientation was normal, they wouldn’t be so concerned that heterosexuals perceive them as normal. However, since their sexual orientation is abnormal and deep down inside most of them must know it- rather than try to change it or accept the abnormality, they instead try to convince everyone else that homosexuality is just as normal as heterosexuality. Having all heterosexuals recognize their “marriages” as valid in every way is part of this effort to convince.

Homosexuality is abnormal. If nothing else, human anatomy, i.e. the perfect complementarity of male and female reproductive systems, irrefutably affirms this.

What do you mean it is abnormal? Homosexuality is certainly not seen in most people, but neither is left handedness. Hmmm, I think people that were left handed used to be viewed as evil too.

 

[markeverett49]

What do you mean it is abnormal? Homosexuality is certainly not seen in most people, but neither is left handedness. Hmmm, I think people that were left handed used to be viewed as evil too.

Here is the relevant difference: homosexuals argue that sexual orientation is irrelevant to marriage, a view hard to square with a) our being a sexually reproducing species, and b) the state’s compelling interest in children. If marriage is primarily about the emotional and sexual satisfaction of adults, it is hard to see what interest the state would have in it. (State’s don’t regulate friendships, for example, which are important to people.)

 

[Faithdancer]

What do you mean it is abnormal? Homosexuality is certainly not seen in most people, but neither is left handedness. Hmmm, I think people that were left handed used to be viewed as evil too.

You are comparing apples and oranges. Human beings do not walk on their hands. If some did, that would probably be considered aberrant. In other words, they would not be using the body part for its natural, anatomical and physiological purpose. The purpose of the male reproductive system is to connect with the female reproductive system. This really is beyond dispute- it is a biological fact, and no amount of sophistry will change that.

 

[Faithdancer]

Here is the relevant difference: homosexuals argue that sexual orientation is irrelevant to marriage, a view hard to square with a) our being a sexually reproducing species, and b) the state’s compelling interest in children. If marriage is primarily about the emotional and sexual satisfaction of adults, it is hard to see what interest the state would have in it. (State’s don’t regulate friendships, for example, which are important to people.)

Touche, mon ami!

 

[Julia_Mae]

I would like to see the state outside of marriage too, but I doubt highly anyone is going to want to take those benefits away from straight couples in order to avoid legalizing gay relationships. It’s going to be far easier to give benefits to 3% of the population than to take them away from 97% of the population.

I don’t think they should get out of the “civil union” business, just the marriage business. In fact, I think an adult parent and child should be able to form a civil union, maybe up to four adults, like parents and one child and spouse, so we can afford the old-fashioned multi-generational family home. Much better for kids, IMO.

Maybe we should call it a domestic corporation. They can be non-profit.

People who want to be married can find a pastor. I think we should simply separate the two: the state civil contract and the sacramental (in our case) state of lifelong heterosexual union. Or, in the case of some other church, same-sex union.

 

[CopticChristian]

What do you mean it is abnormal? Homosexuality is certainly not seen in most people, but neither is left handedness. Hmmm, I think people that were left handed used to be viewed as evil too.

Interested,

You may be interested in walking down Castro Street in San Francisco. There you can see homosexuality, blatant, in most people that are there. True you cannot distinguish the left handed from the right handed homosexuals that are blatant…you may be interested man to know that homosexuality, ie blatant acting out, is still viewed by many people as evil.

 

[Bradski]

Here is the relevant difference: homosexuals argue that sexual orientation is irrelevant to marriage, a view hard to square with a) our being a sexually reproducing species, and b) the state’s compelling interest in children.

It sounds like you view a state’s interest in marriage as being just in order to give them a right to issue licenses to breed.

If marriage is primarily about the emotional and sexual satisfaction of adults, it is hard to see what interest the state would have in it. (State’s don’t regulate friendships, for example, which are important to people.)

They also don’t differentiate between people who can have sex (in whatever way floats your boat) and those who can’t (as opposed to the Catholic Church). They don’t deny marriage to those who can’t perform the sexual act, so it would seem that they’re a lot less interested in sex than you are.

Edit: I nearly forgot. Faithdancer, are you interested in the percentage of Catholics who think that gay marriage is OK or not? I asked earlier and it must have slipped though unnoticed.

 

[Julia_Mae]

Edit: I nearly forgot. Faithdancer, are you interested in the percentage of Catholics who think that gay marriage is OK or not? I asked earlier and it must have slipped though unnoticed.

I am if you have a link to the source. Please.

 

[Bradski]

I am if you have a link to the source. Please.

Sure: pewforum.org/Gay-Marriage-and-Homosexuality/Religion-and-Attitudes-Toward-Same-Sex-Marriage.aspx

And to confirm my position: just because more people agree with it dosn’t necessarily make it right. But the figures are interesting.

 

[Faithdancer]

There are a many who subscribe to the Catholic faith and who are either lukewarm or confused on many issues, same sex “marriage” being one of them. Those Catholics who claim to favor same sex “marriage” are obviously out of synch with the Magisterium. This doesn’t surprise me, as many Catholics need re-education in many aspects of their faith.

A poll is only as valid as its sample size and the statistical significance of the survey. The results of a poll can be flawed in any number of ways.

I’m not worried that the Catholic Church is going to sanction gay “marriage.” Whatever hope that unbelievers may have for destruction of the Church through a controversy over homosexual “marriage” is doomed to frustration…just as Satan is doomed to eternal frustration.:angel1:

 

[Saint_Castulus]

I’m not asking about the moral issues of same sex marriage. What I am wondering is, why is this such a big deal for homosexuals? What are they trying to accomplish?

that their sin is acceptable? The Catholic church does not condone homosexuality… neither do I.

 

[Bradski]

A poll is only as valid as its sample size and the statistical significance of the survey. The results of a poll can be flawed in any number of ways.

You can trust Pew. They are as solid as any organisation in regard to polling. No agendas, just hard figures.

Whatever hope that unbelievers may have for destruction of the Church through a controversy over homosexual “marriage” is doomed to frustration…just as Satan is doomed to eternal frustration.:angel1:

You must realise that this isn’t about some atheist plot to destroy Catholicism. If you believe that, then the debate is going to run off in the wrong direction and your arguments are not going to be focused on the actual matter in hand.

 

[Seeker1961]

You must realise that this isn’t about some atheist plot to destroy Catholicism. If you believe that, then the debate is going to run off in the wrong direction and your arguments are not going to be focused on the actual matter in hand.

The reason the Catholic Church is mentioned in the discussion is because they put themselves there by opposing civil legislation for civil marriages and even civil unions. (In NJ the Catholic church did a LOT of lobbying against the law granting civil unions to gay people)

The Catholic Church’s position is clear on homosexuality. Despite the number of threads here on the topic, the subject is settled. If you are a gay person, and you have committed to the Catholic church-there is no relationship, so there can never be a marriage. Case closed.

The Catholic church does not attempt to impose Mass attendance on the general population of the United States, The Catholic Church does not attempt to impose yearly confession on the general population of the United States, The Catholic church has not even tried to deny divorce to the general population of the United States. However, the Catholic church is insisting on imposing their position on gay marriage on the general population of the United States. The same goes for every Christian church that opposes gay marriage. The Southern Baptists aren’t lobbying for a law to ban dancing or playing cards or for attendance at Wednesday night services.

This is why gay people who have no connection whatsoever to the Catholic church are angry and why it sounds to some like there is some kind of conspiracy movement against the Church. Those outside the church are responding to the inconsistency of what commitments that the Church says only their members must honor, and what commitments the Church says every human must honor. And I understand that-I certainly would not want to be forced by some civil law to honor commitments of a religion that I don’t follow.

 

[markeverett49]

It sounds like you view a state’s interest in marriage as being just in order to give them a right to issue licenses to breed.

People do not need licenses to have offspring. The state would prefer that couples marry and take care of their offspring so the state won’t have to! The state has an interest in its own survival, which requires a steady inflow of children.

 

[CopticChristian]

Sure: pewforum.org/Gay-Marriage-and-Homosexuality/Religion-and-Attitudes-Toward-Same-Sex-Marriage.aspx

And to confirm my position: just because more people agree with it dosn’t necessarily make it right. But the figures are interesting.

Bradski,

You confirm the Bible…in the Church there is wheat and chaff.

 

[Julia_Mae]

Sure: pewforum.org/Gay-Marriage-and-Homosexuality/Religion-and-Attitudes-Toward-Same-Sex-Marriage.aspx

And to confirm my position: just because more people agree with it dosn’t necessarily make it right. But the figures are interesting.

They really are. If you compare the “white Catholic” to the “white Evangelical” the Catholics favor gay marriage at 57% while the Evangelicals only 19%. That’s a pretty significant variance. Yet, the Catholics are, we assume, receiving Christ in body, blood, soul and divinity probably at least monthly. Not sure what Evangelicals receive, but, if religion is the only difference, why is there such a large disparity?

(I also note we don’t seem to have enough black Catholics to break them out as a group. )

 

[Julia_Mae]

The Catholic Church’s position is clear on homosexuality. Despite the number of threads here on the topic, the subject is settled. If you are a gay person, and you have committed to the Catholic church-there is no relationship, so there can never be a marriage. Case closed.

The Catholic church does not attempt to impose Mass attendance on the general population of the United States, The Catholic Church does not attempt to impose yearly confession on the general population of the United States, The Catholic church has not even tried to deny divorce to the general population of the United States. However, the Catholic church is insisting on imposing their position on gay marriage on the general population of the United States. The same goes for every Christian church that opposes gay marriage. The Southern Baptists aren’t lobbying for a law to ban dancing or playing cards or for attendance at Wednesday night services.

This is why gay people who have no connection whatsoever to the Catholic church are angry and why it sounds to some like there is some kind of conspiracy movement against the Church. Those outside the church are responding to the inconsistency of what commitments that the Church says only their members must honor, and what commitments the Church says every human must honor. And I understand that-I certainly would not want to be forced by some civil law to honor commitments of a religion that I don’t follow.

:tiphat:

 

[CopticChristian]

They really are. If you compare the “white Catholic” to the “white Evangelical” the Catholics favor gay marriage at 57% while the Evangelicals only 19%. That’s a pretty significant variance. Yet, the Catholics are, we assume, receiving Christ in body, blood, soul and divinity probably at least monthly. Not sure what Evangelicals receive, but, if religion is the only difference, why is there such a large disparity?

(I also note we don’t seem to have enough black Catholics to break them out as a group. )

Julia,

Aside from statistics…you have to consider that

Catholics are baptized
Evangelicals are baptized and part of the Church

So you have to then say that those that are baptized in the trinitarian formula and part of the Church have a disparity in percentage according to the polls and they have to be viewed jointly not separately because we are looking at consent of those in the Church…

Do you deny that those baptized in the triniarian formula are part of the Church?

That being said the question has to be asked how reliable the notion of the Evangelical percentage is as this tends to be an amorphous group as opposed to the Catholic. Does the Catholic percentage include Oriental Orthodox, Eastern Orthodox, Catholic East/West…for I see the OHCAC as being composed of all of those.

These numbers need to be seen for the skewed questioning of only a portion of the Catholicity.

Finally, who cares…Augustine as you know was the Bishop of Hippo…Hippo as you know was over run by Arians. A poll at the time of Augustines Bishopric would have shown that the vast majority of Hippo residents favored Arianism. Hippo was over run by Arians. The Church was not. The Church survives and continues to grow. The “gay” controversy is but a bump in the road and those that rally should realize that like Hippo…The Church will be triumphant…somewhere, regardless of polling…