Seems that way. Apparently Catholics are just hypocrites out to deny others of their rights. I’m unable to beat any arguments on this one forum.
A hypocrites is someone who, when sins, states that their sin is okay and does not acknowledge their wrongdoing. A sinner who’s not a hypocrite is someone who sins but does acknowledge their wrongdoing (and repents) and continues to promote the Truth. A hypocrite says that birth control use is okay. A sinner repents, goes to confession, and lets everyone know that they were wrong in their actions of using birth control (not for medical reasons) and tell others why they were wrong.
I do not understand your post.
Catholics are hypocrites because YOU cannot beat any arguments on this forum?
But the title of your post is that is it IMPOSSIBLE to argue AGAINST same-sex marriage?
Perhaps it is because it’s so early in the morning here, but I don’t get it…how can it be impossible to argue anything at all? I can argue that my watch is a piece of chocolate cake if I want to - now, my argument may not be very successful and I may not convince anyone of my premise, but I am certainly able to argue the point.
And if you mean that, because the Church is made for sinners, we cannot argue against committing sins then that is a false premise. That would be the same as saying that someone who dyes their hair blonde cannot argue the genetic reality that some people are natural blondes.
Sorry, I guess I am just not getting the point of your post. Perhaps you can help me out?
I believe that Larowyn says that other people perceive us as hypocrites because we allow marriage for ourselves but deny it to others.
It is, indeed, very hard to argue against same sex marriage using Church teaching with those who do not believe Church teaching. The secular arguments against ssm aren’t really that compelling, frankly.
I think they should go ahead and be allowed to get married. But they need to give up on The Church sanctioning such marriages. It ain’t gonna happen. The Church doesn’t make laws according to popular vote. If you want same sex marriage to succeed, you are barking up the wrong tree to expect the Church to compromise herself. Stick to the legislative arena. If the reason they are looking for Church approval, is because they are looking for God’s approval, then I don’t know what to say. I don’t see how the Bible can be more clear about homosexual relationships. Can’t they read?
It should be impossible to argue FOR same-sex marriage. Maybe we are in the end times after all.
All of my arguments were countered by how bigoted and hateful the Church and anyone against it is. I can’t think of anything else to argue.
How about Natural Law or the obvious physical differences between men and women?
It is impossible to argue against “same sex marriage” because same sex marriage is an impossibility
Oh joy, a trolling thread. :rolleyes:
I find myself thinking the same way. Let them legislate and let the Church speak the truth she is destined to speak. But that leads me to censure protesters of same sex marriages, the ones who stand outside and blast gay people with their views. I know they are not necessarily Catholic but all Christians who follow the law of God should trust in it. Maybe I’m bordering on apathy. Because my mind goes to all those who keep vigil at abortion clinics and I know they have done some good persuading women to change their minds.
Even if you look at the concept biologically, homosexuality serves no purpose in nature, it is a defect. The biological argument is actually cruel in comparison to the Church’s teaching.
I think if you are not religious/faithful to God then it is hard to understand why same sex marriage is wrong for some people… :shrug:
Wait a minute, I think some of us are confused, maybe me included.
You are arguing FOR the Catholic Church and her stance AGAINST same sex marriage?
Please clarify, thanks
Argued that already. Response was that it didn’t matter what consenting adults did in private and that Natural Law is just an excuse used to control other people.
[quote=JimG]It is impossible to argue against “same sex marriage” because same sex marriage is an impossibility
They fail to see how.
[quote=Ted in Charlott]You are arguing FOR the Catholic Church and her stance AGAINST same sex marriage?
Yes, obviously. Why wouldn’t I?
I thought a hypocrite is someone who condemns others for something they are also guilty of. For example, if someone told everyone birth control was wrong while using it themselves they would be a hypocrite.
In any event, if you are not Catholic, why would you care what Catholic Marriage Sacrament Laws were? So if you are Catholic, or want to be, then the Laws do apply to you.
And if you are an actively practicing homosexual, why would you want to be Catholic anyway? I mean unless you know her to be the one true church. And if she is the one true church then she is the one set up by Christ. So it is Christ’s rules, not the RCC.
I mean to say your arguments are with God, not the RCC.
As for SSM, is it just for the financial reasons that gays want it? I mean (with all due respect and attempt to discuss in all respect) does it have anything to do with not wanted to live in adultry. Why would you want a marriage sacrament instead of just a license? I really am interested.
Is marriage a “right” or a “rite”? For the Catholic Church it is a “rite” and you must meet certain criteria. Not everyone is eligible. Just because someone was formerly married and can’t get married under the rules doesn’t make them the target of bigotry. The same with mariiage being between one man and one women. It is not bigotry, it is just a rule.
There was some confusion, just clearing it up. Thanks
They are arguing that the Church should not interfere with the same-sex agenda unless they decide to support same-sex marriage, not that the Church should marry gay couples.
If you think about it, that would make EVERYONE a hypocrite on some level (which to me, makes the word meaningless and pointless to use in an arguement). That is why I stated what it was, because every priest would be a hypocrite on some level (even if we don’t know a priest’s sins) same as the Pope. To me, that just doesn’t make sense because being a sinner does not automatically qualify a person as a hypocrite. Basically, your definition would require someone to be without any type of sin all of the time inorder to NOT be a hypocrite. I just had the same arguement with my cousin, which is why I have actually tried to put thought into this (my cousin sent an email to his friends as well as mine and our family stating that I was a perfect example of a religious hypocrite and proceeded to forward the email I sent to him about a political candidate that was not so nice about that candidate).