zunshynn Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 I need help explaining why gay marriage is not the same as impotent people being married. I tried to explain that technically if someone is impotent at the time of marriage then they aren't actually married because a marriage has to be consummated to be valid. But then I tried to explain that an impotent marriage is also not necessarily immoral because they aren't having sex. Anyway, it's not working. And he keeps saying that we have know natural way of knowing whether or not God calls people of the same sex to marriage... then I said that marriages have to be fruitful, and he was like, well who are you to say they aren't fruitful in other ways? Help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fides_et_Ratio Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 Impotency is a failure of nature to be the way it should be. (or to "work" the way it should...). Homosexual relationships are unnatural and anti-nature--they completely go against the dynamic of nature and the nature and meaning of sexual intercourse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MC IMaGiNaZUN Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 [quote name='Fides_et_Ratio' date='Mar 25 2006, 08:41 PM']Impotency is a failure of nature to be the way it should be. (or to "work" the way it should...). Homosexual relationships are unnatural and anti-nature--they completely go against the dynamic of nature and the nature and meaning of sexual intercourse. [right][snapback]922361[/snapback][/right] [/quote] I think homosexual relationships also are radically opposed to the supernatural spiritual dynamic of the complimentarity of the different sexes. (wait did i just make any sense) SHALOM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p0lar_bear Posted March 26, 2006 Share Posted March 26, 2006 [quote name='zunshynn' date='Mar 25 2006, 10:26 PM']I need help explaining why gay marriage is not the same as impotent people being married. I tried to explain that technically if someone is impotent at the time of marriage then they aren't actually married because a marriage has to be consummated to be valid. But then I tried to explain that an impotent marriage is also not necessarily immoral because they aren't having sex. Anyway, it's not working. And he keeps saying that we have know natural way of knowing whether or not God calls people of the same sex to marriage... then I said that marriages have to be fruitful, and he was like, well who are you to say they aren't fruitful in other ways? Help. [right][snapback]922341[/snapback][/right] [/quote] A couple of things...first, a marriage doesn't have to be consummated to be valid. It has to be consummated to be indissolvable, but it is valid as soon as the vows are given. Second, while someone who is permanently impotent cannot validly marry, someone who is permenantly infertile can. The ability to have children does not determine whether a marriage is valid, sacred, or indissolvable. I think it would be better to focus on the nature of human sexuality and the conjugal act rather than the ability to have children. Homosexual relationships are wrong because they are inherently disordered and contrary to the natures God has given us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatcatholic Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 what is the difference between impotent and infertile? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fides_et_Ratio Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 [quote name='phatcatholic' date='Mar 27 2006, 05:24 PM']what is the difference between impotent and infertile? [right][snapback]924073[/snapback][/right] [/quote] one who is impotent is unable to engage in intercourse entirely. one who is infertile, while he/she can engage in the act of intercourse, the act lacks the ability to be fruitful (for whatever reasons). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phatcatholic Posted March 27, 2006 Share Posted March 27, 2006 ohhhhhh, okay!! i've always wondered about that...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ziggamafu Posted March 28, 2006 Share Posted March 28, 2006 hmm...but wouldn't viagra eliminate the impotencey issue? does that mean that an impotent man is unable to marry or is gravely sinning by marrying? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fides_et_Ratio Posted March 29, 2006 Share Posted March 29, 2006 [quote name='Ziggamafu' date='Mar 28 2006, 09:20 AM']hmm...but wouldn't viagra eliminate the impotencey issue? does that mean that an impotent man is unable to marry or is gravely sinning by marrying? [right][snapback]924841[/snapback][/right] [/quote] Not necessarily. Some impotencies cannot be cured... I'm not positive, but I'm pretty sure that impotency (permanent impotency) excludes one from the married life... i.e., they are ineligible in the eyes of the Church (because they cannot engage in the marital act) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p0lar_bear Posted March 29, 2006 Share Posted March 29, 2006 Fides is right. Viagra and similar drugs only treat some types of impotency. And yes, permanent impotency is an impediment to marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cappie Posted March 29, 2006 Share Posted March 29, 2006 in regards to impotent people: From the Code of Canon Law; Can. 1084 §1 Antecedent and perpetual impotence to have sexual intercourse, whether on the part of the man or on that of the woman, whether absolute or relative, by its very nature invalidates marriage. §2 If the impediment of impotence is doubtful, whether the doubt be one of law or one of fact, the marriage is not to be prevented nor, while the doubt persists, is it to be declared null. Impotence invalidates a marrige only if it is antecedent, perpetual and certain. it is antecedent if the condition if present at the time of the marriage, it is perpetual if it cannot be cured, it is certain when it is not the subject of doubt. What is important is #2. Since there is a fundamental right to marry, the exercise of that right may not be impeded save only where there is established with certainty the extence of some condition, circumstance or situation which would render a person incapable of exercising it. In regards homosexual people....it's just a nonsense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prodigalson Posted March 29, 2006 Share Posted March 29, 2006 As is common with the homosexual agenda- this person is trying to mix apples and oranges as if they are the same fruit. Firstly, Impotence and Homosexuality are two entirely different things- impotency, the person has no choice, nature has made that person impotent. Homosexuality is not natural again I say homosexuality is NOT NATURAL. A person who is homosexual is not born that way, impossible! I would also bring up the fact that marriages primary purpose is education and procreation of children! Again, not possible with same sex union! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now