Having the same argument over and over about gay marriage

I have a good friend, who is Catholic like me. Over some months, she has become in favor of gay marriage. Her reasons seem to be largely emotional - she saw a YouTube video about a gay man being denied inheritance and visitation to the funeral when his partner of several years died. All her other reasons are the same things you hear over and over - two adults doing nothing to hurt anyone, who are we to say what a marriage is, etc. She knows what the Church’s position is on this. When the ruling happened, our priest gave a homily telling the truth of the matter - she said she was so offended that she walked out. (I did not hear exactly what Fr. said at that particular homily because we attended different masses that week.)

My responses were:

  • Marriage is about unity and procreation; with a same-sex couple (SSC) there is no biological chance whatsoever for children.
  • For thousands of years marriage has been defined as between a man and woman, it is not wise to allow current pop culture to dictate morality.
  • The argument that two consenting adults “in love” is all it takes to make a marriage is flawed; what is a consenting father is in love with his consenting daughter, should they be allowed to marry?
  • Interracial marriage is completely different from SSM; the two are apples and oranges - you are still comparing a heterosexual marriage to a homosexual marriage.
  • Homosexual acts are explicitly condemned in the New Testament and Catechism; by making your own choice on the matter you are in effect starting your own religion, where you are replacing God’s Word with your own ideas.
  • Churches will be sued over this issue - it is inevitable. She had also not heard of the Sweetcakes lawsuit in Oregon.

After rehashing all of this as we had in the past, I finally said that I didn’t enjoy discussing this topic with her. We both get pretty heated and it has caused hurt feelings in the past. I told her that there was absolutely no changing my mind on the issue and that I doubted hers would change either (of course praying it does). She goaded me a bit, saying I couldn’t handle deep thinking, and liked to discuss issues only with people who agree with me. This is not true; I have been defending the Church’s teachings for years and would continue to, but I just feel that the methods employed are not fruitful in this situation. Maybe it’s selfish of me, but we went over for dinner and drinks and to let the kids play and I was in the mood for a relaxing evening. As I said, we have had this same argument many times.

So was I wrong in putting an end to it? I know that now is more important than ever to stand up and vocalize what we believe. I want to stress that I have no problem with that! I will always defend the Church loudly and boldly. In this situation though, it’s more like arguing for the sake of arguing - she is a lawyer and loves this stuff.

Thoughts? Also please pray for my friend and me!

Just always remember that God is Love. And if two people of the same sex are in Love…truly…It is as real as two heterosexual people in love…Love of this kind is naturally a very private thing between those who love each other. I have faith in you and your friend. None of us is without sin so if homosexuality is a sin then in all respect we can’t judge others by ourselves and must always look at the log in our own eye.

Yeahhhh, no. We judge actions daily. I believe that SS couples may love each other, however, I love plenty of people that I won’t marry. Maybe you should brush up on Catholic teaching before you post on a Catholic forum about moral theology.

OP, I would make this topic off limits, as well. There is no need to sound like a broken record, just pray for your friend. :hug1:

I would say set up boundaries where you don’t discuss this topic. She knows your stance on the subject and you know hers. If you keep arguing past each other it will not achieve anything. Just agree to disagree and move on and if she tries to goad you into a discussion just change the subject or leave.

Yes. I’ve had to do this with some people. Some are very pushy and they don’t realize how emotionally upsetting it is for me and how I deeply care about their souls and the souls of so many being led astray. It’s tough enough even setting the boundaries without being out and out rude. I’ve been practicing my calm “No comment” broken-record assertiveness response ever since Obergefell v. Hodges happened.

The above does not mean that I would shy away from a genuine heartfelt talk with anyone who is willing to be calm and reasonable and try to see where I’m coming from and why the Church teaches as it does, and give me a little bit of credit that I can up to a point empathize with their views. But a p----ng contest is a waste of time, IMO. At that point I feel it’s best to disengage, set the boundaries (and if they’re not respected, take a time out from that person), and do a lot of praying.

You say she knows the Church’s position on this. Jesus Christ and His Church, the Catholic Church are One and the Same. The Church’s position on this issue is derived from the teachings of Jesus.

You also…you are not defending the Church’s teachings. You are defending the teachings of Jesus

I have the same heated conversation with a family member years ago and it left us with a broken relationship which we have rekindled just a few days ago. She came to visit from out of State and it was a Sunday when she and her family arrive and we ended meeting at our church. Long story short, our priest homily was based on abortion and SSM.

Not all of us gays are for gay marriage either, but it does help us to feel accepted in a way that not having that option sort of burned a little. Still, I would recommend agreeing to disagree. Just smile at her whenever she brings up the topic and tell her you would like to plead for a postponement to the trial. Something light-hearted anyway just to remind her that you are not about to be caught in such an argument, but you still want to have fun with her. This is no longer about defending the Church because she already knows your position. The rest is just firecrackers!

Good luck :wink:

There is a huge difference between judging and discerning…

One thing I remind people when they bring up the interracial marriage argument:

the Bible nowhere prohibits marriage between people of different races or ethnicities.
In fact the Bible never talks about “race” only the human race. People are distinguished by being Greek, Roman, Hebrew, Ethiopian, Ect. skin color is never mentioned.
In Fact, Moses married an Ethiopian woman(cushite) and when Miriam and Aaron grumbled about it, God quickly put them in their place.

The only prohibition in inter-ethnic marriage is between Believers(people of Israel in the OT) and non-believers. Once someone was converted to Judaism or Christianity there was no problem. Think of Ruth the Moabitess who is the ancestor of our Lord.
Laws banning miscengenation are a fairly recent thing in human history and are definitely
man-made.
On the other hand homosexuality is spoken against in the Bible.
Of course homosexual people are created in the image of God and have human rights and dignity same as us and we are all sinners.
But marriage has been defined by God as one man and one woman.
Of course in a society that is increasingly non-Christian, quoting the Bible doesn’t go over anymore.
So I don’t know if we can even argue anymore.
Most people I know support the SCOTUS decision, unless they are conservative Christians.

If someone told me that I couldn’t handle deep thinking because I didn’t agree with them on a subject, I would be extremely offended and I would take my kids and leave.

I had the same discussion. If it is brought up again, I think I will just say, Who am I to re-define what God has already defined. Therefore, since He is the final word on the subject, there is no point in discussing it. Look what happened to Eve when she and the serpent had a discussion about whether God really meant what he said.

It will be hard to ever come to a truce with your friend unless she accepts that your disagreement is ALL about the definition of marriage. It’s not about limiting the rights of gay people or any other people.

Since 2004 in the UK, gay couples have been able to enter into a civil partnership if they wished, to make a public and legally-binding commitment to each other and to obtain the same rights in law as husbands and wives have always enjoyed (e.g., no inheritance tax after the death of one partner). Gay people and non-gay people campaigned for this and saw it as a righting of a wrong.

I was happy when that law was passed, it seemed fair and equitable. However, at the time, I really didn’t think that in 10 years we’d have moved so far and would now be talking about the definition of marriage. :shrug:

Thank you for your thoughtful responses! Some great ideas here. It was hurtful of her to say I couldn’t handle deep thinking, she says things like that sometimes and I’m sure I have as well. I love the ideas of saying to postpone the trial, and who am I to redefine what God has defined? Thank you again and I will be praying for you.

Unfortunately, here in the States it has been found that allowing civil partnerships does not go far enough - it must be marriage or nothing.

:thumbsup:

People in the church will tells us that homosexuality is no different than any other sin. Could have fooled me with how we talk about it.

May love each other? Homosexual persons who want to marry each other simply*** DO*** love each other. You may love people that you wouldn’t marry, but I do not at all believe this kind of love is the same two persons who want to share their lives together have.

If I see that “John” is a bad person, I am morally obligated to avoid him so as not to place myself in occasion of sin. How can I do this if I can’t judge “John”?

In my view, the media highlights emotion over reasonable arguments regarding this subject. Phrases and slogans about this issue are presented as facts. It all boils down to the Church is wrong. Why was the man denied an inheritance and why was he denied a visit to his partner’s funeral? No need to guess. Find out.

I think, based on the constant 24/7 message from the media that anyone who is against gay marriage, religious or not, are basing their position on emotion and beliefs, is too readily accepted and without proper critical thought. No, there are solid reasons why “gay marriage” cannot be on the same level as opposite sex marriage, but those arguments are usually hit by a barrage of emotional words and judgmental statements.

You absolutely did the right thing. Stand by the truth - always. And I’ll pray for you and your friend.

Peace,
Ed

Not to derail the thread, but add hoaxes to phrases and slogans. Before you find out “why” you first need to find out if it really happened:

– When the issue of homosexuals routinely being denied the right to visit their partners in hospitals was raised during debate over the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, the Family Research Council did an informal survey of nine hospitals in four states and the District of Columbia. None of the administrators surveyed could recall a single case in which a visitor was barred because of their [his] homosexuality, and they were incredulous that this would even be considered an issue.
Peter Sprigg, “What’s Wrong with Letting Same-Sex Couples Marry?” Family Research Council, In Focus: Issue No. 256.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.