Are you in favor of Same Sex Marriage?

[ElCid]

Hmpz! If I were still available, then I would think of ElCid as a gallant knight of diversity. But I am already taken.

Unlike Islam, Christianity/Catholicism can exist apart from the state since we do not have 'Shariah' or religious law that is foisted on all adherents. The kingdom of the Lord is not of this world it is clear. As long as the state does not interfere with the affairs of religion then I don't see anything wrong - just a minor inconvenience. If the state makes same sex marriage legal it doesn't mean that I will marry another of the same sex. As long as they don't compel everyone to follow that law and as long as it remains a choice then I see no problem. However, the state can make anything legal but it can't make things moral by doing so.

[archnemeziz]

Unlike Islam, Christianity/Catholicism can exist apart from the state since we do not have 'Shariah' or religious law that is foisted on all adherents. The kingdom of the Lord is not of this world it is clear. As long as the state does not interfere with the affairs of religion then I don't see anything wrong - just a minor inconvenience. If the state makes same sex marriage legal it doesn't mean that I will marry another of the same sex. As long as they don't compel everyone to follow that law and as long as it remains a choice then I see no problem. However, the state can make anything legal but it can't make things moral by doing so.

Funny enough, the separation of the church and the state in Christian Europe did not occur until the 17th century. Medieval Europe did not have any separation of the church and the state: the monarchs ruled because of their divine right. The pope had the ultimate authority over the state and its crown (think about Henry VIII asking the pope to annul his marriage with Catherine - this is, in fact, an example of the non-separation of the state and the church). It wasn't until a philosopher named John Locke in the 17th century who basically introduced the idea of the separation of the church and the state. Otherwise, this was an inconceivable idea for many Western Christian states.

[tremble]

This is tough. I am against same sex marriage because that is what the Bible says. But i do recognize that not everyone subscribe to my faith and they should be given the right to follow their own beliefs just like what I am able to enjoy. Though I do not support the idea, I will be fine with it. As long as it is NOT REQUIRED!haha

[tonton]

This is tough. I am against same sex marriage because that is what the Bible says. But i do recognize that not everyone subscribe to my faith and they should be given the right to follow their own beliefs just like what I am able to enjoy. Though I do not support the idea, I will be fine with it. As long as it is NOT REQUIRED!haha

I like what you said. You are enlightened.

[Ferdinand]

There is separation of church and state.

Military chaplains are under contract to the United States of America and they can be ordered to uphold the constitution as they are sworn in.

As of today, there is no provision in the Obama care that the Catholic Church is exempt from providing contraceptives to their employees. This is why some Catholic institutions are suing the federal government. So where is the separation of Church and state there?

How about Catholic Captains and judges who are given power by the state to perform marriages?

[ElCid]

Military chaplains are under contract to the United States of America and they can be ordered to uphold the constitution as they are sworn in.

True but we can't violate our own consciences - the constitution also guarantees the freedom of conscience.

As of today, there is no provision in the Obama care that the Catholic Church is exempt from providing contraceptives to their employees. This is why some Catholic institutions are suing the federal government. So where is the separation of Church and state there?

Then the church is well within it's rights to fight the encroachment of the state upon it's own right - freedom of religion is also a constitutional right.

How about Catholic Captains and judges who are given power by the state to perform marriages?

They of course know what to do - the right thing and that is what the church teaches. Even it they performed such actions - those wouldn't be valid church sacrament since it is against the catholic faith.

[ElCid]

Funny enough, the separation of the church and the state in Christian Europe did not occur until the 17th century. Medieval Europe did not have any separation of the church and the state: the monarchs ruled because of their divine right. The pope had the ultimate authority over the state and its crown (think about Henry VIII asking the pope to annul his marriage with Catherine - this is, in fact, an example of the non-separation of the state and the church). It wasn't until a philosopher named John Locke in the 17th century who basically introduced the idea of the separation of the church and the state. Otherwise, this was an inconceivable idea for many Western Christian states.

You are partly right but not entirely. There was separation of church and state in the first early centuries in the history of the catholic faith. The state even persecuted it both Jewish and Roman. It wasn't until the Edict of Milan that catholicism was tolerated and later on became the dominant religion which was supported by the state. So the church can both exist either way: with the support of the state or without it.

[archnemeziz]

You are partly right but not entirely. There was separation of church and state in the first early centuries in the history of the catholic faith. The state even persecuted it both Jewish and Roman. It wasn't until the Edict of Milan that catholicism was tolerated and later on became the dominant religion which was supported by the state. So the church can both exist either way: with the support of the state or without it.

First early centuries in the history of the Catholic faith - when it existed in the Roman empire was heavily persecuted because they weren't willing to comply with traditional Roman religion (for almost 3 centuries). Prior to that, they were persecuted by the Jewish authorities because of their teachings. You're right in saying, "[t]here was separation of church and state in the first early centuries in the history of the catholic faith" because (Roman) Catholicism was not the official religion of the empire - not until 380 when the Edict of Thessalonica was proclaimed.

The Edict of Milan was issued as such after the Diocletian persecutions - to proclaim religious tolerance for all. The Edict was proclaimed to tolerate all religions - but you can't claim that there was a separation of church and the state in this particular period because the Roman Empire (under Constantine and Licinius) was considered neutral. Between the Edict of Milan (313) and the Edict of Thessalonica (380), the official religion was still paganism - with Constantine slowly beginning to favour Christianity.

I never said that any religion couldn't exist without the state (or Christianity, for that matter). I'm merely showing that, in your previous post, you were too easy to 'demonize' Islam as having no separation from the state when in fact, Christianity never reckoned about the separation of the state and religion (St. Augustine's City of God advocated for the unity of the Holy Roman Empire and the Catholic Church) until John Locke came about.

[Voku]

I have two points to raise about this topic:

First, Exercising and abusing the word "freedom" is considered a danger. Just imagine Killing someone because u like to do it that's freedom. That's why we should control using it. I am against this Horrible act because it violates the law of order. scientifically speaking we humans are created in order to reproduce. IF there are people will be married with the same sex it will result to a termination of a certain genes its like you ended the generation passed over to you. and you'll say adopt? adoption is like you are a tiger and you will get a lion. That's crazy. we Humans are here to breed.

Second, it is a violation of God's commandment
Leviticus 18:22, "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

Leviticus 20:13, "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

Deuteronomy 23:17, "There shall be no ***** of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel."

Romans 1:26-32, "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them."

1 Corinthians 6:9-11, "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God."

1 Timothy 1:9-10, "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;"

Same sex marriage is an abomination and i speak here in both Spiritual and Scientific aspects

[tonton]

I have two points to raise about this topic:

First, Exercising and abusing the word "freedom" is considered a danger. Just imagine Killing someone because u like to do it that's freedom. That's why we should control using it. I am against this Horrible act because it violates the law of order. scientifically speaking we humans are created in order to reproduce. IF there are people will be married with the same sex it will result to a termination of a certain genes its like you ended the generation passed over to you. and you'll say adopt? adoption is like you are a tiger and you will get a lion. That's crazy. we Humans are here to breed.

Second, it is a violation of God's commandment
Leviticus 18:22, "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

Leviticus 20:13, "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."

Deuteronomy 23:17, "There shall be no ***** of the daughters of Israel, nor a sodomite of the sons of Israel."

Romans 1:26-32, "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, Backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents, Without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful: Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them."

1 Corinthians 6:9-11, "Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God."

1 Timothy 1:9-10, "Knowing this, that the law is not made for a righteous man, but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and for sinners, for unholy and profane, for murderers of fathers and murderers of mothers, for manslayers, For whoremongers, for them that defile themselves with mankind, for menstealers, for liars, for perjured persons, and if there be any other thing that is contrary to sound doctrine;"

Same sex marriage is an abomination and i speak here in both Spiritual and Scientific aspects

You love quoting the bible, yet you people can't implement killing homosexuals.

[Ferdinand]

True but we can't violate our own consciences - the constitution also guarantees the freedom of conscience.

And this is where the problem arise. Military chaplains are commissioned officers sworn in to defend the constitution, making gay marriage a law without provisions will be in conflict with the first amendment.

Obama who was a constitutional law professor should know about it. Military chaplains (not just Catholic chaplains but all chaplains) were forbidden by the Office of the Chief of Chaplains to read the letter of the USCBC against the Obama care of providing contraceptives to their employees.. Most if not all Catholic Chaplains admitted disobeying the order. See the conflict here? Chaplains are being forced and ordered to disobey their conscience and their religious freedom!

Then the church is well within it's rights to fight the encroachment of the state upon it's own right - freedom of religion is also a constitutional right.

I agree, and the Obama administration is dividing this country by enforcing "Chinese style" government of regulating some aspects of the Church.

They of course know what to do - the right thing and that is what the church teaches. Even it they performed such actions - those wouldn't be valid church sacrament since it is against the catholic faith.

Again the Obama administration is making its own problem. Talk of gay marriage should be accompanied by provisions that will not violate the first amendment, they are just making a fool of this nation and dividing the people.

[archnemeziz]

I have two points to raise about this topic:

First, Exercising and abusing the word "freedom" is considered a danger. Just imagine Killing someone because u like to do it that's freedom. That's why we should control using it. I am against this Horrible act because it violates the law of order. scientifically speaking we humans are created in order to reproduce. IF there are people will be married with the same sex it will result to a termination of a certain genes its like you ended the generation passed over to you. and you'll say adopt? adoption is like you are a tiger and you will get a lion. That's crazy. we Humans are here to breed.

First, how do you conceptualize 'freedom'? If you see freedom as something negative (which means you see humans are naturally evil), then yes, freedom in this sense could be 'dangerous' (this is, by the way, very Hobbesian). This will take us to a very philosophical argumentation about freedom? What is 'freedom'? Is 'freedom' synonymous to 'free will'? What is the relation of freedom to ethics? It's not a simple formulation, you see.

Secondly, the argument of reproduction doesn't hold any water. As a matter of fact, if you look at the world today, humans are continually reproducing (to the point of almost annihilating ourselves because we're slowly depleting the earth of resources) - despite of the fact that so-called 'homosexuals' exist.

Same sex marriage is an abomination and i speak here in both Spiritual and Scientific aspects

Spiritual in what and whose sense? Which spiritual tradition are you talking about?

Any scientist, I think, reading your claim that same-sex marriage is an abomination in "scientific aspect" will laugh at this claim. Science, in its essence, base their arguments on facts derived from nature. In nature, animals do exhibit same-sex attraction (the gay penguins!) - thus, we can say that our idea of 'homosexuality' exists in nature. We humans just like to think that our humanistic existence is transposable to nature and try to model animal existence from human principles. Further, how about evolution? I'm sure you wouldn't agree with this because 'spirituality' doesn't believe in evolution, but science does. How you may go about explaining this?

[Voku]

Then if I should say how the civilization will keep evolving IF homosexuals will dominate the world. How can we produce new civilization if presuming that 80% of the world are full of homo? Now if the number of homos will continue to rise. Reproduction will ceases as the hetero will be outnumbered. Thus, Evolution will cease to exist, thats why Reproduction=Evolution, cause the Genes continues to improve and adopt to the environment. I should say that homos will just disrupt the cycle of life.

[Voku]

You love quoting the bible, yet you people can't implement killing homosexuals.

Cause killing is an abomination. An act of Abomination cannot be replaced by another Act per se

[Ateo]

Cause killing is an abomination. An act of Abomination cannot be replaced by another Act per se

What Tonton said is that killing gays, like killing non-virgins and killing Canaanites, are actually biblical exhortations. You are supposed to do it, whether you are the abominable snowman or not.

[archnemeziz]

Then if I should say how the civilization will keep evolving IF homosexuals will dominate the world. How can we produce new civilization if presuming that 80% of the world are full of homo? Now if the number of homos will continue to rise. Reproduction will ceases as the hetero will be outnumbered. Thus, Evolution will cease to exist, thats why Reproduction=Evolution, cause the Genes continues to improve and adopt to the environment. I should say that homos will just disrupt the cycle of life.

Why do religious people keep on saying that homosexuality is a threat to 'civilization'? If in fact, this was the case, then the Greeks would've been annihilated long time ago. Remember that in ancient Greece, adult males were expected to have sexual relations with younger males - although this wasn't understood as 'homosexuality' as such. This was just a part of the 'normal' life of the ancient Greek male citizen.

Human reproduction will not cease because your end-of-human-civilization scenario is, in most likelihood, will not happen. The chances of us screwing our civilization because of global warming is 100 times more probable than 'homosexuals' ending the civilization

[ElCid]

And this is where the problem arise. Military chaplains are commissioned officers sworn in to defend the constitution, making gay marriage a law without provisions will be in conflict with the first amendment.

Obama who was a constitutional law professor should know about it. Military chaplains (not just Catholic chaplains but all chaplains) were forbidden by the Office of the Chief of Chaplains to read the letter of the USCBC against the Obama care of providing contraceptives to their employees.. Most if not all Catholic Chaplains admitted disobeying the order. See the conflict here? Chaplains are being forced and ordered to disobey their conscience and their religious freedom!

I agree, and the Obama administration is dividing this country by enforcing "Chinese style" government of regulating some aspects of the Church.

Again the Obama administration is making its own problem. Talk of gay marriage should be accompanied by provisions that will not violate the first amendment, they are just making a fool of this nation and dividing the people.

Bro you know we're on the same side. All I'm saying is that the state can and do make things legal even if it is against the church's law but it doesn't mean that the church will modify its teachings because of it. Divorce for example is legal in Italy. Should the Vatican force its own religious views on the state to repeal that law on divorce since Italy is a catholic nation? Of course not. As long as there is no compulsion exerted by the state on the citizen - I don't see any problem since we are guided by the teachings of the church. And the church can and have always existed despite persecution from the state. We will survive this Bro and we shall fight any encroachment in our freedom of conscience and religion. At least they aren't feeding us to the lions anymore :P

Again the point is there are things which the state can make legal but it doesn't make it moral therefore even if they make same sex marriages legal - I don't see you, me, orionpax getting married to another guy anyway so what's the problem ? As long as the powers of the state isn't used to compel the citizens in violation of their religious views then I don't see any problem. .

[Ferdinand]

Bro you know we're on the same side. All I'm saying is that the state can and do make things legal even if it is against the church's law but it doesn't mean that the church will modify its teachings because of it. Divorce for example is legal in Italy. Should the Vatican force its own religious views on the state to repeal that law on divorce since Italy is a catholic nation? Of course not. As long as there is no compulsion exerted by the state on the citizen - I don't see any problem since we are guided by the teachings of the church. And the church can and have always existed despite persecution from the state. We will survive this Bro and we shall fight any encroachment in our freedom of conscience and religion. At least they aren't feeding us to the lions anymore :P

I know that we are on the same side. I may sound as if I am being combative against you, I am not, I am merely pointing out that this Obama administration is making war against Catholics here in the US. They are the ones who are breaking the separation of church and state by violating the 1st amendment. They know that the first amendment protects the Church and yet they are still doing their best to bully the Church, to make life as miserable as they can make it for us. What a wasteful way of spending tax payers money.

They can make things legal until they are challenged and the Supreme Court making them illegal, therefore making them unconstitutional. For example the Obama Health Care is already a law, it is being challenge now. Until the Supreme Courts make a decision against it, it is still the law.

Imagine the Office of Chief of Chaplains ordering our chaplains not to read the letter of the USCBC, what nerve! Now the Obama administration is trying to define the Church for us. Some in the administration are arguing that Catholic charities and hospitals are not part of the church! What the heck is that? What nerve this administration have!

They want gay marriage? Fine! Just don't make it compulsory for priest, military chaplains, judges and captains who are against it. Let the gays get married by those who support that law. They want abortion? Fine! Just don't force Catholic doctors and nurses to provide it for them! They want contraceptive to be part of the Healthcare System? Fine! Just don't force Catholic institution to provide them!

There should be provisions that those who are against it for religious reasons should not be forced to be part of the it. They should not force the Church to provide contraceptives to its employees. They should learn not to meddle with Church's teaching and make us redefine who and what the Church is.

Again the point is there are things which the state can make legal but it doesn't make it moral therefore even if they make same sex marriages legal - I don't see you, me, orionpax getting married to another guy anyway so what's the problem ? As long as the powers of the state isn't used to compel the citizens in violation of their religious views then I don't see any problem. .

As you can see, my argument against gay marriage is IF it is passed WITHOUT provisions. And as I have pointed out this Administration is already making it a problem for us. Look at the case of the HHS making the Catholic Church provide contraception. Some Catholic institutions are fighting back and suing the Federal Government. Look at the money and resources the Church is wasting not to mention the tax payers' money being wasted by the gov't just to annoy the Church. I see the Federal Government losing this battle. This Administration is unnecessarily making problems.

[ElCid]

I know that we are on the same side. I may sound as if I am being combative against you, I am not, I am merely pointing out that this Obama administration is making war against Catholics here in the US. They are the ones who are breaking the separation of church and state by violating the 1st amendment. They know that the first amendment protects the Church and yet they are still doing their best to bully the Church, to make life as miserable as they can make it for us. What a wasteful way of spending tax payers money. They can make things legal until they are challenged and the Supreme Court making them illegal, therefore making them unconstitutional. For example the Obama Health Care is already a law, it is being challenge now. Until the Supreme Courts make a decision against it, it is still the law.

Imagine the Office of Chief of Chaplains ordering our chaplains not to read the letter of the USCBC, what nerve! Now the Obama administration is trying to define the Church for us. Some in the administration are arguing that Catholic charities and hospitals are not part of the church! What the heck is that? What nerve this administration have!

They want gay marriage? Fine! Just don't make it compulsory for priest, military chaplains, judges and captains who are against it. Let the gays get married by those who support that law. They want abortion? Fine! Just don't force Catholic doctors and nurses to provide it for them! They want contraceptive to be part of the Healthcare System? Fine! Just don't force Catholic institution to provide them!

There should be provisions that those who are against it for religious reasons should not be forced to be part of the ceremony. They should not force the Church to provide contraceptives to its employees. They should learn not to meddle with Church's teaching and make us redefine who and what the Church is.

As you can see, my argument against gay marriage is IF it is passed WITHOUT provisions. And as I have pointed out this Administration is already making it a problem for us. Look at the case of the HHS making the Catholic Church provide contraception. Some Catholic institutions are fighting back and suing the Federal Government. Look at the money and resources the Church is wasting not to mention the tax payers' money being wasted by the gov't just to annoy the Church. I see the Federal Government losing this battle. This Administration is unnecessarily making problems.

Thank you for the clarification. I am one with you on this issue.

[Ferdinand]

Thank you for the clarification. I am one with you on this issue.

I know you are! The question is, are the liberals with us on this?