Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
fatboyluis

Same Sex Marriage

Recommended Posts

fatboyluis
well basically i know that same sex marriage is not right and shouldn't be allowed to b legal, but ive been having trouble in explaining why its wrong. ppl keep saying "its their choice, why not give them the right of marriage?"
some help pls! :idontknow:

how should i explain to some of the ppl that i work with how wrong it is?

thanks and may God Bless you all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
journeyman
some of the church scholars can provide chapter and verse (and it's probably in other debate threads) . . . but one basic principle is that marriage is a sacrament intended to encourage the creation of life . . . the parties should be open to the creation of life . . . and two partners of the same gender are not going to be able to do that

for those who want to exercise their "choice" there is the concept of a civil domestic partnership . . . a matter of contract . . . .rather than a marrige

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Paphnutius
Well as someone else said, "What is the function of the sex organs?"

The function of the sex organs is propagation of the human race, for conceiving children. Any other use than that is a disorder. Same sex couples cannot use the sex organs as they were intended so they must not use them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Church Punk
From Genesis -
In the begining God created them Man and Woman, and He saw that they were very good.

And further God says, be fertile and multiply and subdue the Earth you will have dominion over all creation.

Same sex couples frustrate the very first commandment God ever gave to human beings! How can they be fertile and multiply with another of the same sex? Thus it is against the will of God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
she_who_is_not
I kind of think that for state and legal purposes there should just be one kind of domestic partnership/civil union and marriage should be a religious distinction. I say this for a few reasons.
1. Marriage as a legal contract and marriage as a sacrament are very different things. The state takes marriage a lot less seriously that the Church and providing seperation between the two may require people to take Marriage (as a sacrament more seriously. For example it is more difficult to recieve an annulment from the Church than to get a divorce. Many protestant denominations also have some sort of procedure that closely examines the reasons of the previous marriages failure before either party can remarry. Most faith communities also require couples to do some kind of counseling with a clergy member before marriage. I also think that this kind of distinction would give elevate the state of marriage among the general public. Give it a sort of mystique. Married people would also have a civil union. I had a friend who sort of did something like this. She and her husband were married in a civil ceremony and later had there marriage blessed and recognized in a ceremony by an Anglican priest.

2. Everyone could have equal legal status in relationships.

3. There are many heterosexual couples who do not believe in marriage. More and more people are having children out of wedlock and civil unions might give families more of a legal cushion in dealing with the world.

Of course, many people will disagree on this. I really think that it is important that everyone in this country start taking marriage more seriously. This is kind of a personal issue for me right now, my sister is getting divorced and remarried almost simultaneously and I am trying to be supportive and loving about it. But, I just don't approve!
Peace,
Amanda

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
cappie
Bishops' statement on civil partnerships

Following the news that same-sex partnerships can now be made legally binding in the UK, Archbishop Peter Smith issued the following statement yesterday, on behalf of the Bishops' Conference of England and Wales.

The introduction of civil partnerships as a legal institution is bound to have a significant and lasting cultural and social impact. The government has effectively established same-sex marriage in all but name. As a result, there is a real danger that the deeply rooted understanding of marriage as a permanent and exclusive relationship between a woman and a man, and as the best context for raising children, will be eroded.

What the government needs to do in terms of public policy is support and promote marriage rather than undermine it. Civil partnership is not based on natural complementarity of male and female and the natural purpose of sexual union cannot be achieved by same sex partnerships, nor can a same sex couple co-operate with God to create new life. For centuries, the legal recognition of marriage, including the benefits associated with it, reflected not only the personal commitment of the couple but also about the social commitment that husband and wife make to the wellbeing of society through the procreation and education of children.

As the Catholic bishops in England and Wales demonstrated in our series of diocesan conferences we are strongly committed to upholding the unique status and meaning of marriage and its importance for the well-being of society, as was evident in our Listening 2004 initiative on marriage and family life.

[b]Lifelong marriage between a man and a woman continues to represent an unchanging ideal, and a vital anchor for a rapidly changing world. Marriage is recognised to be the most stable and loving context for raising children. For these reasons, it has had and should continue to have a special position in our social and legislative frameworks. Its value to society should be promoted and never diminished. [/b]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
journeyman
[quote name='she_who_is_not' date='Dec 25 2005, 07:40 PM']

1. Marriage as a legal contract and marriage as a sacrament are very different things. The state takes marriage a lot less seriously that the Church and providing seperation between the two may require people to take Marriage (as a sacrament more seriously. For example it is more difficult to recieve an annulment from the Church than to get a divorce. Many protestant denominations also have some sort of procedure that closely examines the reasons of the previous marriages failure before either party can remarry. Most faith communities also require couples to do some kind of counseling with a clergy member before marriage. I also think that this kind of distinction would give elevate the state of marriage among the general public. Give it a sort of mystique. Married people would also have a civil union. I had a friend who sort of did something like this. She and her husband were married in a civil ceremony and later had there marriage blessed and recognized in a ceremony by an Anglican priest.

2. Everyone could have equal legal status in relationships.

<snip>
Peace,
Amanda
[right][snapback]836035[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

The State used to take marriage very seriously indeed - because marriage produced those who would succeed their parents in the fealty owed the king - the marriage relationship governed the devolution of property - today, marriage produces new generations of taxpayers and contributors to the social security program.

Competing legal status ? X is married to Y. They have 3 children, A, B & C. X and Y divorce when X decides to come out of the closet. X then "marries" Z in a domestic partnership arrangement. and just to bring this to a quick end, dies of AIDS.

What are the rights of the children of a failed heterosexual marriage with the "spousal" rights of the homosexual partner of the deceased father . . . if at law, a "partner" has the same rights as a "spouse" . . . will the state want to make sure the children are adequately provided for . . . or follow the current trend that the surviving spouse is first in priority? . . . .surviving spouses/partners may find their rights diminished . . . or children may find theirs removed.

Which is the proper course for the state?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
son_of_angels
This is why the notion of separation of church and state is ridiculous, they are too co-dependent to have an honest relationship that doesn't overlap in cases like this. Separation between the two oftentimes ends up causing people to have some notion of their separation in society itself, which is where the function of marriage lies.

Marriage, for example, has political effects and ecclesial effects. Which one trumps the other? Personally, I feel the solution to all this is to relegate the joining of spouses to a set of ecclesiastical courts, who regulate all aspects of the marital contracts, and, by the characteristic of the contract, settle all suits relating to divorce etc. by their respective communities. Having a structure capable of enforcing their particular contracts should be a requirement for having a religion authorized to perform wedding ceremonies. On the other hand, the state should say specifically that a marriage contract is one in which a male and a female agree to the joint sharing of property, and to the common procreation of children. This just follows from reason.

From another standpoint, there exists no "right to marriage" and marriage is neither a natural right, because it depends on the will of another person. That would be like saying that one "has a right to be heard." No, one has a right to speak, not to be heard. Hence, no one has the "right" to form a contract with someone (marriage) in a manner other than that prescribed by law, which is the case in both the Church and the State. Profess your love all you want, just don't assume you have the right to marry/have sex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
franciscanheart
Same-Sex Relations and Marriage

From the Catholic Catechism..
Chastity and Homosexuality
2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of great deprevity, tradition has always declared that "homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered." They are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.

The Old Testament
Genesis 1:27
27 God created man in His image; in the divine image he created him; male and female he created them.

Genesis 1:28
28 God blessed them saying, "Be fertile and mulitply; fill the earth and subdue it. Have dominion over the fish of the sea, the birds of the air, and all the living things that move on the earth."

God created man and woman with the intent of procreation. Procreation is not possible in same-sex unions/relations.


Genesis 2:22-24
24 The Lord God then built up into a woman the rib that he had taken from the man. When He brought her to the man,
23 the man said:
"This one, at last, is bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
This one shall be called 'woman,'
for out of 'her man' this one has been taken.
24 That is why man leaves his father and mothers and clings to his wife, and the two of them become one body.

From the beginning the complementarity of man and woman has reflected God's inner unity and His creative power and Fatherhood, for each gender is designed specifically by the Father for the other. God created man and woman to become one flesh which is consummated in the act of marital love.


Genesis 19:24
24 at the same time the Lord rained down sulphurous fire on Sodom and Gomorrah

Leviticus 18:22, 29
22 You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; such a thing is abominable.
29 Everyone who does any of these abominations shall be cut off from among his people.

Leviticus 20:13
13 If a man lies with a male as with a woman, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.

The severity of this sin is apparent in the punishments that are said to follow such abominations.


The New Testament
Matthew 19:4-5
4 He said in reply, "Have you not read that from the beginning the creator 'made them male and female'
5 and said 'For this reason, a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'?"

Jesus speaks of the becoming of one flesh which ultimately reflects God's union with humanity through the Church. Homosexual unions are obviously a perversion of this divine truth.


Romans 1:26-27
[I]26 Therefore God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones
27 and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.

1 Corinthians 6:9-10
9 Do you not know that the unjust will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived; neither fornicators nor idolaters nor adulterers nor boy prostitutes nor practicing homosexuals
10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor robbers will inherit the kingdom of God.

1 Timothy 1:8-10
8 We know that the law is good, provided that one uses it as law,
9 with the understanding that law is meant not for a righteous person but for the lawless and unruly, the godless and sinful, the unholy and profane,, those who kill their fathers or mothers, murderers,
10 the unchaste, practicing homosexuals, kidnappers, liars, perjuers, and whatever else is opposed to sound teaching

Sodomites are called to chastity by God (as mentioned below). It must be made clear that homosexual inclinations and attractions are not sinful but rather the acting out upon those feelings that is then sinful. Those with homosexual desires can still live a life worthy of Christ by remaining chaste and pure as they abstain from acting out on their desires.


From the Catechism of the Catholic Church
2358 The number of men and women who have deepseated homosexual tendencies is not negligible. This inclination, which is objectively disordered, constitutes for most of them a trial. They must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfill God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition.

2359 Homosexual persons are called to chastity. By the virtues ofself-mastery that teach them inner freedom, at times by the support of disinterested friendship, by prayer and sacramental grace, they can and should gradually and resolutely approach Christian perfection.


1605 Holy Scripture affirms that man and woman were created for one another: "It is not good that the man should be alone." (Genesis 2:18) The woman, "flesh of his flesh," his equal, his nearest in all things, is given to him by God as a "helpmate"; she thus represents God from whom comes our help. "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and cleaves to his wife, and they become one flesh." The Lord himself shows that this signifies an unbreakable union of their two lives by recalling what the plan of the Creator had been "in the beginning"; "So they are no longer two, but one in flesh."

This says specifically man and woman together. This leaves no room for same-sex unions.


2360 Sexuality is ordered to the conjugal love of man and woman. In marriage the physical intimacy of the spouses becomes a sign and pledge of spiritual communion. Marriage bonds between baptized persons are sanctified by the sacrament.

Again there is not any room left for same-sex relations. It is between man and woman only.

On marriage:
1603 "The intimate community of life and love which constitutes the married state has been established by the Creator and endowed by him with its own proper laws. ... God himself is the author of marriage." The vocation to marriage is written in the very nature of man and woman as they came from the hand of the Creator. Marriage is not a purely human institution despite the many variations it may have undergone through the centuries in different cultures, social structures, and spiritual attitudes. These differences should not cause us to forget its common and permanent characteristics. Although the dignity of this institution is not transparent everywhere with the same clarity, some sense of the greatness of the matrimonial union exists in all cultures. "The well-being of the individual person and of both human and Christian society is closely bound up with the healthy state of conjugal and family life."


From Fifty Questions on the Natural Law
The essential nature of man is unalterable because it is a reflection of the unchanging divine essence. Saint Thomas [Aquinas] says that "all those things which man has a natural inclination are naturally aprehended by reason as being good, and sonsequently as objects of pursuit, and their contraries as evil, and objects of avoidance." The basic inclinations of man are five:

1. To seek the good, including his highest good, which is eternal happiness with God.

2. To preserve himself in existence.

3. To preserve the species - that is, to unite sexually.

4. To live in comminuty with other men.

5. To use his intellect and will - that is, to know the truth and to make his own decisions.

These inclinations are put into human nature by God to help man achieve his final end of eternal happiness. From these inclinations we apply the natural law by deduction: Good should be done; this action is good; this action therefore should be done. However, because of "concupiscence or some other passion, ... ever perversions ... or ... vicious customs and corrupt habits", people may come to the wrong conclusions in their understanding or application of the secondary principles of the natural law. For example, among some people, as Saint Thomas points out, homosexual activity is not considered sinful although it is specifically stigmatized by him as the "unnatural crime." The fact that people are in error in their perception of the natural law may reduce or eliminate their subjective culpability. But whether or not such people are culpable, some acts are always objectively wrong.


Pope John Paul II
Pope John Paul II says that the approval of gay marriages "degrade" the true sense of marriage between a man and a woman. John Paul said a family based on marriage between a man and a woman was a pillar of society that justly had rights and duties specific to it. He urges all public authorities, but particularly Catholic ones, to stop approving such laws, saying they should not contribute to legislation contrary to "the primary and essential norms that regulate moral life." Authorities must instead protect laws that favor the family "knowing that they promote a social development that is just, stable and promising," he said.
The Full Article


To close,
Galatians 6:7-8
7 Make no mistake: God is not mocked, for a person will reap only what he sows,
8 because the one who sows for his will reap corruption for the flesh, but the one who sows for the Spirit will reap eternal life from the Spirit.

original form found [url="http://phorum.phatmass.com/index.php?showtopic=19599"]here[/url]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  


It costs about $850 a year for Phatmass.com to survive–and we barely make it. If you’d like to help keep the Phorum alive, please consider a monthly gift.



×
×
  • Create New...