"What Is Wrong With Homosexual Marriage?" A Catholic article


#290

You either don’t understand what was said or (more likely as it’s hard to believe you can’t comprehend such a simple thing…)
you know your position is dead in the water and are squirming.
Here’s the exchange:

DAKOTA111
Thats not quite a fair summary of the issue, at least not mine.

Let me rephrase:
I am a gifted and experienced basketball player but havent risen through the usual clubs, schools or institutions and so am a nobody.
Why should I not even be investigated and judged when I apply, like all the other bluebloods, just because I have no apparent bona fides?
That I suggest is the issue.

GOOUT:
Analogy doesn’t work.
In your example, you are what you claim to be. , but you are discriminated against.

To go further, a Jewish person in Nazi Germany is objectively a human being, but is subject to the ““personal determinations”” of a select few that he is not a human being.
That is a heinous deception that denies common sense and self evident human nature.

In regards to this issue, the union of a gay couple is equated to that of a man and woman, when they are not the same thing.

These are such plainly obvious observations and concepts that it has to be pointed out:
the real issue we are facing in this culture is not the various sexual moral principles, it’s the loss of the ability to think coherently and reason from point A to B.


#291

It was the slow erosion of sexual morality (Hey, this is good or OK or we do it, why don’t you? etc.). That is why there is an STD epidemic going on right now. All that sex education talked about the mechanics but left out relationships. If anything, human beings need to realize they CAN control themselves. According to the CDC, the most heavily affected group is “men who have sex with men.” That’s their wording, not mine.


#292

So have another go explaining your basketball example if you really believe it well represents the position of those who disagree with you.

Was there a reason you couldnt respond to my actual point:

The point is why should nobody skillful parents not even be assessed simply because they are, in your view, in abnormal family situations…eg single, remarried, divorced, same sex etc etc.


#293

I did. Why does simple conversation prove difficult? That is really the core issue here, moral theology aside. Loss of the ability to reason. Voluntarism maybe.

You made an analogy that did not work, namely proposing a person with a set of attributes that qualifies that person for some recognition, yet the person was not recognized as such.

And I pointed out to you that your analogy doesn’t work, as the attributes composing gay union are not the same as those of the marriage of a man and woman. And so calling it the same doesn’t make it so. It’s just a bald assertion, or an act of willfullness without reason.

Your analogy doesn’t work.
What don’t you understand…


#294

IVF is a mockery, yes. The Catholic Church condemns it. Just as the Church would utterly condemn any unholy conception via homosexual activity, were such an abomination ever even possible.


#295

Can someone confirm that the catholic church dehumanizes people born through IVF in this way?


#296

Straw man.
And, the title of these forums is Catholic Answers.


#297

To summarize:
You originally posted this in response to Young Sheldon hypothesizing about a future where people would be born through two female parents (I’m still not sure how he’s getting the idea that maleness will “die out” in humans when it hasn’t in any other animal…):

To which I asked:

… wondering if you really meant that the people conceived in such a way would be “mockeries of God’s creation”

And you responded in the affirmative:

Which again dehumanizes people by saying they were born of an “unholy conception”.

I don’t see how this is a strawman.

I also realize that this is Catholic Answers, which is why I am asking if what you are saying is actually representative of Church teaching. It may well be but it is a quite radical teaching in my opinion, and I want to be sure. My church teaches that all people are creations of God, even those conceived through rape, so it is surprising.


#298

The original sin was man decided he/she would define what’s Good and Evil over God’s definition of Good and Evil. Man has never been good at defining Good and Evil in the history of this world. God never told any of use to be progressive with commandments or laws…‘man’ does! God’s has always wanted to be present with man once again after the exile of Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden. If you truly have faith and salvation you would know the answer to the question you’re asking. Perhaps you should focus on the question of salvation first.


#299

Yes and man has taken it upon himself to “improve” on God’s creation including procreation, gender, marriage and family.


#300

As far as Catholic teachings, please feel free to search those out for yourself. As far as “dehumanizing,” that’s your attack word, which I haven’t used. You may cease and desist now. Thank you.


#301

I’m pretty sure I’m allowed to ask honest questions on this forum.


#302

It doesn’t consider children born via IVF to be lesser in dignity than any other child.


#303

That is not true. There are a whole group of people who think the have a right to sex, even if they have to take it by force. In the past, many considered the right to rape a fringe benefit of being a soldier. If you start trying to dismantle the example by an appeal to “all reasonable people” you run afoul of the “No True Scotsman” fallacy.


#304

Who said it does?
Not to mention, IVF is not even remotely the subject of this thread. Feel free to start a new thread, though.:wink:


#305

I voted in favour of amending the Marriage Act in the Australian “plebescite” last year. My primary reason was that, as the Act is a piece of federal legislation, it was (and is) my view that the government should not legislate in such a way as may result in gay couples receiving a lower level of statutory recognition than straight couples.

That had nothing to do, in my mind, with the sacrament of Marriage as it is understood by the Church, which, in my opinion, is the exclusive province of the Church and not of the government. Indeed, I would argue that the statutory concept of “marriage”, which (in my country) may be dissolved without fault upon proof of 12 months separation, is qualitatively different from Marriage within the meaning of the gospels and as understood sacramentally within the Church.


#306

Well, the state can decide to legalize any union and designate it as marriage. Same sex ‘marriage’ is inherently non marital, but that does not prevent the government from declaring it a marriage. The state could, by the same token declare any number of other unions to be legal marriage: polygamy, polyandry, man-boy unions, unions of close relatives, the possibilities are endless. Of course, the concept of marriage itself would become even more meaningless, as it has already become.


#307

I’m wondering whether you consider a civil marriage celebrated under the Act (by an administratively delegated statutory official) to be “marital” in the sense in which you use that term? Isn’t that simply a statutory construct with the label “marriage” given to it by the legislation? Is it the “intimate community of life and love […] established by the Creator and endowed by Him with its own proper laws”? If not, should we as Christians oppose gay couples’ entitlement to share in the legislative benefits of such a scheme?

I really struggle with this because I count some gay men amongst my friends and while I can see that their sexuality is something over which they had no control, I really cannot find fault with the Church teaching that it is fundamentally disordered.

I think I came upon the statutory/Church distinction as a way out of the dilemma. I’m still not convinced I’m right about that, but I really do struggle with this, as I said.


#308

This is why I prefer the term “holy matrimony.” It emphasizes the Divine ordination and intention of marriage as between one biological man and one biological woman. And it draws a diametric contrast with the most unholy “marriage” of two people of the same sex.


#309

Why bring up polygamy? Surely, you’re not going to claim that polygamous marriages would not be real marriages? If that were true, that would mean that the marriages of Abraham, Jacob and many other Biblical patriarchs, as well as some Muslims aren’t real marriages.


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.