Why the fuss?

[jomoco]

First of all, the Supreme Court has made it clear that the guarantee of equal treatment within the equal protection clause does not mean that governments cannot ever treat different people differently. For example, states need not permit children to drive cars, for example, nor must they allow senior citizens to enroll in grammar school. As a basic rule, the Court has said that it is reasonable for states to build categories or classifications into the laws that they pass, and in fact, the “rational basis test” is one of the standards used by the courts to determine whether these classifications are fair. Also known as the Lindsley test, this standard says that if the reasons for treating people differently are reasonable and logically related to the law’s purpose, then they are constitutional.

There is a rational basis for restricting marriage to a relationship between a man and a woman.

Secondly, nobody who knows your declarations in this forum gets excited over your posts. It is obvious here you wish to attribute something to the Church which is again false. Fortunately, for those who wish to find out, your pro-gay and anti-Church positions and reasons are discoverable. One just has to read the threads you opened upon joining the forum. You have an agenda, sir. You have an axe to grind against the Catholic Church and insert an accusation wherever you can take a shot, even when it is inappropriate and out of topic.
,

Sounds like the same scotus that assisted george w into office, wrongly.

Jesus was not a war kinda guy. Quite the opposite in fact. Compassionate, forgiving, healing the sick, and caring for the elderly, afflicted and lame.

The precise opposite of what we experience in today’s world of flawed men’s egos.

I’ll take Jesus regardless of which door He’s behind thank you.

jomoco

 

[SteveGC]

Sounds like the same scotus that assisted george w into office, wrongly.

Jesus was not a war kinda guy. Quite the opposite in fact. Compassionate, forgiving, healing the sick, and caring for the elderly, afflicted and lame.

The precise opposite of what we experience in today’s world of flawed men’s egos.

I’ll take Jesus regardless of which door He’s behind thank you.

jomoco

Any chance you’d like to have a mature discussion about the subject at hand? Or is it just pot-shots on the menu today?

 

[Nate13]

Don’t get excited guys. I know that the CC is completely against granting homosexuals their 14th amendment rights to equal protections under the law.

I just wanted to read your rationalizations for reaching such a traditional error?

Thanks for clarifying this important matter, I think?

jomoco

equal protections assumes equal merit. That is the difference between the homosexual marriages movement and the women’s/African American movements. First off there is no such thing as a right to marry and secondly I don’t believe homosexual marriages have shown they are of equal merit. Actually they have shown quite the opposite in Sweden where it has been legal for 10 years.

 

[jomoco]

Any chance you’d like to have a mature discussion about the subject at hand? Or is it just pot-shots on the menu today?

Sure, let’s discuss the many reasons all Christians should be totally for granting poor afflicted homosexuals equal protections under the law, shall we?

My faith in God/Jesus is such that I have no problem whatsoever in letting God judge whatever sins they may or may not have committed during their lives.

In so much as they don’t break my leg nor gore my ox, I’m very comfortable letting one far far more worthier than I judge them.

And while there’s absolutely no doubt that the CC’s treatment of homosexuals has vastly improved through the centuries, atleast recently, It still has a long way to go in my opinion.

Why this stubborn insisting that your hands are worthy enough to judge, rather than trusting in God’s worthiness to do so from an un-flawed perspective?

If these homosexuals are indeed born with their polarity’s switched backwards somehow, through absolutely no fault of their own? Then you unforgiving hard cases are going to regret your un-Jesus like conduct big time, in my opinion.

Think about it friends.

jomoco

 

[Nate13]

Sure, let’s discuss the many reasons all Christians should be totally for granting poor afflicted homosexuals equal protections under the law, shall we?

My faith in God/Jesus is such that I have no problem whatsoever in letting God judge whatever sins they may or may not have committed during their lives.

In so much as they don’t break my leg nor gore my ox, I’m very comfortable letting one far far more worthier than I judge them.

And while there’s absolutely no doubt that the CC’s treatment of homosexuals has vastly improved through the centuries, atleast recently, It still has a long way to go in my opinion.

Why this stubborn insisting that your hands are worthy enough to judge, rather than trusting in God’s worthiness to do so from an un-flawed perspective?

If these homosexuals are indeed born with their polarity’s switched backwards somehow, through absolutely no fault of their own? Then you unforgiving hard cases are going to regret your un-Jesus like conduct big time, in my opinion.

Think about it friends.

jomoco

Your going to have to help me out here on showing me how are we judging them by not giving them a privilege? I guess we are judging polygamists and child-man love relationships as well right? Stop with the rhetoric and debate with arguments instead of accusing us of hating homosexuals. It’s like trying to call one of the presidential candidates un-American.

If these homosexuals are indeed born with their polarity’s switched backwards somehow, through absolutely no fault of their own? Then you unforgiving hard cases are going to regret your un-Jesus like conduct big time, in my opinion.

Then explain to me God’s reasoning in Romans 1:26:27. God abandoned them to their SHAMEFUL desire. It also describes man-man relationships as lustful. My question to you is how can you say you love them when you propose to not just allow this to happen, but make it Easier and society sponsored. This is no act of love.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Sure, let’s discuss the many reasons all Christians should be totally for granting poor afflicted homosexuals equal protections under the law, shall we?

Again, false premise. There is nothing to “protect,” because there is no inherent entitlement.

Why this stubborn insisting that your hands are worthy enough to judge, rather than trusting in God’s worthiness to do so from an un-flawed perspective?

It’s God’s judgment, not man’s. That judgment was confirmed (not denied) by Jesus, in his coming, his validation and fulfillment of Mosaic law which forbids homosexual activity, and his triumphal ascension into Heaven.

If these homosexuals are indeed born with their polarity’s switched backwards somehow, through absolutely no fault of their own? Then you unforgiving hard cases are going to regret your un-Jesus like conduct big time, in my opinion.

Who’s “unforgiving”? My (different) disordered attractions that I was born with do not require me to act on them. It would appear that God allowed them to exist in me for the sake of my sanctification. I can choose to meet that challenge toward holiness, or I can indulge attractions that are contrary to the law and order of God. And then I will be my own judge at the Particular Judgment, when the perfect Judge, Jesus, will face me and ask me what I did with the graces he made available to me.

 

[jomoco]

Your going to have to help me out here on showing me how are we judging them by not giving them a privilege? I guess we are judging polygamists and child-man love relationships as well right?

It’s the act of not granting them EQUAL protections(plural) under the law.

Polygamists are consenting adults.

Children are off limits, and the responsibility of their upbringing falls upon their parents until the age of eighteen.

Schools need to accept that gay children exist, grant them equal protections, and teach them the same as any other student.

Not putting them into the corner of the class wearing a societal dunce cap, as the other children laugh at their embarrassment.

jomoco

 

[Nate13]

It’s the act of not granting them EQUAL protections(plural) under the law.

Polygamists are consenting adults.

Children are off limits, and the responsibility of their upbringing falls upon their parents until the age of eighteen.

Schools need to accept that gay children exist, grant them equal protections, and teach them the same as any other student.

Not putting them into the corner of the class wearing a societal dunce cap, as the other children laugh at their embarrassment.

jomoco

“Polygamists are consenting adults”
Yes I understand that and so are homosexuals. That is not what we are discussing. Should polygamist be able to get married to more than one person? I’m not going out and trying to stop all the people masturbating in America NOR am I trying to stop homosexual’s from committing their act which the bible decisively says is lustful in and of itself. You act as if we are trying to stop homosexual’s from having sex by going door to door. We ARE saying no to homosexual’s getting married legally under the pretense that they by their nature can’t get married. It would similar to me saying that I’m being persecuted as a man because my right to give birth to a child is being withheld. It is not in my nature to be able to have a child in the same way that two men do not have it in their nature to get married.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

“Polygamists are consenting adults”
Yes I understand that and so are homosexuals. That is not what we are discussing. Should polygamist be able to get married to more than one person? I’m not going out and trying to stop all the people masturbating in America NOR am I trying to stop homosexual’s from committing their act which the bible decisively says is lustful in and of itself. You act as if we are trying to stop homosexual’s from having sex by going door to door. We ARE saying no to homosexual’s getting married legally under the pretense that they by their nature can’t get married. It would similar to me saying that I’m being persecuted as a man because my right to give birth to a child is being withheld. It is not in my nature to be able to have a child in the same way that two men do not have it in their nature to get married.

:yup:

:clapping:

 

[SteveGC]

It’s the act of not granting them EQUAL protections(plural) under the law.

And exactly how, jomoco, are we not granting them equal protection under the law? Define our actions which deny them unequal protection. But be careful not to redefine what equal protection actual means. So far, you are demonstrating a significant amount of ignorance regarding what equal protection under the law actually means. So, for clarity, define for us what equal protection under the law means, and then how it is we are not granting them that, specifically. Please.

Schools need to accept that gay children exist, grant them equal protections, and teach them the same as any other student

. See, here is proof you are confused about what equal protection means. You are using it here in a non-legal sense. How do schools grant equal protection under the law?? You are using the term indiscriminately, with various types of meanings, then accusing Catholics of violating your defintions

Not putting them into the corner of the class wearing a societal dunce cap, as the other children laugh at their embarrassment.

This is not “granting equal protection under the law”, this is being non-discriminatory, which is always a good thing, and something the Church has always taught us to be.

 

[jomoco]

“Polygamists are consenting adults”
Yes I understand that and so are homosexuals. That is not what we are discussing. Should polygamist be able to get married to more than one person? I’m not going out and trying to stop all the people masturbating in America NOR am I trying to stop homosexual’s from committing their act which the bible decisively says is lustful in and of itself. You act as if we are trying to stop homosexual’s from having sex by going door to door. We ARE saying no to homosexual’s getting married legally under the pretense that they by their nature can’t get married. It would similar to me saying that I’m being persecuted as a man because my right to give birth to a child is being withheld. It is not in my nature to be able to have a child in the same way that two men do not have it in their nature to get married.

But how do you know God’s will on the matter matches your own?

Do you know why God made homosexuals?

They’ve most certainly been with us throughout the centuries.

God made them to the same degree He made us. We are all His creatures. The whole ball of wax, since Eden.

You may not know God’s plans for us all as well as you think, particularly coming from a discriminating perspective.

jomoco

 

[Nate13]

But how do you know God’s will on the matter matches your own?

Do you know why God made homosexuals?

They’ve most certainly been with us throughout the centuries.

God made them to the same degree He made us. We are all His creatures. The whole ball of wax, since Eden.

You may not know God’s plans for us all as well as you think, particularly coming from a discriminating perspective.

jomoco

Ouch! So your saying God designed some of us with homosexual tendencies and made us so that they would be unable to prevent themselves from giving into their desires? In that case you just justified the child-man love people as well because I’m sure some of them would claim they are unable to prevent themselves from giving into their desires… OR we could show LOVE and COMPASSION for these people and encourage them to fight against their passions and instead align themselves with God and nature. Heterosexual or homosexual we all have desires of the flesh that we must gain control of so we can live our lives in accordance with God’s will.

Are you accusing God of being a cruel God since he must obviously be cruel to allow people to be created with same-sex attraction, and then make very clear in his Word that acting on those desires would be a sin.

 

[InSearchofGrace]

But how do you know God’s will on the matter matches your own?

Do you know why God made homosexuals?

They’ve most certainly been with us throughout the centuries.

God made them to the same degree He made us. We are all His creatures. The whole ball of wax, since Eden.

You may not know God’s plans for us all as well as you think, particularly coming from a discriminating perspective.

jomoco

I doubt that you will accept any explanation but your own.

The root cause of homosexuality is original sin. Original sin blinded the human mind from clearly seeing the purpose of sexual pleasure.

God did not create homosexuals. When He created Adam and from Adam his mate Eve, he created them with complementary sexes for propagation. How much clearer could His intent be? Male and female, He created them. Not homosexual male or homosexual female. Or of any hybrid sexuality.

After the Fall, man came to know about sickness, disease, death. And concupiscence. Jesus, God the Son, came down as the Word Incarnate for man to be redeemed, to give us a chance to choose eternal life with Him.

The earliest record of homosexuality was during the time of Sodom and Gomorrah. And they were punished for it. Please don’t raise the revisionist homosexualist version that Sodom and Gomorrah were punished for inhospitality.

Further, are you directing the discussion to your strange theory or theories about the Tree of Life? I ask because of your references to “since Eden” and “God’s plans.” If you are, you would be derailing this thread, something you have done recently in another thread.
,

 

[jomoco]

Ouch! So your saying God designed some of us with homosexual tendencies and made us so that they would be unable to prevent themselves from giving into their desires? In that case you just justified the child-man love people as well because I’m sure some of them would claim they are unable to prevent themselves from giving into their desires… OR we could show LOVE and COMPASSION for these people and encourage them to fight against their passions and instead align themselves with God and nature. Heterosexual or homosexual we all have desires of the flesh that we must gain control of so we can live our lives in accordance with God’s will.

Are you accusing God of being a cruel God since he must obviously be cruel to allow people to be created with same-sex attraction, and then make very clear in his Word that acting on those desires would be a sin.

No. I am accusing the church and some of you of being cruel and stiffnecked. And further, presumptuous in your supposedly detailed knowledge of God’s mind and will concerning homosexuals,

You may not stone them to death physically any longer, but you certainly still manage to make their lives as hellish as possible mentally when it comes to granting them equal rights as another of God’s flawed creations called human beings, that in this country anyway, are endowed with certain inalienable rights, as citizens, homosexual or not.

A widowed heterosexual Catholic has legal rights pertaining to their spouse’s property, children and insurance policies, etc.

These are the legal rights both the church and far too many of you would deny homosexual couples. Or put another way, you protect that right for heterosexual married couples, but deny that same right to homosexual couples.

Unequal protection, versus equal protection, under the laws of the land.

Can I make it any clearer for you my discriminatory friends?

jomoco

 

[SteveGC]

No. I am accusing the church and some of you of being cruel and stiffnecked. And further, presumptuous in your supposedly detailed knowledge of God’s mind and will concerning homosexuals,

God’s mind about homosexual ACTS are quite clear in Scripture. This is what we object to, jomoco. Not homosexuals themselves, but the normalization and institutionalization of same-sex relationships, which subsequently does 2 things:

1. it establishes a normalization of homosexual ACTS, which are intrinsically evil ACTS, which puts the ACTOR(s) in harms way spiritually, eternally.
2. it profanes the divinely instituted sacrament of one man/one woman marital union, innately removing the pro-creative act from the marital bond…again sinful…again endangering the soul of the sinner.

You interpret all this as discriminatory, when it, in fact, is an act of love…and genuine concern for the eternal life of those with homosexual temptations.

You may not stone them to death physically any longer, but you certainly still manage to make their lives as hellish as possible mentally when it comes to granting them equal rights as another of God’s flawed creations called human beings, that in this country anyway, are endowed with certain inalienable rights, as citizens, homosexual or not.

A widowed heterosexual Catholic has legal rights pertaining to their spouse’s property, children and insurance policies, etc.

These are the legal rights both the church and far too many of you would deny homosexual couples. Or put another way, you protect that right for heterosexual married couples, but deny that same right to homosexual couples.

Unequal protection, versus equal protection, under the laws of the land.

Can I make it any clearer for you my discriminatory friends?

You’ve made yourself clear. But unfortunately, also clearly uninformed about the nature of marriage and the motivations of The Church. If it’s about rights pertaining to property, insurance, health, etc…then why don’t homosexuals just get a power of attorney with their significant other and receive those rights legally? Why not lobby to insurance companies, health organizations, etc? Why infiltrate marriage?

I know why. Because marriage law has already established these conveniences for heterosexuals, so it’s easier for homosexuals to just latch on to a pre-existing law designed for heterosexuals, instead of going after these rights individually through their respective institutions. You would be hard-pressed to find the Church or any Catholic opposing the homosexual community in their attempts to lobby through those individual institutions for the rights they desire. But redefining marriage, and normalizing homosexuality in society by infiltrating that divine institution, is not tolerable.

But the Church does not teach us to exclude or discriminate individual homosexuals. We are simply called to protect divine institutions and morals.

 

[Elizabeth502]

But redefining marriage, and normalizing homosexuality in society by infiltrating that divine institution, is not tolerable.

But the Church does not teach us to exclude or discriminate individual homosexuals. We are simply called to protect divine institutions and morals.

Correct. There is not the possibility of a “moral equivalency” which is really what they mean by the code phrase “marriage equality.” There is not the possibility of a moral equivalency, and the attempt is to somehow force that through language. (Has nothing to do, as you pointed out, with civil regulations for persons in various relationships who seek legal arrangements, etc.)

 

[Nate13]

No. I am accusing the church and some of you of being cruel and stiffnecked. And further, presumptuous in your supposedly detailed knowledge of God’s mind and will concerning homosexuals,

You may not stone them to death physically any longer, but you certainly still manage to make their lives as hellish as possible mentally when it comes to granting them equal rights as another of God’s flawed creations called human beings, that in this country anyway, are endowed with certain inalienable rights, as citizens, homosexual or not.

A widowed heterosexual Catholic has legal rights pertaining to their spouse’s property, children and insurance policies, etc.

These are the legal rights both the church and far too many of you would deny homosexual couples. Or put another way, you protect that right for heterosexual married couples, but deny that same right to homosexual couples.

Unequal protection, versus equal protection, under the laws of the land.

Can I make it any clearer for you my discriminatory friends?

jomoco

ah yes you got us we are completely denying them all of their rights and give them no chance for happiness on Earth… Why can’t you take a hint from Catholics with same-sex attraction that have CHOSEN not to ignore what is so clearly written in the Bible and lead their lives with God’s will in mind instead of their own. They are the true hero’s that show we do have free will and aren’t chained to our passion’s. I’m curious now though as to your feelings on bestiality. This has even fewer references in the Bible than homosexuality so I’m sure you don’t persecute these poor people and are promoting them to be able to marry an animal correct?

 

[jomoco]

ah yes you got us we are completely denying them all of their rights and give them no chance for happiness on Earth… Why can’t you take a hint from Catholics with same-sex attraction that have CHOSEN not to ignore what is so clearly written in the Bible and lead their lives with God’s will in mind instead of their own. They are the true hero’s that show we do have free will and aren’t chained to our passion’s. I’m curious now though as to your feelings on bestiality. This has even fewer references in the Bible than homosexuality so I’m sure you don’t persecute these poor people and are promoting them to be able to marry an animal correct?

The speed with which you equate homosexuals to beasts is very telling friend.

Your chosen course is obvious. But remember, your opinions are not necessarily shared by God, or Jesus, both of whom counseled us to love and forgive our neighbors as ourselves. Not to stone them and discriminate against them because they are afflicted.

Your assumptions are your own. Don’t attribute them to God, He might take exception.

jomoco

 

[perro_sarnoso]

The K.I,S. principle really applies here,

Active homosexuality is evil - it is Lucifer’s plan to destroy a society and a nation by insinuating and pushing this evil into our collective psyche.

A sin is a sin is a sin. Whether that’s adultery, fornication or homosexuality. And notice that with homosexuality there is more leverage than with the previous two. Only active homosexuality is sinful and evil. Not the case with adultery and fornication - which, as soon as they arise in the heart …you’ve already sinned.

Keep it simple and don’t be stupid. This is not about civil rights and entitlements and priviledges…it’s about Lucifer deploying his strategies on Catholics and all christians alike. Looking for the wishy washy catholics, the relativism of what’s right and wrong, the liberalism, modernists and the political correctness.

The spiritual war is escalating before our eyes and here we are rationalizing and justifying this sodom and gomorrah agenda.

Lord have mercy on us for we are stupid.

 

[jomoco]

The K.I,S. principle really applies here,

Active homosexuality is evil - it is Lucifer’s plan to destroy a society and a nation by insinuating and pushing this evil into our collective psyche.

A sin is a sin is a sin. Whether that’s adultery, fornication or homosexuality. And notice that with homosexuality there is more leverage than with the previous two. Only active homosexuality is sinful and evil. Not the case with adultery and fornication - which, as soon as they arise in the heart …you’ve already sinned.

Keep it simple and don’t be stupid. This is not about civil rights and entitlements and priviledges…it’s about Lucifer deploying his strategies on Catholics and all christians alike. Looking for the wishy washy catholics, the relativism of what’s right and wrong, the liberalism, modernists and the political correctness.

The spiritual war is escalating before our eyes and here we are rationalizing and justifying this sodom and gomorrah agenda.

Lord have mercy on us for we are stupid.

Certainly can’t argue with your last sentence friend.

Everything before it seems a might flawed in my humble opinion.

jomoco