Gay Catholics Push for Church Weddings
- Thread starter GFR7
- Start date
Yet, somehow the opposite gender that you hold in disdain along with all those homosexuals makes you morally superior ... or just overly obsessed ... OR just cringe worthy.
HisServant
New member
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-wing_fascism
In the past yes... but I have found the left to be the most intolerant of all groups these days as they just cannot stomach that other people do not have their views and there for must be publicly shamed or sued into oblivion.
The thing about america is that all views are welcome.. enlightened and ignorant alike. It is this diversity that makes the very fabric of our society. It's unfortunate that the left feels the must homogenize us all these days.
HisServant
New member
https://ronconte.wordpress.com/2011...ation-of-catholics-who-obtain-a-gay-marriage/
Their membership has already been revoked based on heresy... they cannot receive any sacraments. (marriage being one of them).
Do gay couples get revoked in catholic churches?
HisServant
New member
They can attend... they are just excommunicated and cannot participate in any sacraments (like communion, marriage, etc.)
GFR7
New member
Excuse me?
Jose Fly
New member
Exactly. If what you say is true, it's been settled within the church. So I don't understand what the big deal is.
HisServant
New member
Some people just cannot stomach that people do not approve of their lifestyle... so they must use whatever means they can to change your mind.
Quetzal
New member
Wrong, they are tolerated at best. They are open to criticism, critique, and ridicule. No view, including yours and mine, is safe from that. Calling me a fascist over that is juvenile.
Quetzal
New member
And yet you do not see the irony that many conservatives are doing the exact same thing.
HisServant
New member
Some do, but not me... Do what you want, but don't force your lifestyle on others.
And no, your position is not superior... its idiotic.... and you are free to be an idiot if you chose. Just don't force me to have to hire you.
Quetzal
New member
How is my position idiotic? You know what my position is, right? I believe homosexuals should be able to obtain legal marriage in the same way a heterosexual couple can. How is that idiotic?
HisServant
New member
For a lot of reasons..
It was done too fast and the costs of all the ramifications was not weighed. The SCOTUS would have done this country better if they had instituted a phased in approach.
Heck, a couple states are unable to enter license into their computer systems because they were hard coded for M/F and wont accept M/M or F/F and are issuing license by hand for now.... how long these manual licenses take to get in the system is an unknown.
There is a huge amount of work that needs to be done on the family law side of things also.
This country is designed to change slowly so that the highs and lows of public opinion are moderated... I'm afraid that gay marriage was pushed through so fast its not going to last.
Quetzal
New member
My view does not incorporate logistics, how could it? It is simply a concept, an idea. It is abstract. If you think it was pushed through too fast, your problem doesn't seem to be with the idea, just the way it was handled. Holding me accountable for that is not fair because I didn't have anything to do with those specific logistics.
Gay Catholics Push for Church Weddings
The Catholic Church in America may have manoeuvered itself into a corner based on Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), is a landmark civil rights decision of the United States Supreme Court, which invalidated laws prohibiting interracial marriage.
Prior to that decision in 1967, interracial marriage had been declared illegal in 16 southern states and presumably the Catholic Church honored those state laws by refusing to marry interracial couples.
Fast-forward to the Supreme Court's recent Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) decision that legalized "gay marriage."
In arriving at their decision, the Court made almost a dozen references back to "Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967)" and
concluded that both should be decided on the Equal Protection Clause and the Due Process Clause of the Constitution.
Given that the Catholic Church has already set the precedent of a longstanding unwilling to conduct interracial marriages wherever they were prohibited by secular (not Church) law , how can they now refuse "gay" marriage that is the law now permits?
The Catholic Church in America may have manoeuvered itself into a corner based on Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967), is a landmark civil rights decision of the United States Supreme Court, which invalidated laws prohibiting interracial marriage.
Prior to that decision in 1967, interracial marriage had been declared illegal in 16 southern states and presumably the Catholic Church honored those state laws by refusing to marry interracial couples.
Fast-forward to the Supreme Court's recent Obergefell v. Hodges (2015) decision that legalized "gay marriage."
In arriving at their decision, the Court made almost a dozen references back to "Loving v. Virginia, 388 U.S. 1 (1967)" and
concluded that both should be decided on the Equal Protection Clause and the Due Process Clause of the Constitution.
Given that the Catholic Church has already set the precedent of a longstanding unwilling to conduct interracial marriages wherever they were prohibited by secular (not Church) law , how can they now refuse "gay" marriage that is the law now permits?
glassjester
Well-known member
This is a non-issue.
The Church will marry a couple as long as one of the spouses-to-be is a practicing Catholic in good standing with the Church.
In the case of a homosexual couple, neither one of them is a practicing Catholic in good standing with the Church.
So, no Catholic wedding. Boo hoo.
What confuses me is - if they do not believe Catholic doctrine, why's a wedding in a Catholic church even desirable to them?
GFR7
New member
They pursue Catholic church weddings for one reason:
To prove they can. They always have to win, and won't take 'no' for an answer, no matter that it makes no sense.
TracerBullet
New member
To fast? Gays have been fighting for equality for decades.
Just how many years of being denied rights and legal protections should gays, or any minority for that matter, have to live as second class citizens?
Between emancipation and the civil rights law African Americans had a century of being second class citizens. Did they move to fast?
What costs? Can you give an actual example?
What about the personal and social costs of ongoing discrimination?
And just how long, in your opinion should people be denied rights and legal protections?