The Religious Liberty to Support Same Sex Marriage...

[sean michael]

You have a good spirit and a good brain truthseeker. Rare combination these days. Before long, it will get you flogged. You be ridiculed by the ridiculous. Debased by the base. There is no future in this country for good men. Hence, I a embrace idiotism and whistle the surf song

 

[sean michael]

I wanna agree with you tallguy, but failure to accept personal responsibility is the real problem here. The doctor who kills the baby is no less guilty. The only place I know of where abortion is forced is china. Nobody can kill their baby and then say, oh, really? I didn't have to kill my baby? I understand what you're saying though and my heart breaks for her and every person whose done something that can't be undone, its very painful

 

[Nietzscheiswrong]

What's the threat of homos getting married in civil marriages?

I don't get it.

MArriage is a human construct anyway. It existed before christianity and exists for people who aren't christian and don't see it as a "covenant" between God and the man + woman. Is only christian marriage a marriage? Nope.

 

[Tallguy88]

http://hopeafterabortion.com/

The Catholic Church has long recognized abortion's impact on women and their families. While law and society often pit the interests of a mother against those of her unborn child, the Church recognizes that their best interests are joined. What is best for the child is also best for the mother.

Project Rachel began over fifteen years ago as an outreach of the Catholic Church to women, men and families who have been affected by abortion. The Church is a place of healing. It speaks the truth about abortion to men and women contemplating this action. 'Don't do it! It is wrong and it will hurt you and the baby,' but it also speaks the full truth: 'If you have had an abortion, God's mercy is great enough to forgive that, too.' Jesus offers forgiveness and healing. He offers the hope and promise of resurrection and reunion with the child who is waiting for his parents in heaven.

People who call Project Rachel are offered referrals to professional counselors or to priests specially trained for spiritual guidance and the Sacrament of Reconciliation. But basically everyone in the Church is a part of Project Rachel. Everyone is a part of the healing ministry of Christ. You may know someone whom you think has had an abortion. You never accuse or confront. A simple word that will touch their hearts and release them from fear and isolation can begin the healing process.

 

[Tallguy88]

What's the threat of homos getting married in civil marriages?

I don't get it.

MArriage is a human construct anyway. It existed before christianity and exists for people who aren't christian and don't see it as a "covenant" between God and the man + woman. Is only christian marriage a marriage? Nope.

I would advise you to not use the phrase "homos". It is offensive and could be considered a violation of forum rules against flaming and discrimination.

 

[Nietzscheiswrong]

I would advise you to not use the phrase "homos". It is offensive and could be considered a violation of forum rules against flaming and discrimination.

ok thanks for the advice but isn't it short for homosexuals? There was no flaming nor malice intended.

 

[Tallguy88]

ok thanks for the advice but isn't it short for homosexuals? There was no flaming nor malice intended.

I understand. But using it in such a way is unnecessarily offensive. It demeans the dignity of the person and puts them on the defensive in such a way as to be detrimental to your own argument.

 

[sean michael]

Gotta love political correctness. It makes soooooo much sense

 

[Tallguy88]

Gotta love political correctness. It makes soooooo much sense

So you support using offensive slurs to prove your point?

 

[sean michael]

I think you have to go out of your way to be offended by the term homo. Its absolutely idiotic. Its like, lets distract from your really good point to call you a hater because look, you just called me purple instead of violet.

 

[Tallguy88]

I think you have to go out of your way to be offended by the term homo. Its absolutely idiotic. Its like, lets distract from your really good point to call you a hater because look, you just called me purple instead of violet.

The problem is that that word attacks the person. As Catholics, we believe that it is the act, not the inclination that is sinful. As such, an attack against a person because of their orientation, which they cannot help, is wrong. We can, and should call homosexual acts sinful, but should not attack the person in the process. Such could harden their hearts and drive them further away from the love of Christ.

 

[Michie]

I think you have to go out of your way to be offended by the term homo. Its absolutely idiotic. Its like, lets distract from your really good point to call you a hater because look, you just called me purple instead of violet.

*yawn* Yeah so lets argue about that now.

 

[sean michael]

The problem is that that word attacks the person. As Catholics, we believe that it is the act, not the inclination that is sinful. As such, an attack against a person because of their orientation, which they cannot help, is wrong. We can, and should call homosexual acts sinful, but should not attack the person in the process. Such could harden their hearts and drive them further away from the love of Christ.

Ahhh gotcha. Very good explanation. I guess I'm rough enough around the edges that I like to think if I were trying to insult you, you would really know it. I have gay friends, and I don't walk lightly around them. I call them what they are, and accept them for what they are, as they do me.

 

[sean michael]

*yawn* Yeah so lets argue about that now.

Is that a turtle wagging its tail? I must have that turtle

 

[truthseeker32]

...there exists evidence that trans-sexualism is the result of biological factors, not purely psychological ones. As such, I am not so quick to condemn those who feel the were truly born into the wrong sex. If they have the genitals of a male, but the brain of a female, what is their gender? What if they have male parts on the outside, and ovaries on the inside?

I acknowledge the struggle that such occurences present, and I would never condemn nor speak ill of someone who suffers from such a condition.

If someone is physically a man, but mentally a woman, for example, I would ask why their brain thinks it is a woman. If someone is at once both a fertile male and a fertile female, this would be a difficult issue to asses. I am not an expert in this area, but I would assume that in most cases when a person appears to have both genitals, one set is more fit for its purpose. In the end, however, it does not change the natural end of sexual reproduction, and the key question remains: Does the natural end or purpose of sex have any moral bearing?

It's all very interesting from an intellectual standpoint. And it helps me to see that homosexuals and transsexuals are not just degenerates trying to bring down society, but people with real problems that could potentially be "cured" with genetic therapy, if the technology advances to that point. Whether people would accept such treatment, is another matter, of course.

I agree that this issue needs to be handled with love and charity. You bring up the idea of such people being cured. We first have to assess whether there is anything to be cured.

 

[truthseeker32]

...common sense has been overridden by political correctness. And, no, nobody's common sense tells them its OK to kill babies.

What can we point to? What is the standard by which we can say to people "your opinion is wrong"? You say that nobody's common sense tells them that it is okay to kill babies, but there are actually many secular scholars that don't see anything wrong with it. In order to dialogue about the issue we must first come to a consensus about what the good is.

 

[Michie]

Is that a turtle wagging its tail? I must have that turtle

You cannot have my turtle!!!

 

[sean michael]

What can we point to? What is the standard by which we can say to people "your opinion is wrong"? You say that nobody's common sense tells them that it is okay to kill babies, but there are actually many secular scholars that don't see anything wrong with it. In order to dialogue about the issue we must first come to a consensus about what the good is.

I gotcha, but I disagree. My brain is not a democracy. I have, at the door of my debate room inside my mind, what I call the threshold of stupidity. If, for example, we do not agree that murder is wrong, you have not crossed the threshold of stupidity, and therefore are not in the debate room, capable of reasonably debating a simple subject

 

[sean michael]

You may call me self righteous, you may call me close minded, you may call me Tarzan of the jungle, but you can not debate me if you can not cross over the threshold of stupidity. Debating the stupid is fun but its not very spiritual.

 

[Michie]

You may call me self righteous, you may call me close minded, you may call me Tarzan of the jungle, but you can not debate me if you can not cross over the threshold of stupidity. Debating the stupid is fun but its not very spiritual.

I think you have stumbled upon the long sought after OBOB motto.