Well, what did they expect?

[Caedmon]

The Catholic Church will not condone homosexuality or polygamy sheltered within a "civil union."
Roma locuta est, causa finita est.

 

[Caedmon]

CCC 1645 "... Polygamy is contrary to conjugal love which is undivided and exclusive."

CCC 2387 "... polygamy is not in accord with the moral law. "[Conjugal] communion is radically contradicted by polygamy; this, in fact, directly negates the plan of God which was revealed from the beginning, because it is contrary to the equal personal dignity of men and women who in matrimony give themselves with a love that is total and therefore unique and exclusive."..."

CCC 2357 "... Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, 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."

 

[Maggie893]

When the APA makes statements it infiltrates to our legal systems quickly because defense lawyers are always looking for "expert" testimony that their clients are not guilty of crime. Once something has passed through the courts by an "expert" it becomes precedent and therefore slowly becomes the norm in similar cases.

The APA has made statements based on their "research" that indicate that child sexual abuse is only to be considered abuse if the child has a negative feeling about the encounter. If the child finds pleasure or a positive experience at that point it is not considered abuse.

The APA has also supported Same-Sex Marriage. It will take no time for that to penetrate our courts systems as well.

In light of the current findings, it is appropriate to reexamine the scientific validity of the construct of CSA as it has been generally conceptualized. In most studies examined in the current review, CSA was defined based on legal and moral, rather than empirical and phenomenological, criteria. This approach may form a defensible rationale for legal restrictions of these behaviors, but is inadequate and may be invalid in the context of scientific inquiry ( Okami, 1994 ). In science, abuse implies that particular actions or inactions of an intentional nature are likely to cause harm to an individual (cf. Kilpatrick, 1987 ; Money & Weinrich, 1983 ). Classifying a behavior as abuse simply because it is generally viewed as immoral or defined as illegal is problematic, because such a classification may obscure the true nature of the behavior and its actual causes and effects.

As discussed previously, abuse implies that harm is likely to result from a behavior. The results for SA male college students, using this scientific conceptualization of abuse, highlight the questionable validity of the construct CSA as defined and used in the studies examined in the current review. For these male college students, 37% viewed their CSA experiences as positive at the time they occurred; 42% viewed these experiences as positive when reflecting back on them; and in the two studies that inquired about positive self-perceived effects, 24% to 37% viewed their CSA experiences as having a positive influence on their current sex lives. Importantly, SA men across all levels of consent (i.e., both willing and unwanted experiences) did not differ from controls in current psychological adjustment, although SA men with unwanted experiences only did, implying that willingness was associated with no impairment to psychological adjustment. The positive reports of reactions and effects,along with normal adjustment for willing participants, are scientifically inconsistent with classifying these male students as having been abused. Their experiences were not associated with harm, and there appears to be no scientific reason to expect such an association (i.e., predicting psychologically harmful effects from events that produced positive reactions lacks face validity). On the other hand, a minority of SA men did report retrospectively recalled negative reactions, negative current reflections, and negative self-perceived effects; moreover, unwanted CSA was associated with adjustment problems. Assuming that negative reactions were associated with unwanted CSA, the term abuse may be scientifically valid for the latter students. Combining positive and negative responders into a single category of abuse may incorrectly suggest harm for the former and simultaneously dilute harm for the latter (Bauserman & Rind, 1997 ).

From http://www.ipce.info/library_3/rbt/metaana.htm

Prohibiting civil marriage for same-sex couples is discriminatory and unfairly denies such couples, their children and other members of their families the legal, financial and social advantages of civil marriage says the American Psychological Association’s (APA) Council of Representatives in a resolution adopted today. The APA also opposed discrimination against lesbian or gay parents adoption, child custody and visitation, foster care and reproductive health services.
Both policy positions were adopted at the recommendation of an APA Working Group on Same-Sex Families and Relationships. The Working Group, appointed by the APA Council of Representatives in February 2004, was charged with developing policy recommendations for APA that would guide psychologists in the current public debate over civil marriage for same-sex couples. The Working Group was directed further to base its policy recommendations on the research on same-sex relationships and families.

http://www.apa.org/releases/gaymarriage.html

 

[Wolseley]

No one is suggesting anything like this.

I would advise that they don't. A 7.62-mm hollow-point round with 122 grains at close range leaves a very large exit wound that's even more "open" than their perverted liberal minds.

 

[Wolseley]

I'm a little confused. I was posting in my post that there are child molesters from all different political spectrums; indeed, that children being married off to adults was a traditional practice, not a "liberal" one (and I included links)

Do you have any validated information that people who want to marry children off to adults are specifically Liberal minds?

I suspect it's probably safe to say that anyone who advocates any type of sexual encounter between children and adults is "liberal", insoafar as any type of traditional morality goes.

Erm...experts are people who are knowledgable in their fields of study and have learned and researched those fields. They are not "experts" that have gotten their degrees from the back of matchbooks. They are trained, educated researchers who come up with evidence that is reproducible. If you don't like it, then search for other reliable sources from experts. But that doesn't make experts "experts": that simply means that there is a diverse set of information regarding a given topic.

Yes, as we recall, it was the "experts" who told Cardinal Law in Boston that his homosexual priests were "cured" of their ephebophelic tendencies, and therefore they could be sent to any parish of his choosing, since they would henceforth never abuse adolescent boys again. So much for expertise.

It gives me the creeps to read posts like this, especially on a Christian site.

Does it? Guess what. Activity like that I linked to in the OP and the existance of organizations like NAMBLA gives me the creeps, too.

And being a Christian doesn't mean that you simply smile and accept whatever deviant behavior is presented to you as perfectly fine, because Christians, after all, are supposed to be "tolerant". True, Christ did not condemn the woman caught in adultery, but He also did not accept her activity, either; on the contrary, He told her to stop doing it: "Go, and sin no more". And He also never said that Christians should never defend themselves against the perversities of perverts; as I recall, He was the One Who said, "Anybody that doesn't have a sword had better sell his coat and buy one."

But I apologize if you got the creeps, higgs. I had no intention of upsetting you.

Let's hope that the ones who get the creeps are the NAMBLA types when they consider the inevitable repercussions which will result if they approach my children---or the children of many others like me---with ideas of furthering their deviant activities. I am combat trained on everything in an evolutionary scale of weapons from a Ka-Bar knife to a .50-caliber machine gun, and I have absolutely no scruples whatsoever about using any weapon at my command to protect my children from these types of people, by any means necessary.

 

[Maynard Keenan]

Me too... wait till awhile later when some will marry their farm animals or automobiles..



.

Except legal marriage is a contract. Only humans who are of sufficient mental capacity (not retarded or comatose) can enter a contract.


As for the three way marriage. I'd oppose it on economic/buerocratic grounds. It'd require too much in the way of changes in tax aw, too much of a drain on businesses that would be required to extend insurance to BOTH of a person's spouses, etc. etc. It just is not practical.

A lot of people on here seem to confuse the terms "legal" and "moral." When one poster said this group thing is different than with animals because it is consenting adults, he referred to the legality of a contract. The response, hoever, said that "well consent doesn't make it moral." I don't know if anyone here would argue that such a union is moral.

 

[Wolseley]

How so? Traditional morality has had girls being married off right after they had their first menses, if not earlier. I have provided links to this. 100 years ago it was "liberal" thinking to allow girls to grow up before they got married; 50 years ago it was "liberal" thinking that led to tough laws against the physical and sexual abuse against children.
http://www.iwhc.org/resources/childmarriagefacts.cfm

Once again, I am not talking about adolescents, I am talking about children---children below the age of 14, 15 years of age. The perverts in NAMBLA are not attracted to adolescents, they are attracted to children---little boys 6, 8, 10 years old.

Links? Homosexuality and pedophelia is not the same thing at all. http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_chil.htm
One is stricly an attraction to adults, the other, attraction to children.

I am perfectly aware of the distinction between ephebophilia and pedophilia. Cardinal Law's deviant priests were afflicted with homosexuality, which gave rise to ephebophilia---a taste for adolescent boys or young men---and not children, a fact which was deliberately ignored by the media, which favor homosexual deviancy. So to obfuscate the fact that the priests in question were homosexuals, they instead invented the term "pedophile priest", a misleading and inaccurate term which would shape the public's thinking that the priests were preying on children, not young men:

"Most of the mental health field is now drawing a distinction between pedophilia and ephebophilia. The overwhelming number of sexual abuse cases in the archdiocese were of the latter category with a priest targeting adolescent males, not prepubescent ones."
http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/stories2/050402_opinion.htm

The fact remains, and which was my point to begin with, was that Cardinal Law consulted "experts" which told him his priests were "cured" of their homosexual deviancy, which led in turn to the massive scandals of 2002 in the Boston Archdiocese:

"Perhaps the cardinal's greatest error was the acceptance of the counsel and recommendations of advisers and so-called experts in what are clearly inexact sciences."
http://www.boston.com/globe/spotlight/abuse/stories2/050402_opinion.htm

Now that we have disposed of the side issues, let's gather up all these straw men and have a hayride.

 

[Wolseley]

So what?

So, you don't understand the post, then?

 

[MrBean]

I think what sickens us the most is that this is a love marriage, not just a legal contract. For most traditional non-western culture this would not be unusual. You can look at Jacob and his wives. I think was gets to me the most is the fact that they think it can only work because the chicks are bisexual. And that just gives me bad pictures in my head!

Pax Christi

 

[sreno7]

I for one did not expect this...I truly am shocked, I didn't have a problem with civil unions as I don't hold non christians up to the same standards as christians. But while most western countries are trying to get rid of small polygamous sects Holland is reinventing it?

 

[amx]

We really need to nail down the definition of marriage here as one man and one woman and tell everyone that is looking for a more flexible option to move overseas.
Wolseley I feel as strongly as you do I pray for my future daughter in law all the time. I want for her and my son to make it to the altar. I want them to be pure and unblemished on their wedding day so they will bond well. I want marriage to mean something. Why aren't we helping deviants leave the country and maintaining our Christian traditions? I say, if the rest of the world wants to go the hell in a handbasket, let them. We should not let foreign countries inform our policies. This whole thing frightens me. If I didn't know God is in control and his return is imminent I would have to join the Amish.