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

  • Thread starter Thread starter sweetcharity
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Seeker1961 said:
So that makes it obvious that ALL humans are heterosexual…ummm…really??

Keeping the species going doesn’t require that all members of said species reproduce. Shockingly enough there are straight people that do not feel a biological imperative to create new life. How do they fit into your paradigm?
Click to expand...
Seeker,

Some heterosexuals in committed relarionships reproduce, some more than others. Some heterosexuals choose not to reproduce.

No homosexual in a committed relationship can reproduce.
 
CopticChristian said:
No homosexual in a committed relationship can reproduce.
Click to expand...
Homosexual acts cannot lead to human reproduction, but a gay man may father a child. Many gay men have married and fathered children. It is not being homosexual that keeps one from reproducing—it’s homosexual acts that are non-generative.
 
CopticChristian said:
Seeker,

Some heterosexuals in committed relarionships reproduce, some more than others. Some heterosexuals choose not to reproduce.

No homosexual in a committed relationship can reproduce.
Click to expand...
But again you’re boiling everything down to children. You can’t have kids, you’re disordered. How does an infertile straight couple feel about that? They can’t reproduce either.
 
Seeker1961 said:
But again you’re boiling everything down to children. You can’t have kids, you’re disordered. How does an infertile straight couple feel about that? They can’t reproduce either.
Click to expand...
Well, several disorders may render a couple incapable of producing children. The difference is that advocates of same-sex marriage DENY that homosexual acts are disordered and INSIST that their, um, acts of bonding are equivalent to heterosexual coitus. They are wrong in this. Some of us think that the proper response to error is to correct it, while others think, “It is wrong to make anyone feel bad, and since telling people they are wrong might do that, then nobody can be wrong. Except religious people, of course—they get up everyone’s nose!” This not only harms the people who are encouraged to persist in error, it harms the people who act this way because it distorts their view of truths and places matter of lesser import above things of greater import.
 
Not only what mark said, but often times heterosexual couples do not know they are infertile and sterile UNTIL they are married.

Homosexual couples by default and by nature are sterile.
 
markeverett49 said:
Well, several disorders may render a couple incapable of producing children. The difference is that advocates of same-sex marriage DENY that homosexual acts are disordered and INSIST that their, um, acts of bonding are equivalent to heterosexual coitus. They are wrong in this. Some of us think that the proper response to error is to correct it, while others think, “It is wrong to make anyone feel bad, and since telling people they are wrong might do that, then nobody can be wrong. Except religious people, of course—they get up everyone’s nose!” This not only harms the people who are encouraged to persist in error, it harms the people who act this way because it distorts their view of truths and places matter of lesser import above things of greater import.
Click to expand...
Who are you to say what is right or wrong? I don’t understand natural law. It’s an entirely subjective look onto nature, and you yourself decide what should be right or wrong and then you go around proclaiming it is the objective truth. It is your opinion that homosexuality is disordered, or wrong, or evil, not any kind of established objective truth.
 
markeverett49 said:
Well, several disorders may render a couple incapable of producing children. The difference is that advocates of same-sex marriage DENY that homosexual acts are disordered and INSIST that their, um, acts of bonding are equivalent to heterosexual coitus. They are wrong in this. Some of us think that the proper response to error is to correct it, while others think, “It is wrong to make anyone feel bad, and since telling people they are wrong might do that, then nobody can be wrong. Except religious people, of course—they get up everyone’s nose!” .
Click to expand...
And some people think it’s not wrong. At all.
 
Seeker1961 said:
Keeping the species going doesn’t require that all members of said species reproduce.
Click to expand...
Actually, if they did, we’d wipe ourselves out pretty quickly. Also, it would slow selection down so far, we wouldn’t be able to adapt, so, every single individual reproducing is just not part of natural law.
 
Julia_Mae said:
Actually, if they did, we’d wipe ourselves out pretty quickly. Also, it would slow selection down so far, we wouldn’t be able to adapt, so, every single individual reproducing is just not part of natural law.
Click to expand...
We wouldnt wipe ourselves out. God would not let that happen for doing His will.

Did He let Moses starve in the desert or did he not provide for him food and water?

In fact, we’re closer to wiping ourselves out when we go against Gods will.
 
Faithdancer said:
Amen, Constantine. Marriage is a Sacrament, meant for a man and a woman. This is why men and women have complementary bodies. Our Church teaches us that homosexual activity is gravely disordered and for those who engage in homosexual activity, the Sacrament of Marriage is forever denied, Deo gratias!

The devil loves to mock what is holy, and gay “marriage” mocks a holy Sacrament. I guess the atheists and pagan pantheists and what not who lurk here can’t get it through their heads that this is a Catholic forum, and the Catholic church teaches that homosexual activity is an abomination. Now as far as two celibate people with homosexual inclination living together, that’s a grey area. But for the Church to sanction a same sex couple being “married” and “raising children?” Never gonna happen!**

^
Thanks for writing this. The Church will never sanction this abomination!
Click to expand...
 
Rocky24 said:
^
Thanks for writing this. The Church will never sanction this abomination!
Click to expand...
Who is saying that the Church will ever change??🤷

What is going to happen, and already has-is CIVIL LAW is allowing gay people to get married. That’s it, period, end of story.

You can still feel exactly as you choose about gay people, but while you’re doing it, they’re in NY and other states getting married and living their lives. They’re not marching up your driveway demanding you “approve” of them. Most of them could not possibly care less what you think about their lives, just as you could not possibly care less about what they think of yours.

I think there’s a whole lot of hyperbole on this issue that could be dialed back a notch.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
Who are you to say what is right or wrong? I don’t understand natural law. It’s an entirely subjective look onto nature, and you yourself decide what should be right or wrong and then you go around proclaiming it is the objective truth. It is your opinion that homosexuality is disordered, or wrong, or evil, not any kind of established objective truth.
Click to expand...
Who am I? Well, I’m me. I don’t claim that anything is right or wrong because I say it is, though. If you don’t understand natural law, perhaps you would do yourself a favor by reading more about it, coming to understand it, and then forming a judgment. It seems to me that YOU are the one deciding things in an entirely subjective way.
 
Seeker1961 said:
I think there’s a whole lot of hyperbole on this issue that could be dialed back a notch.
Click to expand...
You may be right, though our society getting comfortable with contraception and abortion is what allowed it to get comfortable with embryonic stem cell research and euthanasia. Same-sex marriage is another terrible consequence of this willful blinding of our society’s view of what it means to be human.

The hyperbole tends to come from the “pro” side: that same-sex marriage is a civil rights issue, for example.
 
Seeker1961 said:
Who is saying that the Church will ever change??🤷

What is going to happen, and already has-is CIVIL LAW is allowing gay people to get married. That’s it, period, end of story.

You can still feel exactly as you choose about gay people, but while you’re doing it, they’re in NY and other states getting married and living their lives. They’re not marching up your driveway demanding you “approve” of them. Most of them could not possibly care less what you think about their lives, just as you could not possibly care less about what they think of yours.

I think there’s a whole lot of hyperbole on this issue that could be dialed back a notch.
Click to expand...
It is a serious problem. That some do not see the gravity of it is even more serious.
 
markeverett49 said:
Who am I? Well, I’m me. I don’t claim that anything is right or wrong because I say it is, though. If you don’t understand natural law, perhaps you would do yourself a favor by reading more about it, coming to understand it, and then forming a judgment. It seems to me that YOU are the one deciding things in an entirely subjective way.
Click to expand...
Okay, can you give me a definition of natural law, then? I’ll admit I don’t understand it, and I’m confused. Because I’ve heard two definitions, and here they are:
  1. A body of unchanging moral principles regarded as a basis for all human conduct. Okay, fine, but who determines these principles? Where do they come from? They evidently don’t come from an examination of nature itself.
  2. Natural morals that God gave all human beings. Oh. Okay. Can you give me some evidence for such an idea?
What would you say natural law is?
 
Seeker1961 said:
…They’re not marching up your driveway demanding you “approve” of them. Most of them could not possibly care less what you think about their lives, just as you could not possibly care less about what they think of yours. …
Click to expand...
Really? How do you explain the recent Chick-Fil-A controversy?
 
stewstew03 said:
Really? How do you explain the recent Chick-Fil-A controversy?
Click to expand...
They want marriage. Chick-fil-A did also donate some money to anti-gay organisations, so the fact that people were not buying their products was justified. Besides, boycotting a store isn’t anti-freedom of speech, it’s a method of expressing your views. The only people who were in the wrong were those claiming they should shut down.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
They want marriage. Chick-fil-A did also donate some money to anti-gay organisations, so the fact that people were not buying their products was justified. Besides, boycotting a store isn’t anti-freedom of speech, it’s a method of expressing your views. The only people who were in the wrong were those claiming they should shut down.
Click to expand...
I believe Catholics have called for boycotting businesses and even charities in the past. Like not giving money to breast cancer charity because it gave money to Planned Parenthood that was used only to pay for breast-cancer screening.

I think if someone can morally justify that, then gay folks boycotting a business isn’t even a blip on the moral radar.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top