Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Note that here in the real world, empirical studies (I know - science - not much use for that in the fundiverse) have shown that children do as well in female/female and male/male households as they do in female/male households. This particular point was in contention in one case after another concerning same-sex marriage, and proponents were repeatedly able to show as much, while opponents were able to offer no rebuttal in the form of peer-reviewed studies.
Of course, I understand how badly some people want to try and put a respectable sheen on their anti-gay animus, dressing it up as 'concern for the children!'. But it's just lipstick on a pig.
Oh - and marriage has squat to do with procreation. It is neither necessary for it nor is procreation an inevitable result. And even if you could demonstrate that it was somehow better for children to be raised in the condition of a married opposite-sex couple, unless one was willing to ban marriage by impoverished folks (on the basis that it is better for children to be brought up out of poverty than within it) or to ban marriage by people with serious genetic defects that might be passed on the children one would be admitting that the professed 'concern for the children!' is just a flimsy excuse trotted out only when the subject of same-sex marriage arises, ne'er to be mentioned again in any other situation that might be less than ideal for raising children.
All these rhetorical contortions boil down to nothing more than "My ancient book says gays are bad, so I want to ostracize and marginalize them in every way possible!".
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
It's perfectly on topic, just a topic that makes you uncomfortable.
It isn't just "Ancient Books" that has writing that says that.
Just 25 years ago...the U.S. Government (that according to many on this forum is straight-up secular) put forth the Defense of Marriage Act that said marriage was to be only between one man & one woman.
I actually don't even believe that Governments should be involved in "marriage", in any way...but they are.
25 years isn't very ancient...and from a secular entity.
It isn't just Theologies taking these views.
It isn't just "Ancient Books" that has writing that says that.
Just 25 years ago...the U.S. Government (that according to many on this forum is straight-up secular) put forth the Defense of Marriage Act that said marriage was to be only between one man & one woman.
I actually don't even believe that Governments should be involved in "marriage", in any way...but they are.
25 years isn't very ancient...and from a secular entity.
It isn't just Theologies taking these views.
And, just to be clear, which I am sure you wanted to be, even if by accident you were not, on June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that the 14th Amendment requires all U.S. state laws to recognize same-sex marriages.
In other words, Section 2 of DOMA was superseded and unenforceable.
And, just to be clear, which I am sure you wanted to be, even if by accident you were not, on June 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Obergefell v. Hodges that the 14th Amendment requires all U.S. state laws to recognize same-sex marriages.
In other words, Section 2 of DOMA was superseded and unenforceable.
Yes! Thank you for highlighting that point.
I must modify my post, to note that.
In 1996...EVEN THOUGH IT VIOLATED THEIR CONSTITUTION...the secular U.S. Government wrote that "Marriage was only to be between one man and one woman". And made that a law!
The only thing one can reasonably conclude by that, is that it boiled down to nothing more than their declaration that "Gays are bad, so we want to ostracize and marginalize them in every way possible!".
Who needs 2000 year old Theological writings for that position...when the secular U.S. Government provided it just 25 years ago?!
The topic of this thread is what Pope Francis said.
Please don't condemn children for sexual orientation: Pope Francis
If you want to argue about what the Congresssaid, did, meant to do, wished they had done, regretted doing, etc., this probably isn't the best place to do it.
This is the Religion and Spirituality forum. Post accordingly.
As many know, I am not particularly enamored with religion, and in particular, the way the Catholic church has operated, especially with hiding their pedophile priests.
However, Pope Francis has been a bit of fresh air. It's impossible to turn around the Catholic church, and in particular the way the Vatican has been run, in a short period of time. Better to take small steps, small changes, ones that can be implemented and change attitudes.
The Pope coming out against the discrimination that children who are gay is one of those things. Will all Catholics follow? No. Of course not.
But enough will at least listen and think. And that is a start.
As can be seen by reading the comments...the Adherents have differing views about this.
In my view...I think it is a reasonable and pragmatic position the Pope is taking.
Many have all kind of sexual inclinations and "orientations"...and they will then desire to get with someone of the same gender (homosexuality), have sex with a lot of different people (promiscuity), have a relationship with more than one at the same time (polygamy), have sex outside of a relationship they committed to (adultery), to have sex as a vocation (prostitution), sex with themselves (masturbation), or some other proclivity, compulsion, or preference.
People can think what they want about any of this personally, for themselves...but none of this should be illegal or viewed with condemnation...as it is just the personal predilection, preferences, and desires of those involved.
I hope the Pope expands his position to include adults and the other sexual postures I noted...so everyone can enjoy their life sexually and relationshipwise.
I'm given to understand that the general teaching of the Catholic church is that BEING gay is not a sin and cannot be because it isn't chosen, but acting on it IS. This effectively means that all LGBTQ persons must be celibate as to their sexuality.
More nuanced version -- all sexual acts must be "open to procreation" and "express the symbolism of male/female complementarity". This latter is formally known as "complementarianism" and it is probably your deonomination's belief as well, though you likely apply it differently.
That's what it says in a Catholic catecism book that I have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
Let's give them credit, though. There are no catholics anywhere that commit adultery.
Exactly, the moment someone commits something like adultery, the are basically evidencing that they stop being or never were Catholics. Heck, that's part of the 10 commandments. Catholics aren't the only ones that live according to those rules.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant
Or molest little boys, right?
Right, a person can't be Catholic and do such a thing.
Anyone can say anything, but actions speak louder than words. A real Catholic shows his or her devotion via his or her actions, not words.
It's kind of like love between a couple. Oh sure, they say that they love each other, but if it isn't backed by actions then was there true love between the two? Yeah, "I love you" and then proceed in your psychological abuse of your spouse or physical abuse of your kids.
That's what it says in a Catholic catecism book that I have.
Exactly, the moment someone commits something like adultery, the are basically evidencing that they stop being or never were Catholics. Heck, that's part of the 10 commandments. Catholics aren't the only ones that live according to those rules.
Right, a person can't be Catholic and do such a thing.
Anyone can say anything, but actions speak louder than words. A real Catholic shows his or her devotion via his or her actions, not words.
It's kind of like love between a couple. Oh sure, they say that they love each other, but if it isn't backed by actions then was there true love between the two? Yeah, "I love you" and then proceed in your psychological abuse of your spouse or physical abuse of your kids.
Leaving aside your last paragraph...I think you've taken the concept a bit too far. We all fail. All of us. There are no perfect people.
In my view, one of the failures of catholic doctrine is the whole concept of confession. The way that it is done actually -- for many people -- makes 'sinful' failure more likely. They commit a 'sin', go into a confession booth for a couple of minutes, say some mostly rote lines to another human being who supposedly doesn't know who you are (and don't take too long, cause there's a line of people waiting), the other human being makes some rather vague statements (since he doesn't really know much or even anything about you), he says some more rote words, you go out and maybe say 5 our fathers and 5 hail marys, and you're done. All forgiven. I know that theoretically that's not the way it's supposed to work, but it's the way it does work most of the time for most people. Been there, done that, watched other people do that, and then, particularly if it's a habitual problem, the person goes out for the next week, and the pattern repeats itself.
I don't even know what "a real catholic" is. Because if a real catholic never commits mortal or venial sins, then there are no real catholics.
It isn't just "Ancient Books" that has writing that says that.
Just 25 years ago...the U.S. Government (that according to many on this forum is straight-up secular) put forth the Defense of Marriage Act that said marriage was to be only between one man & one woman.
I actually don't even believe that Governments should be involved in "marriage", in any way...but they are.
25 years isn't very ancient...and from a secular entity.
It isn't just Theologies taking these views.
Marriage was actually created as 1 man, 1 woman, and it existed that way in this nation for 200+ years until it was changed.
Marriage was actually created as 1 man, 1 woman, and it existed that way in this nation for 200+ years until it was changed.
Slavery existed in this nation/colonies for 200+ years, too...until it was changed.
Same can be said for interracial marriage.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
