They don’t think it matters.
But in fact, same sex couples are incapable of engaging in marital intercourse.
The liberal strategy is if reality doesn’t agree with their agenda then redefine reality. They will probably try to redefine “marital intercourse” to fit with their agenda. It’s like they think this world is just one big illusion or that they are dreaming all of this and can make it all up as they go. I think they have adopted the philosophy that rejects the concept that reality is something external to one’s self.
You don’t want to know. :nope:
This is a concept that very much invites, sustains and absolutely depends upon wishful thinking. Something will occur simply because it is desired to occur. In fact, it must occur, or something is truly wrong with those who think it. Reality is suppressed, as it is unpalatable.
Bishop Sheen gave a talk once in which he asked, “Where are your sox?” Western minds turn to reality and conclude that sox are in the dresser drawer. Leftist respond by saying, “Wherever the party says they are!”
Political correctness: the rejection of truth that conflicts with ideology. It requires that we pretend not to know things that we do.
Which is never the case.
They redefine what “sex” is to fit their vision of what they think it should be. Then again, they’ve been doing that since their Glorious Sexual Revolution. And we see how good that’s been for us…
…[forty-three] years have passed since the infamous Stonewall riots of 1969 in New York, the Lexington and Concord of the gay liberation movement. During that time, homosexuals have carved out for themselves public spaces in every major American city, and many of the minor ones as well. They have had the chance to create whatever they wanted in those spaces, and what have they created? New spaces for locating sexual partners.
“The Truth About the Homosexual Rights Movement”
By Ronald G. Lee
New Oxford Review
That’s why we get statements like, “What’s true for you is not necessarily true for me.” AKA, relativism.
Why would they even care about this?
I am sure the google would turn up quite a few results if searched about how one would consummate a gay marriage. I wouldn’t suggest doing the search though.
Only marriages can be consummated.
You cannot be a practicing Catholic and be gay… those are the facts. Pure and simple, so can gays marry in other faiths yes. But to be Catholic you cannot. My question is what about two elderly persons, she is past menopause is the marriage ever legal in the Church? Or say she is unable to bare children is the marriage legal?
The argument I have heard for this is that technically sex with a women after menopause is still “open to life.” Even though that is not biologically correct, people will say that sarah proves it is possible. That is the argument I have heard.
Menopause is just as natural as the fact that not every act of marital intercourse between fertile hetero couples results in a pregnancy. God gives children when he wills it and puts a natural limit on it with menopause. When my wife reaches menopause and stops having children, our marriage will still be valid because we still have the unitive aspect of marriage (the penis is made for the vagina), and our bodies are still ordered to procreation even if the eggs have run out. With God all things are possible, except for God to contradict himself.
“Right to marry” will translate into the “right to children.” And not the right to adopt, but the right to have without adoption, just like fertile hetero couples. George Orwell could see where this is headed.
Leaving men without a role in society. mensnewsdaily.com/2007/09/25/gay-marriage-and-civil-unions-are-unconstitutional
Relativists reject morality until someone does something to offend them. Then all of a sudden they are talking about morality.
Relativists are hypocrites.