E
- Status
S
SavannahGal
Guest
Siblings already have an established legal relationship and may very well be determined next of kin, even in the absence of a healthcare directive, General Power of Attorney, Will or Trust, etc.
The problem for gay couples is that without civil union or marriage, they have absolutely no legally recognized relationship, which can become very problematic, even with the above mentioned legal documents in place.
T
the_universal
Guest
There’s lots of sources out there. Catholics for Choice does extensive polling on the subject. I don’t adhere to their positions on many things but they do have data on the topic. And there’s lots of other polling that has been done indicating what I say is true.
I don’t think this has anything to do with whether or not Church teachings change (which is debatable as well). But it has lots to do with the fact that the vast majority of Catholics do not hold as conservative a position on many family and social teachings as what is directed by the Church.
R
Rau
Guest
Nor do best friends. Somehow, best friends having sex makes all the difference!
R
Rau
Guest
You forgot to mention that the love is accompanied by same sex sexual acts, that the two persons hold themselves to have the right to acquire children and to be regarded as just another natural style of family and any action by another which might stand in the way of any of this is illegal.
No doubt you will regard the presentation of such families in your children’s primary school readers as perfectly fine too. If at that point you still view the matter as a non-issue, we’ll have a clearer picture of where you really stand!
R
Rau
Guest
Doesn’t require it, but presumes it!
C
clem456
Guest
This makes sense, as long as it is not falsely equated with the union of a man and woman.
T
the_universal
Guest
Don’t be silly, of course the love would be accompanied (in all likelihood) by same sex acts. The rub is that we really wouldn’t know though would we? I only ever speak for myself, but I couldn’t care less what two people do in the privacy of their own home. I have a hard time understanding why someone would be concerned that two people may or may not be engaging in a homosexual act in the privacy of their own home. How would that affect you or me? I’m assuming you wouldn’t be there to watch?You forgot to mention that the love is accompanied by same sex sexual acts, that the two persons hold themselves to have the right to acquire children and to be regarded as just another natural style of family and any action by another which might stand in the way of any of this is illegal.
No doubt you will regard the presentation of such families in your children’s primary school readers as perfectly fine too. If at that point you still view the matter as a non-issue, we’ll have a clearer picture of where you really stand!
And regarding your statement about same sex couples in a children’s reader. I’ve never seen that. And if I did, being the involved parent that I am I would explain to a child that in reality (i.e., the real world) some people love others of the same sex, but most do not.
S
SavannahGal
Guest
A sexual relationship between best friends is often an attribute and therefore indicator of the type of relationship in which participants would seek to have these legal protections in place, don’t you think? It certainly is in heterosexual relationships. I married my best friend, although I don’t know that I ever called him a best friend because I was able to call him my husband.
And I’m not suggesting that there should not be some form of legally recognized union that would include asexual relationships, such as those between friends or siblings. I’m simply stating that I have not heard of these individuals expressing a pressing need for such legal protections, so I’m rather perplexed by your outrage.
Personally, I believe that not only does our society in general not place enough importance on friendship, but quite frankly neither does the Church, at least certainly not in the way it once did. Religious vocations and marriage are both highly valued and praised, but not much in between.
R
Rau
Guest
That was once the status quo, and it did not concern me greatly either. But then the privacy was thrown out and the two declared that their relationship ought to be public, and demanded that it be accepted as “marriage”. That made the “non-issue” into an “issue”.
And so the non-issue now becomes normalized.
E
edwest2
Guest
R
Rau
Guest
Whether two men engage in sexual acts is not relevant to the state (unlike man and woman). If two men need a legally recognized relationship, it ought carry no implication that their relationship is sexual. But that implication exists today. That siblings are denied such relationship is not offensive to me - rather it is simply one piece of evidence - if any were needed - that civil unions (like marriage) are presumed sexual.
But that’s ancient history. SSM has arrived.
S
SavannahGal
Guest
So then, the inclusion of sibling relationships in civil unions is of importance to you solely to the extent that it obfuscates the sexual nature of the relationships of all couples who might choose to take advantage of this form of legal recognition. That certainly clarifies your stance.
But as you say, we are long past civil unions.
T
the_universal
Guest
Regardless of your own personal “tolerances” towards same sex couples (sounds like you don’t like to see it in public or consider it marriage), there’s no evidence that it does any great damage to society. I hear a lot of fear-based arguments but nothing concrete to back anything up.
By the way, I have no objections to people not supporting same sex marriage or civil unions - I fully respect anyone’s stance and/or the Church’s stance on the matter. What I take issue with are the arguments around “it leads to societal decline” (please show me) and worse, the way the Church’s stance on marriage (i.e., between one man and one woman) is used by some to create an underlying narrative for homophobia and fear-mongering.
E
estesbob
Guest
Poor cathecisis
T
Thorolfr
Guest
Do you really think that it’s just ignorance of Church teachings (i.e. “poor catechesis”) or is it that many Catholics just don’t agree with a number of Church teachings of which they are perfectly aware?
E
estesbob
Guest
Probably both , Many Catholics believe in the bogus " primacy of conscience"
- Status