Why the fuss?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bezant
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
B

Bezant

Guest
Question:

With gay civil unions / marriages legalised state by state in the U.S., why the fuss from the Church, if the She sees nothing sacred or special about civil marriage anyway?
 
It’s not just the “civil union” aspect. It is the fact that in granting civil unions to homosexuals, society is encouraging homsexual activity, which is gravely sinful, not just in the Catholic Church, but in any Christian religion that adheres to Sacred Scripture.

Granting these same-sex unions is inviting people with a same-sex attraction to engage in an act that can lead them into Hell. That’s what the fuss is about.

ahs
 
Question:

With gay civil unions / marriages legalised state by state in the U.S., why the fuss from the Church, if the She sees nothing sacred or special about civil marriage anyway?
There is plenty sacred about civil marriage! All marriages outside of the Catholic Church are valid - divorce is not generally allowed even among non-Christians. Only Catholics and Orthodox Christians are bound to a church marriage.
 
There is plenty sacred about civil marriage! All marriages outside of the Catholic Church are valid - divorce is not generally allowed even among non-Christians. Only Catholics and Orthodox Christians are bound to a church marriage.
I disagree. It seems the Church’s view of civil marriage is very practical. Catholics may civilly divorce when the marriage fails and partners want to protect their assets. Furthermore, a civil marriage is not sufficient as a Christian marriage in the Church’s eyes.

All marriages outside of the Catholic Church may be valid, but are they sacred? Furthermore, the Church can only rule over non-Christian marriages when one partner converts.
 
It’s not just the “civil union” aspect. It is the fact that in granting civil unions to homosexuals, society is encouraging homsexual activity, which is gravely sinful, not just in the Catholic Church, but in any Christian religion that adheres to Sacred Scripture. Granting these same-sex unions is inviting people with a same-sex attraction to engage in an act that can lead them into Hell. That’s what the fuss is about.

ahs
So the problem is encouraging Christian homosexuals to engage in homosexual activity. What about the non-Christian homosexuals?
 
Question:

With gay civil unions / marriages legalised state by state in the U.S., why the fuss from the Church, if the She sees nothing sacred or special about civil marriage anyway?
You’re ignoring the fact that violating the moral standards of God have negative ramifications for our society. The idea that marraige is not a sacred institution to be guarded has led to a massive divorce rate, as well as a ridiculous number of children being born out of wedlock. In turn, we must note that these children are VASTLY more likely to be poor, commit crimes, and have children out of wedlock themselves… in other words, the death of marraige as a sacred and vital institution in our culture is feeding a cycle of degeneration because Christian morality is not just about what God wants, but about what is good for us (both as individuals and as society).

So we’re going to have homosexual “marraiges” (civil shams that are somehow given secular-moral equivalancy with sacred marraiges), more children raised without the balance of a mother/father, and more degeneration of the absolute NEED of a society for a strong family structure which produces well rounded children.

It’s not that homosexuality alone is the gunshot that’s going to kill traditional marraige: it’s that it’s just another nail in the coffin of our culture due to the degeneration of the traditional values and sacred institutions that made us strong to begin with.
 
Better two parents than one. There really is no argument other than its against the bible an all 'hell will break lose.- Talk about passing the buck. I am pretty sure ALCOHOL ends more marriages than homosexual influences.
Better a father and mother proper family model than two fathers or two mothers. Saying “two parents are better than one” is just a justification to settle for less than what is best for children in our society.
 
It’s not just the “civil union” aspect. It is the fact that in granting civil unions to homosexuals, society is encouraging homsexual activity, which is gravely sinful, not just in the Catholic Church, but in any Christian religion that adheres to Sacred Scripture.

Granting these same-sex unions is inviting people with a same-sex attraction to engage in an act that can lead them into Hell. That’s what the fuss is about.

ahs
So, are you saying that same sex relations should be illegal too?

Does it ever occur to you that, whether you like it or not, (AFAIK anyway) the US isn’t and has never been a theocracy?
 
Better a father and mother proper family model than two fathers or two mothers. Saying “two parents are better than one” is just a justification to settle for less than what is best for children in our society.
No its a fact according to the study done in the video i posted.
 
Better two parents than one.
At the risk of eternal damnation? Really?! And then let’s assume you aren’t Christian since you don’t buy the facts from the Bible. A Mother and Father is natural…and indeed a proper family model. Why cheat children of that?
 
The fact is “gay marriage” is all about getting the same rights and privileges as heterosexual couples. Some of these I have sympathy for such as being able to visit their partner in the hospital. However in my opinion the tax benefits of being a married heterosexual couple are a privilege not a right, the point of which is to promote unions that are beneficial to society. Homosexual unions have yet to prove they are equal to heterosexual marriages in their benefit to society. Everyone blames all the poor results in the data on the fact that homosexual couples are discriminated against and thus are more prone to a variety of things. Even in places in Europe where it is much more widely accepted, homosexual couples fall short. All in all I feel no obligation to give homosexual couples these benefits unless they were able to prove they deserve them.
 
So, are you saying that same sex relations should be illegal too?

Does it ever occur to you that, whether you like it or not, (AFAIK anyway) the US isn’t and has never been a theocracy?
It makes no difference to me personally if it is legal or not. The fact is that same sex “relations” are a grave offense against God. When all is said and done, it won’t matter if you were adhering to civil law or not…it is God’s Law that you be judged against.

U.S. not being a “theocracy” will be of little importance when you try to defend homosexuality to God when He asks you to account for it.
 
The fact is “gay marriage” is all about getting the same rights and privileges as heterosexual couples. Some of these I have sympathy for such as being able to visit their partner in the hospital. However in my opinion the tax benefits of being a married heterosexual couple are a privilege not a right, the point of which is to promote unions that are beneficial to society. Homosexual unions have yet to prove they are equal to heterosexual marriages in their benefit to society. Everyone blames all the poor results in the data on the fact that homosexual couples are discriminated against and thus are more prone to a variety of things. Even in places in Europe where it is much more widely accepted, homosexual couples fall short. All in all I feel no obligation to give homosexual couples these benefits unless they were able to prove they deserve them.
Look at video in my previous post. It shows a congressional hearing going over a report that homosexual families are more beneficial to society than single parent families. Go on look, 🙂
 
No its a fact according to the study done in the video i posted.
Regardless of whether or not it is better than a single parent situation (a single parent does not constitute a “family”), it is still not OPTIMAL for a child.

Again, justifying that two parents might be better than one is not a reason to allow for children to be adopted into homes where they will receive anything other than what is optimal.
 
At the risk of eternal damnation? Really?! And then let’s assume you aren’t Christian since you don’t buy the facts from the Bible. A Mother and Father is natural…and indeed a proper family model. Why cheat children of that?
I believe you have my argument mistaken for the “lets strip mothers and fathers of their babies and hand them over to the gays” argument. No one gets deprived of anything when a child is placed from a group home with no parents to a home with two loving parents
 
At the risk of eternal damnation? Really?! And then let’s assume you aren’t Christian since you don’t buy the facts from the Bible. A Mother and Father is natural…and indeed a proper family model. Why cheat children of that?
Nothing unnatural about the love this boy feels from both of his moms. heck, they raised an eagle scout, how is that bad for society?

youtube.com/watch?v=FSQQK2Vuf9Q
 
I disagree. It seems the Church’s view of civil marriage is very practical. Catholics may civilly divorce when the marriage fails and partners want to protect their assets. Furthermore, a civil marriage is not sufficient as a Christian marriage in the Church’s eyes.
Civil marriage is not sufficient for a Catholic, but only because Catholics are required be married in a Catholic Church. Protestants and non-Christians are not required.
All marriages outside of the Catholic Church may be valid, but are they sacred?
Yes, marriage all marriage is sacred, even among pagans. Among baptized Protestants, its even sacramental, even without a religious ceremony!
Furthermore, the Church can only rule over non-Christian marriages when one partner converts.
True, why I said divorce is generally not approved ;). An while a civil divorce might be allowed, neither civil nor religious remarriage is allowed (unless the marriage was deemed null…)
 
Look at video in my previous post. It shows a congressional hearing going over a report that homosexual families are more beneficial to society than single parent families. Go on look, 🙂
I watched it. Al Franken shows that the paticular study that was referenced wasn’t about homosexual couples vs heterosexual couples. There are plenty of studies that do look at these two relationships compared to each other. Also, Al Franken really doesn’t prove anything for homosexual couples being effective with his statements. I don’t believe he ever comments on whether the author’s of the study used homosexual couples as well as heterosexual couples in gathering data for two parent families. He basically just pointed out the mistake of using that study at all in the discussion.
 
Franken shows that nuclear families which are defined as two parent families without regard for those parents sexuality are more beneficial for a child than single parent families.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top