Gay Marriage (A Different Perspective)

jjdrury81 · #1 Apr 3, '09, 10:58 pm

I am a Catholic. And I believe that Gay Marriage, as a civil institution, should be legal in the United States of America.

It is abundantly clear that secular society has a view of marriage that is vastly different than the Church. God is not brought into many marriages. People marry and divorce at will. People carry infidelity in their minds and bodies.

Marriage, as a civil institution, is a contract. It is no different than a contract between a labor union and employer. In other words, it often holds absolutely no spiritual value. God is rarely present. God is not required to be present.

In this context, it is discriminatory to not allow homosexuals to take part in this institution.

I support the Churches teaching on homosexuality. Even more so, I support the Churches teaching on marriage.

However, if same sex couples want to have a civil marriage that is their right. The Church should not concern itself.

JPUSC · #2 Apr 4, '09, 12:42 am

Same sex attraction is a psychological problem and such a marriage would be damaging to the individuals in them.

They should remain friends, not lovers.

kesa82 · #3 Apr 4, '09, 1:47 am

I believe the secular law is not master to the canon law. No secular ruler is superior to the Pope. Not that you have any remotely legitimate secular rulers anyway, as you deny the fundamental divine right of kings.
You have had no end of mischief since you started this republican equivocation and quibble, nor will you ever. They played the correct tune at Yorktown, " The world turned upside down "

Scarlet2009 · #4 Apr 4, '09, 2:29 am

In England, gays are allowed to get married in a civil ceremony. However, I do not agree with this. I think we are encouraging people to think that its ok for man to marry man and woman to marry woman! It is NOT! We are not made that way, whatever your beliefs are!! Our sexual organs are clearly meant for man and woman to connect.
You wouldnt encourage someone to commit murder because they didnt believe in God and it would be discrimination if you said no to them.
Homosexuality is a psychological problem and should never ever be encouraged.
Thats my two cents anyway...

Steven John · #5 Apr 4, '09, 3:15 am

In the Bible it is clear God hates homosexuals.
Be clear though my understanding of the word hate in the bible means likes least.
So it would not mean he does not love them but clearly shows it is against His will.

The original poster makes a seemingly valid argument for civil unions from a contractual view.

I would question why a "Catholic" would promote or advocate that that is against Gods will even in the secular world.

In scripture we learn those that are not against the believers are for believers.

With this in mind i am left wondering is the original poster against me?

Jermosh · #6 Apr 4, '09, 4:47 am

Why are some immoral relationships given rights that other immoral relationships are not? God hates more then just homosexuality, in fact everyone on this forum is a sinner.

Either be fair and give no one any secular rights, or give them all the rights.

Brendan · #7 Apr 4, '09, 4:50 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjdrury81

Marriage, as a civil institution, is a contract. It is no different than a contract between a labor union and employer. In other words, it often holds absolutely no spiritual value. God is rarely present. God is not required to be present.

You have a correct understanding of civil law

Quote:

In this context, it is discriminatory to not allow homosexuals to take part in this institution.

This is where your logic fails.

First of all, the government has the right to set terms of entry onto legal contracts. You must be 18 etc...

It is non discriminatory if the same terms appply to everyone.

In the terms of civil marriage, the same terms of contract DO apply to everyone.

That a contract may be entered into by two human persons, of adult age, who mutually consent, who are not currently entered into a marriage contract, and who are of opposite sexes.

So these terms DO apply to homosexuals as equally as they apply to heterosexuals.

In fact, there is nothing that would prevent two homoexuals from entering into a civil marriage contract, as long as they met the same criteria my wife and I did, including the part about being of opposite sexes.

You correctly noted that civil marriage is simply a legal contract between two persons, and that God has no legal part in it.

What you also fail to recognize is that Love, or even a desire for a sexual relationship also has no bearing in a civil marital contract.

Yes, I entered into a civil marital contract with a woman that I loved (as well as a Sacramental Covenant), but 'love' has never been a requirement for a civil contract, it is not mentioned at all in civil marital law. So how can a homosexual be denied anything when it is not even part of what they are asking for ( a civil marital contract)

AKG · #8 Apr 4, '09, 5:12 am

The difficulty I have with this line of argumentation is that it sets up a false dichotomy between Church and society. In order to be effective, to be "salt and light" as described in the Gospels, the Church must not be marginalized from society. We must not yield to the temptation to set up numerous enclaves in society where "people of faith," are segregated from influence upon the public square. For example, establishing laws that provide for Moslems to practice Sharia Law as civil law, under which a woman may be dragged out stoned to death for infidelity, when the established civil law repudiates such forms of capital punishment.

Our commitment as Catholics to marriage as a Sacramental union between one man and one woman must be steadfast, or otherwise we fall headlong into the malaise of moral and social relativism.

Highwayhound · #9 Apr 4, '09, 5:59 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brendan

You have a correct understanding of civil law

This is where your logic fails.

First of all, the government has the right to set terms of entry onto legal contracts. You must be 18 etc...

It is non discriminatory if the same terms appply to everyone.

In the terms of civil marriage, the same terms of contract DO apply to everyone.

That a contract may be entered into by two human persons, of adult age, who mutually consent, who are not currently entered into a marriage contract, and who are of opposite sexes.

So these terms DO apply to homosexuals as equally as they apply to heterosexuals.

In fact, there is nothing that would prevent two homoexuals from entering into a civil marriage contract, as long as they met the same criteria my wife and I did, including the part about being of opposite sexes.

You correctly noted that civil marriage is simply a legal contract between two persons, and that God has no legal part in it.

What you also fail to recognize is that Love, or even a desire for a sexual relationship also has no bearing in a civil marital contract.

Yes, I entered into a civil marital contract with a woman that I loved (as well as a Sacramental Covenant), but 'love' has never been a requirement for a civil contract, it is not mentioned at all in civil marital law. So how can a homosexual be denied anything when it is not even part of what they are asking for ( a civil marital contract)

brandymmiller · #10 Apr 4, '09, 11:16 am

Aside from any religious argument, aside from any emotional argument, it is the natural facts which provide the clearest and strongest argument that valid marriage is between one man and one woman as that is how children are conceived and it is how they are best raised. Marriage is a universally recognized relationship which has existed throughout human history in every culture and as a part of every religion, and whose purpose has always been and continues to be to provide a stable, nurturing environment in which to raise children. Prior to the development of technologies which enabled the child to be conceived outside of the womb there was little confusion on what constituted a valid marriage, since all cultures recognized the fact that it required the union of man and woman to conceive a child. Therefore, marriage was universally recognized as rightfully taking place between men and women since no homosexual union however loving or caring was ever capable of producing children.

The simple fact of the matter is that homosexuals cannot have a valid marriage because their union is not capable of generating children. A man having relations with another man will not suddenly generate children. The instance of a pregnant "man" so touted on CNN was not, in fact, a man at all but a woman who had surgeries to change her appearance but had not completed those surgeries and so she still had a female reproductive system. A lesbian woman who chooses to be artificially inseminated still owes her motherhood to the contribution of a man, and not to her chosen partner. These are facts which are indisputable and cannot be ignored simply because the facts prove inconvenient to the way one might desire things to be.

The introduction of artificial technology allowing children to be conceived outside of the womb has created a tremendous amount of confusion in the minds of people. What was once obvious is no longer obvious, but it still holds true: all children are conceived through the union of one man to one woman. Even if human cloning should someday be permitted, further obscuring the facts, that clone is still ultimately the result of the pairing of one woman with one man.

**edwest2** · #11 Apr 4, '09, 11:48 am

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjdrury81

I am a Catholic. And I believe that Gay Marriage, as a civil institution, should be legal in the United States of America.

It is abundantly clear that secular society has a view of marriage that is vastly different than the Church. God is not brought into many marriages. People marry and divorce at will. People carry infidelity in their minds and bodies.

Marriage, as a civil institution, is a contract. It is no different than a contract between a labor union and employer. In other words, it often holds absolutely no spiritual value. God is rarely present. God is not required to be present.

In this context, it is discriminatory to not allow homosexuals to take part in this institution.

I support the Churches teaching on homosexuality. Even more so, I support the Churches teaching on marriage.

However, if same sex couples want to have a civil marriage that is their right. The Church should not concern itself.

You say you are Catholic but do you know the Church's clear teaching on this? Any mix and match group of people can and do live together now -- why do gay people need any sort of legal recognition?

Why do you mention a reversible trend regarding divorce as part of your argument? If you think people should form what you call contracts, then don't you think people should abide by them? Divorce today is part of the negative secularizing influences of the last 40 years. I watched faithful, committed Catholics grab onto No-Fault Divorce and easy abortion. That's a spiritual matter caused by the slow poisoning of hearts and minds in the Christian community.

Your statement that the Church should not concern itself has no weight or authority. Obedience to the well considered teachings of the Church is among your obligations as a Catholic. Healing the Body of Christ and convincing them to turn away from casual sex, casual abortion, and living like Agnostics should be among your goals as a part of that Body.

Peace,
Ed

**JimG** · #12 Apr 4, '09, 4:11 pm

It is impossible for homosexual couples to marry because they cannot engage in marital intercourse.

**fix** · #13 Apr 4, '09, 5:29 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by edwest2

You say you are Catholic but do you know the Church's clear teaching on this?

I was wondering that, too. We have a moral imperative to vote against such things.

jjdrury81 · #14 Apr 4, '09, 6:55 pm

I definitely see some of the arguments that were made in this thread against same sex marriage.

However, none of them relate to or should be binding in a civil marriage. One poster had questioned why I brought up divorce in the argument. It was not to posit the idea that divorce was in any way acceptable. Rather, this is the nature of civil marriage. It is a contract between two mutually consenting adults. It can be broken at any time and for. any reason. I can see know reason why civil society should not grant this contract to same sex couples the same as opposite sex couples.

Christian marriage and civil marriage are two vastly different things. I remember when my wife and I were sitting down and discussing getting married with our priest he told us just that. He told us that the civil part of marriage can be broken at will. But in the Church it is a blessed sacrament that can not be broken. Very different.

Newbie2 · #15 Apr 4, '09, 8:10 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjdrury81

I am a Catholic. And I believe that Gay Marriage, as a civil institution, should be legal in the United States of America.

It is abundantly clear that secular society has a view of marriage that is vastly different than the Church. God is not brought into many marriages. People marry and divorce at will. People carry infidelity in their minds and bodies.

Marriage, as a civil institution, is a contract. It is no different than a contract between a labor union and employer. In other words, it often holds absolutely no spiritual value. God is rarely present. God is not required to be present.

In this context, it is discriminatory to not allow homosexuals to take part in this institution.

I support the Churches teaching on homosexuality. Even more so, I support the Churches teaching on marriage.

However, if same sex couples want to have a civil marriage that is their right. The Church should not concern itself.

Supporting homosexual marriage is the moral equivalent of driving your alcoholic neighbor to the corner bar...supporting a near occasion of sin. This is not consistant with Catholic morality. I assume what you mean to say is that not allowing homosexuals to take part in marriage is unfair discrimination. Morality is all about making discriminating choices.

Look beyond your narrow view. Allowing homosexual marriage opens up a whole can of immoral worms...makes adoption by homosexual couples easier, makes "hate speech" out of of the Church's preaching against homosexuality, etc, etc. Every baby step in furthering immorality in our country and worldwide is a baby step toward the moral destruction of our world.