Why does it matter? (Gay marriage)

  • Thread starter Thread starter Susansmum
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
In it’s most simplest terms -

Unfortunatly alot of supports for same sex marriage don’t realise that legalising same sex marriage doesn’t legalise a homosexual union, it recognises it as equivalent to a heterosexual union, which is factually incorrect, so why does it matter? in it’s most simplest terms, because they are pushing a lie, legalising it will not make it truthful, it will mean enforcing a lie.

The obvious sexual anatomy of a man and a woman dictates that a homosexual union and a heterosexual union are fundamentally different, so it’s not whether people want to legalise same sex marriage, it’s whether or not we want to pretend that a homosexual union is equivalent to a heterosexual union in regards to marriage which it obviously is not.

To legalise same sex marriage would be to legalise and enforce a nation wide illusion or false equality, it’s legalising a lie.

I mean didn’t people learn the sexual anatomy of a man and woman in school? don’t they know their sexual compatibility? how can they claim that a homosexual union is equal to a heterosexual union with same sex marriage? it’s illogical.

And this is not religious talk, it’s facing facts.

Thank you for reading
Josh
 
In it’s most simplest terms -

that legalising same sex marriage doesn’t legalise a homosexual union, it recognises it as equivalent to a heterosexual union, which is factually incorrect, so why does it matter? legalising it will not make it truthful, it will mean enforcing a lie.

that a homosexual union is equivalent to a heterosexual union in regards to marriage which it obviously is not.

And this is not religious talk, it’s facing facts.

Thank you for reading
Josh
Unfortunatly alot of supports for same sex marriage don’t realise
Are you sure that many or all don’t realize? What about those that do? If many don’t realize then what can you do to aid that realization?
in it’s most simplest terms, because they are pushing a lie,
If something is a lie, someone is lieing and if lieing it must be those that realize that they support the notion of Same Sex marriage and not those that do not.
The obvious sexual anatomy of a man and a woman dictates that a homosexual union and a heterosexual union are fundamentally different,
I agree with the obvious, however the obvious does not appear to dissuade those that realize the lie and those that push the lie suggesting that the obvious means something other than the obvious to them.
so it’s not whether people want to legalise same sex marriage, it’s whether or not we want to pretend
So those that realize, not recognizing the obvious for what it is lie and want to pretend. I am not so sure that they percieve this as a pretense which suggests that those that realize, may not believe they are lieing because what is obvious is seen as obvious to them in a way that means something totally different than what you and I see and then for them it becomes other than a pretense.
To legalise same sex marriage would be to legalise and enforce a nation wide illusion or false equality, it’s legalising a lie.
Then those that realize, not recognizing the obvious or seeing the obvious for other than what we see as obvious are propagating a lie and a pretense to engage in magic, because an illusion would be the equivalent of magic.

What do we do? No one can be lied to forever. No one can deny the obvious for what it is forever. No one can swallow a lie and stand still as it affects them. No one can accept a falsehood or believe in an illusion forever.
I mean didn’t people learn the sexual anatomy of a man and woman in school? don’t they know their sexual compatibility? how can they claim that a homosexual union is equal to a heterosexual union with same sex marriage? it’s illogical.
Here I believe you have hit the nail on the head. Are we dealing with logic or emotion? If logical then the outcome of propagating a lie becomes evident. If emotion then there is no telling what someone will do to engage in whatever tactic possible to feed that emotion.

How do we reach those that don’t realize?

How de we engage those that do realize?
 
Your first response on this thread was well said, thoughtful, methodical and appropriate. Now this. Others will disagree with me but I do not understand why someone capable of the first response would post this disrespectful, sarcastic and uncharitable response to a fellow Catholic. Please try too use your bright mind in a more positive way. I have always believed if you can’t make your point without sarcasm, if it can’t stand on its own, it has no value.
This post you reference was neither disrespectful, uncharitable or sarcastic.

I would like to know how you thought of Jesus in the temple when he whipped people, threw the tables over and told them that they were disrespectful of his father’s house?

Jesus was the most charitable person alive and he wasn’t all fuzzy and sweet talking.
We should get with the reality that we as Catholics shouldn’t sit back and be intimidated by all this your not a nice person if you speak the truth. We should be trying to save souls, and we have a lot of work to do with people who are lukewarm Catholics and others who just want to sit back and worry about what people think of them. Jesus said people will hate him and those who follow him, so it doesn’t matter really what we do, they will hate us if we tell the truth, but we don’t out of Charity, (getting people to heaven), give false compassion that will lead them to hell.:knight2:
GB
 
Both polygamy and same-sex marriage are destructive to true marriage. The one because it undermines the unitive aspect of one man and woman; the other because it undermines the procreative aspect. But I don’t want to waste time quibbling what’s worse: it’s like saying, would you rather shoot ten people or commit ten abortions.
Jonathan,
The reason, why SSM is worse is the reason God created man in the image of HIMSELF, God also created marriage.
although a man is fornicating with other women and calling it marriage in Polygamy, he is still is using his body in the way God intended as far as him being with a women. When people engage in same sex, they pervert the image that God created and that it why it’s worse and now to call it marriage! The devil loves to pervert everything sexually, because it mocks God.
Same Sex mocks God’s image and his creation. That is why acting on this one sin is said for us to cry out to the heaven for vengeance. I am sure Coptic would know where that it. Can’t find it right now.
Just my thoughts.
GB
 
Ok let me preface this with a statement that this thread is not about if it is right or wrong, as we all know where the church stands on the matter, and why she won’t change, and I’m good with that.
What I want to know is why does it matter what people outside the church do?
I think people would say they believe it is harmful to our society – this change, this redefining of what marriage is – will affect us all. It affects society as a whole – not just individuals–that’s why it matters what others outside the Church do. We can all argue about whether or not it is or is not harmful to society and we can make our arguments and agree to disagree–but this idea that it has no effect on society–and thus on all of us and the kind of society we live–is simply false.
Regardless of weather there is a same sex ‘marriage’ it will never be allowed inside the church, but neither is remarriage after divorce, and yet me don’t have the expectation that those outside the church will not remarry after divorce, we don’t petition for that to be illegal and it isnt’t a valid marriage as far as the church is concerned?

It just seems like the church is pretty relaxed on when non members do, so long as they don’t try to bring it in to the church, and as long as her members don’t participate so why do we care what same sex partners want?
Please correct me because I feel that I am missing something!
I think those in the Church would argue that society would be much better off it we didn’t have no fault divorce. But that battle was fought and lost. Does anyone think it has really been good for our society? for the family? for children? But to reverse the changes that have led people to be concerned with their own fulfillment over their spouses and their childrens, with sex being something we do for recreation and pleasure with whomever happens to be available rather than something sacred and beautiful between a man and woman who have committed themselves to the good of the other, with the fruit of that sex being considered a disposable blob of tissue, and with people being more concerned over the fate of a homeless dog than a homeless person --will, at this point, take more than the changing of laws. It will take Christians actually living like Christians. It will take Christians being transformed and living a life with a peace, a serinity and a love that others want. It will take Christians willing to lose their livelihoods and to die for their belief. The fight against same sex marriage–is putting a finger in another hole in the dike as what was once a society founded on Christian values decays into a society that looks more and more like the pre-Christian pagan societies. We seem to be on a race to the bottom. Instead of holding up an ideal–and telling people they should strive for that–we say, people fall short and don’t live up to the ideal–so lets get rid of the ideal and find the lowest common denominator that people can live–and we hold that up as the new and superior ideal.

Peace of Christ,
Mark
 
Are you sure that many or all don’t realize? What about those that do? If many don’t realize then what can you do to aid that realization?
I don’t know, maybe all, but some would have to know, how could people be blind to the sexual anatomy of a man and a woman, of their sexual compatibility, it’s common sense that homosexuality is no where near equivalent to heterosexuality.

Hopefully we can aid that realisation by pointing it out to them obviously plain and simple like I did.
If something is a lie, someone is lieing and if lieing it must be those that realize that they support the notion of Same Sex marriage and not those that do not.
Some are just going with the flow, when they are blind to the other side of the argument and all they get is the **** from the media, they think that it’s just us being prejudice towards homosexuals, they think we are trying to treat homosexuals as second class citizens, when that isn’t true at all and than there are those who hear the extremists who are against homosexuals altogether and say and do some cruel things towards homosexuals and that gets their back up even more.
I agree with the obvious, however the obvious does not appear to dissuade those that realize the lie and those that push the lie suggesting that the obvious means something other than the obvious to them.
Than thats where you just say that, if they want to play into a rediculous illusion of treating homosexuality equal to heterosexuality in regards to marriage, than so be it, but don’t force your beliefs onto me, Im pointing out the facts, I wish to deal with the truth and I have a legal right to the truth.
So those that realize, not recognizing the obvious for what it is lie and want to pretend. I am not so sure that they percieve this as a pretense which suggests that those that realize, may not believe they are lieing because what is obvious is seen as obvious to them in a way that means something totally different than what you and I see and then for them it becomes other than a pretense.
They know it’s a pretense, there is no way anyone could seriously think that a homosexual union was equal to a heterosexual union because that would be the ultimate stupidity, instead they want to ‘expand’ the difinition of marriage to include somthing fundamentally different and if they expand that definition as Rick Santorum says other expansions are inevitable, how than can others not have marriage equality for any other kind of perverse union, because to expand marriage to include homosexual unions means to include anything that people wish to call a marriage.

It would be incredibly hypocritical and double standards to deny other kinds of unions if they redfine marriage to include same sex, becasue on the same reasoning that same sex marriage was pushed through, how could people force their beliefs of marriage onto other kinds of unions such as polygamous?

People are blind to the truth of homosexuality, they think the only way to make homosexuals feel better is to encourage the acts of homosexuality, which is completely wrong and really cruel to encourage homosexuals to act on their desires that are disordered.

Marriage equality will never change the nature of homosexuality, the fact that the sexual complimantarity simply isnt there, acting on homosexual desires will never provide a homosexual with the satisfaction that they are after, it will simply lead them down a destructive path and ultimatly leave them in despair, so it’s cruel what people are doing by legalsing same sex marriage, they are really lieing to homosexuals to make them feel better and telling everyone else to play along with the lie.
Then those that realize, not recognizing the obvious or seeing the obvious for other than what we see as obvious are propagating a lie and a pretense to engage in magic, because an illusion would be the equivalent of magic.
What do we do? No one can be lied to forever. No one can deny the obvious for what it is forever. No one can swallow a lie and stand still as it affects them. No one can accept a falsehood or believe in an illusion forever.
Exactly, it might take quite a few years (generally a long time, like generations) but people will eventually become aware to their stupidity of legalising same sex marriage, however when that time comes the damage will have already been done, so hopefully we can stop it from occuring before a tremendous amount of damage is done.
How do we reach those that don’t realize?
Point out to them the obvious sexual anatomy of a man and a woman and why the two unions are just so fundamnetally different, a homosexual union is no where near compatible compared to a heterosexual union.

Also point out that ‘marriage’ doesn’t legalise a homosexual union, it recognises it as equivalent to a heterosexual union which it obviously is not, same sex marriage is factually incorrect.
How de we engage those that do realize?
Tell them that if they want to equate two unions that are in no way equal, if they want to play into that lie than so be it, but I don’t have to and I shouldn’t have to, so don’t force that lie onto me and everyone else by changing the law in regards to marriage.

Also if they want to expand the definition of marriage to include same sex unions, than they are incredibly hypocritical and double standard to refuse other redfinitions of marriage such as polygamy.

Say to them, if we cannot force our definition of marriage between a man and a woman onto you, than what right do you have to force your definition of marriage between two people onto those in a polygamous relationship or some other perverse kind?

Thank you for reading
Josh
 
mob (mb)
n.
  1. A large disorderly crowd or throng. See Synonyms at crowd1.
  2. The mass of common people; the populace.

Sadly, I believe our courts, legislators and elected officials wish to placate the mob, those who are most vociferous, rather than to decide the truth, enact the truth or enforce the truth.

Everyone here has great faith, or at least high hopes, that right reason will win the day. But, did right reason win the day when Obamacare went to the SCOTUS? Did right reason win the day in Roe v. Wade? Did right reason win the day with the HHS mandate? Ponder for a moment the words of that famous judge, jury and executioner, who presided over the greatest case in the history of the world. “What is truth?”

A better strategy might be to recruit large numbers of people (a larger, more vociferous mob, if you will) to bring pressure to bear. Our country prides itself on reason and common sense, yet it seems to act on, or rather react to, irrational emotion and what is perceived as the public sentiment. As usual, the squeaky wheel gets oiled.

I have been speaking in secular terms. In reality, that is, spiritually speaking, the most effective mob we could organize would be a rosary mob. We’ll need a different definition of mob, say, a large orderly throng of people of one mind bound together in love. I have not the slightest doubt that this will get the job done, and in fact, is the most important contribution anyone can make toward a victorious outcome.
 
I think of this issue quite simply…and with a question:

Q: What is the greatest threat to marriage today?
A: 1. Divorce
2. Annulment
3. Homosexual marriage

(answers based on percentage of the population participating in each)
 
I think of this issue quite simply…and with a question:

Q: What is the greatest threat to marriage today?
A: 1. Divorce
2. Annulment
3. Homosexual marriage

(answers based on percentage of the population participating in each)
You might add, 4. The general public’s ignorance as to the meaning and sacredness of the sacrament.
 
…why does it matter what people outside the church do?
Regardless of whether there is a same sex ‘marriage’ it will never be allowed inside the church, but neither is remarriage after divorce, and yet me don’t have the expectation that those outside the church will not remarry after divorce, we don’t petition for that to be illegal and it isn’t a valid marriage as far as the church is concerned?

It just seems like the church is pretty relaxed on what non members do, so long as they don’t try to bring it in to the church, and as long as her members don’t participate so why do we care what same sex partners want?
What matters is social norms which are a reflection of values. If we want social norms to reflect our values we need to be more successful than we have been at convincing people that out values should be their values.

We complain a lot about our culture… but it is our culture… (it’s not my culture or your culture, it’s our culture… all 300 million or whatever it is…) change it, leave or get over it and learn to ‘co-exist’ the best you can. The next revolution needs to be ‘internal’ of the Holy Spirit and soul of the people. That’s where real change comes from. Violent change or subjugation comes from trying to force ‘values’ on people externally. We all need to stay away from that. Education, evangelization and enlightenment are the keys to the kind of social change we want. Not governmental laws.
 
What matters is social norms which are a reflection of values. If we want social norms to reflect our values we need to be more successful than we have been at convincing people that out values should be their values.

We complain a lot about our culture… but it is our culture… (it’s not my culture or your culture, it’s our culture… all 300 million or whatever it is…) change it, leave or get over it and learn to ‘co-exist’ the best you can. The next revolution needs to be ‘internal’ of the Holy Spirit and soul of the people. That’s where real change comes from. Violent change or subjugation comes from trying to force ‘values’ on people externally. We all need to stay away from that. Education, evangelization and enlightenment are the keys to the kind of social change we want. Not governmental laws.
What we are complaining about is the counterculture that attacks the Constitution we put in place to safeguard religious freedom. Our Constitution, which is not my Constitution or your Constitution, guarantees freedom to practice our various religions, and it’s only prohibition is that the state not establish a state religion. It is the counterculture to the formalized culture embedded in our founding documents that we are complaining about, and not only complaining about, but opposing with great zeal. Our culture is worth saving. It is the only government on the planet that is based on unalienable rights that come from our Creator and not from the state, Education, evangelization, rallies, and voting are the ways we are waging this battle. It is a revolution we certainly do hope does not turn violent, and it will not on my part. We could have a whole debate on the justification for the revolution against England, but that is not something I wish to debate here, but just to point out that society may or may not force a violent solution. Even the early practice of killing Christians in the arena was a violent revolution/solution, but not one in which the Christians played a part, who for their part were submissive to the state except for refusing to recant their beliefs. The revolution was the nonviolent way in which the Christians reacted. Just some thoughts.
 
I think of this issue quite simply…and with a question:

Q: What is the greatest threat to marriage today?
A: 1. Divorce
2. Annulment
3. Homosexual marriage

(answers based on percentage of the population participating in each)
Three is the most damaging by far. It will affect children in untold ways. It is a new ideology of evil.
 
Three is the most damaging by far. It will affect children in untold ways. It is a new ideology of evil.
Not to change the subject of the thread, but I am not sure why annulment would be one of the most damaging. It would be worse if they didn’t have one and remarried. At least they would be following the Catholic faith no? Children who have parents that get annulled are still legitimate because they were legally married. Some people think that if they get one it means that the church is saying the children never existed which is nonsense. It’s the spiritually part of the marriage that is annulled and the civil part that is divorced legally. Two different paths.

It is divorces that are really the evil part of the breakup that damage children.
It’s also the unprepared marriages that lead to the divorces in the first place. We need to educate Catholics about realizing that they must be prepared for marriages that are supposed to be a life long commitment. Till death do we part, not or if it doesn’t work out… What’s worse is not all people who go for an annulment can get them and it is usually the ones that convert or revert (After) they have remarried that seem to want them. They are getting harder to get so Catholics should be aware that they are endangering their souls without them if they want to remarry and are not even suppose to even date either without one. So many people in the Church don’t know what Annulment entails and exactly what it is.
Just my thoughts

Nice to see you Fix.🙂
GB
 
Not to change the subject of the thread, but I am not sure why annulment would be one of the most damaging. It would be worse if they didn’t have one and remarried. At least they would be following the Catholic faith no? Children who have parents that get annulled are still legitimate because they were legally married. Some people think that if they get one it means that the church is saying the children never existed which is nonsense. It’s the spiritually part of the marriage that is annulled and the civil part that is divorced legally. Two different paths.

It is divorces that are really the evil part of the breakup that damage children.
It’s also the unprepared marriages that lead to the divorces in the first place. We need to educate Catholics about realizing that they must be prepared for marriages that are supposed to be a life long commitment. Till death do we part, not or if it doesn’t work out… What’s worse is not all people who go for an annulment can get them and it is usually the ones that convert or revert (After) they have remarried that seem to want them. They are getting harder to get so Catholics should be aware that they are endangering their souls without them if they want to remarry and are not even suppose to even date either without one. So many people in the Church don’t know what Annulment entails and exactly what it is.
Just my thoughts

Nice to see you Fix.🙂
GB
I think the skyrocketing number of annulments is indeed an issue. It is essentially Catholic divorce at this point and the effects on the children are as damaging as divorce.
 
I think of this issue quite simply…and with a question:

Q: What is the greatest threat to marriage today?
A: 1. Divorce
2. Annulment
3. Homosexual marriage

(answers based on percentage of the population participating in each)
I like your thought process…let us see…

The smallest percentage of the population vs the larger percentage of the population as a means of determining the greatest threat of divorce…

The coronary artery is the smaller of the vessels in your body and the Femoral artery is the larger artery compared to the two…so let us just focus on the Femoral artery as a means of paying attention to what we need to do for our body…

If the Femoral Artery clogs, we lose a leg. If the coronary artery clogs we lose the heart. Let us lose our heart and save our leg since the coronary artery is the smaller artery and presents to us a lesser percentage of arteries compared to the larger. Sounds good.

6.5% of the population is addicted to drugs. 1-2% of the population is homosexual. Let us focus all our attention on the drug problem as a greater threat to marriage since addiction represents a larger percent of the population.

Divorced people (DP) and People have had annulments (AP) do not organize to

DPAP plan to have a day of silence joining with the LGBT in April
DPAP have joined with LGBT to silence NARTH in California, JONAH in New Jersey and any counseling for Homosexuals, Divorcees and those having had annulment
DPAP are joining with LGBT to have the states recognizing that when their unions have dissolved that they have the same rights as married people

DPAP as far as I know have not rallied to make a large voice of a small 1-2% population that have abnormal sexual behavior and spread disease…are you aware of any such groups?
 
I think the skyrocketing number of annulments is indeed an issue. It is essentially Catholic divorce at this point and the effects on the children are as damaging as divorce.
Yes it is an issue, but not one of the most damaging was my point. Not that many in the public population are Catholics who are even getting annulled.
GB
 
Not to change the subject of the thread, but I am not sure why annulment would be one of the most damaging. It would be worse if they didn’t have one and remarried. At least they would be following the Catholic faith no? Children who have parents that get annulled are still legitimate because they were legally married. Some people think that if they get one it means that the church is saying the children never existed which is nonsense. It’s the spiritually part of the marriage that is annulled and the civil part that is divorced legally. Two different paths.

It is divorces that are really the evil part of the breakup that damage children.
It’s also the unprepared marriages that lead to the divorces in the first place. We need to educate Catholics about realizing that they must be prepared for marriages that are supposed to be a life long commitment. Till death do we part, not or if it doesn’t work out… What’s worse is not all people who go for an annulment can get them and it is usually the ones that convert or revert (After) they have remarried that seem to want them. They are getting harder to get so Catholics should be aware that they are endangering their souls without them if they want to remarry and are not even suppose to even date either without one. So many people in the Church don’t know what Annulment entails and exactly what it is.
Just my thoughts

Nice to see you Fix.🙂
GB
Yes, and can you imagine what is going to happen once children are indoctrinated into this ideology. Mothers and fathers will be optional. The basic unit of civilization will no longer exist.
 
Yes, and can you imagine what is going to happen once children are indoctrinated into this ideology. Mothers and fathers will be optional. The basic unit of civilization will no longer exist.
In countries that have legalized so-called “same-sex marriage” instead of there being a place for mother and father on a birth certificate, it now says “parent 1” and “parent 2”. So, I don’t think it was a coincidence that America’s recently proclaimed “Gay Pride Month” is in the month that used to be for fathers.
 
In countries that have legalized so-called “same-sex marriage” instead of there being a place for mother and father on a birth certificate, it now says “parent 1” and “parent 2”.
It’s crazy. People do not reason morally very well. Basically they form their consciences from TV and pop culture. Emotion trumps reason every time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top