"the Catholic Church Can’t Change." The Washington Post

[Debra Little]

Sorry to be a wet blanket, but the Catholic Church is not going to change its teaching on any of the fun stuff (contraception, female “ordination,” homosexuality, abortion, etc.) with the next pope.

 

Nor will it ever.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/guest-voices/post/the-catholic-church-cant-change/2013/02/13/a0b1933a-75fe-11e2-95e4-6148e45d7adb_blog.html

 

 

The Catholic Church has an Old Man River thing going on.
She just keeps rolling, she keeps on rolling along. You can stand on
the shores. Or jump in. It’s your choice. But she’s not changing course.
Thank God.

Ashley E. McGuire is a senior fellow with the Catholic Association and editor of www.Altcatholicah.com.
 

 

amen for that!  you  know what's weird about their dissent?  most of these people are probably not Catholics, so why

do they care?  the Churche's teaching does affect them.  they will go on their way doing all the same things they have

been doing.  this is just an opportunity for them to do more Catholic bashing.  if we are being persecute then you know

we are on the right road!  praise God!
 

i know all about the darkness that comes when one cherishes the homosexual lifestyle.  and that's what it

is, a lifestyle.  it is not an orientation.  there is only one orientation,  man and women in marraige.

i know all about the darkness that comes when one cherishes the homosexual lifestyle.  and that's what it

is, a lifestyle.  it is not an orientation.  there is only one orientation,  man and women in marraige.

I called your argument poo.  You said "poo to you" making it personal.  Perhaps you should listen to hsmom's post and read it with, what do you Catholics call it, some humility, I believe?

 

the state of someone else's heart is between them and God.  it is not for you to judge~!

Edited February 18, 2013 by Debra Little

[Autumn Dusk]

Because a society's values change over time.  Just because those values have logical inconsistencies when manifested through the law does not necessarily mean that those logical inconsistencies will grow into changing societies values again.  This is the main point I'm making against the slippery-slope argument that always comes up in these debates.

 

Actually polygamy was accepted at a time when homosexuality was not.  While modern Jews do not practice Polygamy  the Torah is full of it.  Almost every leader of significance besides Adam and Noah had multiple wives or a wife and concubines.  As the Torah is our OT, Christians can see this, too.

Moslems practice polygamy as well as many Eastern Religions.  It's a very Eastern thought.  It's not too far a cry.

 

If you look at the historical views against homosexuality and compare them to the views against poligmay, we're not talking apples and oranges, we're comparing two decades...less if you count the Islamic influence over culture.

 

The slippery slope, I think, would be bringing bestiality into the picture, but working within a college environment the newest thing is to be "pansexual" and "omnisexual" which means sex with straight men, gay men, straight women, lesbian woman and basically anywhere you can get the equipment to fit.  I don't see it as something that is far off.  To deny that these are the new sexual boundaries are to deny whole segment of the population

 

 

Finally, R2, let's go over this again in relation to minor sexual relationships..

 

The age of CONSENT for a sexual relationship is 14 to 18 (with the medium being 16) in the US and 12 to 21 in other places across the world.  

 

A 14yo can LEGALLY have sex with a party 5 years older without any legal consequence in some states.  In Mexico a 12f/13m can have sex with someone up to 3 years older without any legal ramifications if they both agree.  Laws can be, and continue to be vague, for instance in Delaware, a 16yo can have consequence free sex with someone who is 30 or younger.

 

These are the SEX laws

 

Marriage laws in the US range from 13(females) 14 (males) to 18 and from 9 (females) 14 (males) to 21 across the world.

 

The ONLY thing that is punishable until 18 is pornographic images.  However, if you watch TV, read books or look at magazines the pornographic edge on most of the media marketed to teens is very clear.

 

The "slippery slope" argument is VERY valid here.  All gay "marriage" is is legitimizing a sexual relationship with a religious stamp.  

 

Again, for many reasons I believe that non-traditional relationships should have legal recognition, such as an widow retired woman and her elderly father.  Right now if that retired woman was killed her elderly father would be dependent on the government  instead of able to live off her pension like her deceased husband would have been.

Edited February 18, 2013 by Autumn Dusk

[StMichael]

You really have gone too far.

 

A servant of the devil would allow the whispers of the devil to not only accept sin, but promote it.

 

Unlike a murderer who repents and does not kill again, what is being professed by you is that let the sinner sin, lets rally around them, embrace them and normalize the sin.

 

If I was a servant of the devil I would be agreeing with you. Let them do as they please, let them expose our children to this, that, for this group, lets ignore the Bible.

 

You need to clear your head over who and what is evil, because you appear extremely disoriented.

 

 

I didn't merely call you abusive sir, I've all but called you a servant of the devil.

 

[StMichael]

The first thing you need to do is speak from fact not your imagination.

 

If one happens into Disneyland in the first weekend of October, the park is overtaken by a group that is seeking to be noticed. They carry on in ways that are not meant to overtly offend the park guidelines, but to have the children ask their parents "why are those 2 men kissing?" or  "why are they holding hands, Mommy?" The point of this, in the park, is to introduce this lifestyle to where they can maximize the most exposure to the natural family. Families that save up money all year to spend with their children, not social issues.

 

While Disney does not officiate this at all, they will refund money to those who do not want to be there during that weekend as it is crossing a line.

 

There is a plaque where Walt & Mickey are holding hands, the plaque reads: "I think most of all what I want Disneyland to be is a happy place...Where parents and children can have fun, together. -Walt Disney"

 

So, if you are parent, and parents get zero help from media, radio, advertisements all seeking to undermine their authority, this is one of the few places left where parents can let their guard down to have fun with their children. So, now you do not have to rely on your faulty imagination.

 

And now onto the rest of your tripe:

 

- I made no assertions that the 3 parent certificate was applied to any group, other than that the government is not only redefining the family, they are redefining parents. Prior to the sins of science creating IVF, etc. such a thing could not even be imagined.

 

- I believe you need to stop reading your socially liberal rags that have you misidentifying truth as somehow far right and far right of what?

 

- I appreciate you wanting to share your advice, but I think it is best you read up, learn some more and then you might be able to give advice. 

 

 

Perhaps apes view throwing their poo at others as "tuff love", but we homo sapiens generally view it as an insult at best.

 

To address your concern over the alleged lewd behavior at Disneyland on "Gay Day" I would imagine that it was exaggerated, and likely based on ennroeous assumptions.   I never worked at Disneyland, but I did work a few summers at Kings Dommion here in Virginia and we had a "Gay Day" as well.  For half the day the park was open to the general public and for the last half it was open only to some gay rights group that bought it out.  I didn't see any lewd behavior there.  All I saw was a few gay couples holding hands.  I see no reason why it would have been any different had I been working at Disneyland, esepically the part about straight people and children seeing it.  It's not really a Gay Day if you're going to have straight couples there as well.

 

And the 3 parent birth certificate had nothing to do with bisexuals marrying whoever they want, obviously.  Here's the actual story.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/florida-judge-approves-birth-certificate-listing-three-parents-233555185.html

 

My advice to you would be to stop reading whatever far-right Chirstian rag you've been viewing and actually start thinking for yourself.  You are listening to extremely homophobic media outlets that make Fox News look like Bravo.  Please don't let them win by inspiring false outrage in your heart.

 

      

 

If you're arguing that  the differing age of consent to marry and have sex seems inconsistent and illogical I would agree, but considering it has always been that way I don't see how your slippery-slope argument holds up.  Oh, and just because some people graduate early, graduate later, or don't graduate at all has nothing to do with the norm.  My assertation that 18 is the age of consent for sex (as well as most other adult behavior) because it's the typical age one gets a high school diploma still stands.