Gay Marriage?

[kujo]

Hey guys. So, what's the big deal? I don't ask this because I agree/disagree with it, I just want to see what ya'll think about it. I know what the Church teaches, so I don't think it's necessary to go into that. I am asking what YOU, as a person, think about it.

Keep it holy!

[cmotherofpirl]

I think the same as the church thinks, I'm catholic.
Marriage is between one man and one woman. End of story.
Anything else is simply sex.

[jezic]

it violates the first action of God and the very foundation of Creation. God brought forth life, so should we (if he calls you to be married that is).

[OLAM Dad]

I'm with cmotherofpirl. In matters of faith and morals my thoughts, as a person, must comply with Holy Mother Church.

What do you think, Kujo?

[StMichael]

Men "marrying" men, women "marrying" women... what's next dog owners "marrying" their dogs?

There is no basis for this other than they lust against nature. No fruit can come from this.

Men "marrying" men, women "marrying" women... what's next dog owners "marrying" their dogs?

There is no basis for this other than they lust against nature. No fruit can come from this.

[Ash Wednesday]

I've lived around many different kinds of people from various walks of life -- aside from what the Church teaches, deep down I just don't think there can be any real substitute for what man yearns for: to be part of a traditional family consisting of a mother figure and a father figure. A great deal of depravity and violence, I think, can be traced back to a broken and unstable home with no clear moral structure -- so the emphasis on the traditional family as being the ideal rather than a relativist mindset that "one is just as good as the other" should be encouraged and protected.

Interestingly enough, the Dalai Lama has also spoken out about this same issue and in a lot of ways his views coincide with Church teaching on the relationship between procreation of man and woman, and natural law. This issue spans many religions and isn't just the big bad Church making it a "big deal"

Edited June 6, 2006 by Ash Wednesday

[ironmonk]

[quote name='kujo' post='998187' date='Jun 6 2006, 01:31 AM']
Hey guys. So, what's the big deal? I don't ask this because I agree/disagree with it, I just want to see what ya'll think about it. I know what the Church teaches, so I don't think it's necessary to go into that. I am asking what YOU, as a person, think about it.

Keep it holy!
[/quote]

Are you for it or are you trying to get people to actually think?

....

Nothing is holy about same sex marriage.

"What's the big deal?"... Why allow what has been wrong for over 5000 years to be ok?


"what you as a person think about it"... Huh? People can be wrong, the Church cannot.


If the destestable same sex marriage concept was allowed, then it would confuse children by lying to them that romantic same sex realtionships are acceptable. They are not. They breed disease, they are unnatural, they damage both the psyche and the body. The human body was not meant for same sex interaction.

Why not shoot heroin? Why not snort coke? Why not try smack? Why not kill babies? Why not sleep around? I mean, come one so what's the big deal?

The laws of God are set forth to protect us from harm, when we violate them, we suffer.

If there was not any pre-marital sex there would not be any STD's and HIV/AIDS would not exist... This is proof alone that God's laws should be followed.

Why are so many people involved with same sex relationships end up having hundreds if not thousands of partners over their lifetime? Because it is unholy and is not built on a foundation of Love with God. Love is a gift from God, God does not give the same kind of love that is between a man and woman to those of the same sex.

Common sense, same sex marriage is a horrible thing.

Edited June 6, 2006 by ironmonk

[missionarybelle]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='998204' date='Jun 6 2006, 04:57 AM']
I think the same as the church thinks, I'm catholic.
Marriage is between one man and one woman. End of story.
Anything else is simply sex.
[/quote]

amen

[kujo]

I am torn about the issue. I am a Catholic and I believe that marriage is a sacrament that is to be shared by a man and a woman.

However, some of my close friends are homosexuals and I can sort of understand their argument. Whether we like or not, these men and women are homosexuals and that will (most likely) never change. The way it is now, 2 men/women who have lived with each other for 30 years and who have not been recognized as "married" cannot even come to visit their "spouse" in the hospital because they are not considered "family." Whether or not you agree with their lifestyle, you have got to admit that that is wrong.

My feeling is that 90% of our population would be happy with some sort of compromise. If homosexuals want to have the secular benefits of marriage, I don't see what we can really say about that. Let them be "joined" at City Hall, or by a notary or whatever. But they must understand that there will never be a time when they can expect to be married in a Church. Our beliefs prohibit it and the government is obligated to respect that:

[quote]"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." -First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States[/quote]

As for the other 10% of our population (5% of the extreme left, 5% of the extreme right), they will never be satisfied.

It's a complicated issue for myself, and for many others. But I don't think it would be such a big deal if these people were given the legal-stuff that comes along with marriage. Call it a "civil union," or a "partnership"....call it whatever. As long as they realize that the spiritual aspects of marriage are not there.

[kujo]

[quote name='ironmonk' post='998342' date='Jun 6 2006, 10:52 AM']
Are you for it or are you trying to get people to actually think?

....

Nothing is holy about same sex marriage.

"What's the big deal?"... Why allow what has been wrong for over 5000 years to be ok?
"what you as a person think about it"... Huh? People can be wrong, the Church cannot.
If the destestable same sex marriage concept was allowed, then it would confuse children by lying to them that romantic same sex realtionships are acceptable. They are not. They breed disease, they are unnatural, they damage both the psyche and the body. The human body was not meant for same sex interaction.

Why not shoot heroin? Why not snort coke? Why not try smack? Why not kill babies? Why not sleep around? I mean, come one so what's the big deal?

The laws of God are set forth to protect us from harm, when we violate them, we suffer.

If there was not any pre-marital sex there would not be any STD's and HIV/AIDS would not exist... This is proof alone that God's laws should be followed.

Why are so many people involved with same sex relationships end up having hundreds if not thousands of partners over their lifetime? Because it is unholy and is not built on a foundation of Love with God. Love is a gift from God, God does not give the same kind of love that is between a man and woman to those of the same sex.

Common sense, same sex marriage is a horrible thing.
[/quote]

First off, I don't disagree with your main point; however, you made some pretty bigoted remarks that I'd like to seek clarification for:

1. You mentioned that same-sex relationships breed "disease." I was wondering what disease is transmitted through same-sex contact? And remember...HIV/AIDS is transmitted through the exchange of blood, semen, or vaginal-discharge. Furthermore, you are more likely to contract the disease through a blood-transfusion than through any form of sexual contact:

[quote]Estimated per act risk for acquisition of HIV by exposure route
Exposure Route Estimated infections per 10,000 exposures to an infected source
Blood Transfusion- 9,000
Childbirth- 2,500
Needle-sharing injection drug use- 67
Receptive anal intercourse- 50
Percutaneous needle stick- 30
Receptive penile-vaginal intercourse- 10
Insertive anal intercourse- 6.5
Insertive penile-vaginal intercourse- 5
Receptive oral intercourse- 1
Insertive oral intercourse- 0.5

~Wikipedia[/quote]

Saying that it is a "gay" disease is not only discriminatory and bigoted, but it's also plain wrong.

2. How did you make the jump from legalizing gay marriage to legalizing the use of narcotics and halucinogens to abortion and promiscuity? I don't see the correlation here.

3. You made the claim that "many people involved with same sex relationships....[have] hundreds, if not thousands of partners in their lifetime." Is this based on any real evidence or is just hyperbole? I think that SOME homosexuals engage in promiscuity, but so do SOME heterosexuals. Would it be fair for homosexuals so say the same thing about us?

[KatS]

[quote]what's next dog owners "marrying" their dogs?[/quote]

I once listened to a radio interview with a man who was trying to marry his dog. I don't even think the Unitarian Universalist Association would agree with that.

[Norseman82]

If I have to obey the rules, EVERYONE does.

[Excelsior1027]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='998204' date='Jun 6 2006, 06:57 AM']
I think the same as the church thinks, I'm catholic.
Marriage is between one man and one woman. End of story.
Anything else is simply sex.
[/quote]


[quote name='OLAM Dad' post='998277' date='Jun 6 2006, 09:52 AM']
I'm with cmotherofpirl. In matters of faith and morals my thoughts, as a person, must comply with Holy Mother Church.
[/quote]

^Took the words right out of my mouth.

[Lil Red]

[quote name='Ash Wednesday' post='998327' date='Jun 6 2006, 09:32 AM']I've lived around many different kinds of people from various walks of life -- aside from what the Church teaches, deep down I just don't think there can be any real substitute for what man yearns for: to be part of a traditional family consisting of a mother figure and a father figure. A great deal of depravity and violence, I think, can be traced back to a broken and unstable home with no clear moral structure -- so the emphasis on the traditional family as being the ideal rather than a relativist mindset that "one is just as good as the other" should be encouraged and protected.

Interestingly enough, the Dalai Lama has also spoken out about this same issue and in a lot of ways his views coincide with Church teaching on the relationship between procreation of man and woman, and natural law. This issue spans many religions and isn't just the big bad Church making it a "big deal" [/quote]very well said.

[Socrates]

[quote name='kujo' post='998187' date='Jun 5 2006, 11:31 PM']
Hey guys. So, what's the big deal? I don't ask this because I agree/disagree with it, I just want to see what ya'll think about it. I know what the Church teaches, so I don't think it's necessary to go into that. I am asking what YOU, as a person, think about it.

Keep it holy!
[/quote]
[url="http://www.phatmass.com/phorum/index.php?showtopic=41723"]Lengthy thread on this topic here.[/url]

And what "we as people" think about should be the same as what the Church teaches on this topic if we are Catholics. The Faith and Catholic morality should not be kept seperate from our personal or public lives.

[quote name='kujo' post='998363' date='Jun 6 2006, 09:08 AM']
I am torn about the issue. I am a Catholic and I believe that marriage is a sacrament that is to be shared by a man and a woman.

However, some of my close friends are homosexuals and I can sort of understand their argument. Whether we like or not, these men and women are homosexuals and that will (most likely) never change. The way it is now, 2 men/women who have lived with each other for 30 years and who have not been recognized as "married" cannot even come to visit their "spouse" in the hospital because they are not considered "family." Whether or not you agree with their lifestyle, you have got to admit that that is wrong.

My feeling is that 90% of our population would be happy with some sort of compromise. If homosexuals want to have the secular benefits of marriage, I don't see what we can really say about that. Let them be "joined" at City Hall, or by a notary or whatever. But they must understand that there will never be a time when they can expect to be married in a Church. Our beliefs prohibit it and the government is obligated to respect that:
As for the other 10% of our population (5% of the extreme left, 5% of the extreme right), they will never be satisfied.

It's a complicated issue for myself, and for many others. But I don't think it would be such a big deal if these people were given the legal-stuff that comes along with marriage. Call it a "civil union," or a "partnership"....call it whatever. As long as they realize that the spiritual aspects of marriage are not there.
[/quote]
We should not give legal sanctions and benefits to sin and perversion.
Here's what the Pope Benedict XVI recently said on this issue:
[quote]Here, he listed a number of principles for which Catholics must continue to fight. Namely, these are: "Protection of life in all its stages, from the first moment of conception until natural death; [b]recognition and promotion of the natural structure of the family, as a union between a man and a woman based on marriage, and its defense from attempts to make it juridically equivalent to radically different forms of union which in reality harm it and contribute to its destabilization, obscuring its particular character and its irreplaceable social role[/b]; and the protection of the right of parents to educate their children.”[/quote]

And why should people receive benefits for being in a sodomistic same-sex "relationship" that single people do not receive? Sodomy is not a moral nor social good, and should not be rewarded by the state.

Edited June 6, 2006 by Socrates