- This topic has 1 reply, 5 voices, and was last updated 20 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Wow, ok, there has been a lot of stuff going on in the media and in the United States lately about the issue of gay right, gay marriages, civil unions, human rights, etc….
I’m going to start off this topic with a simple question: Is marriage a [b:1jqieia6]right[/b:1jqieia6]? Or, in other words, do all human beings have the [b:1jqieia6]right[/b:1jqieia6] to marry?
I do not believe marriage is a right either. I am sorry this is not exactly on topic, but I can’t get it out of my mind.
I was disturbed earlier this week when one of my professors handed out a Rainbow Families brochure as a possible project for one of my classes. We are not required to choose this project, but some of what I saw in these brochures made me frustrated, some of it made me upset, and some of it shocked me.
Rainbow Families are families where the parents are same-sex couples. The brochure was advertising for a conference for same-sex couples that want to and are raising children.
One of the topics was “Insemination 101” this was one that both shocked me and made me sad. I come from a rural area and the title reminds me of artifical insemination that was common practice for breeding cattle. I feel using the term and practice is degrading to the intrinsic value of a human being.
The other session is called “Who made me? Explaining the reproductive technologies to your child” This seems to go totally against Catholic teaching.
I don’t exactly know how to deal with this. It is likely that I will have to deal with this issue of civil unions and homosexual families, both in this class, and in my career.
I know there are times that I will I want to speak up, but I don’t know if that is the best choice right now…
time allows only a short reply to Berry Cat.
That is hang in there and keep praying.I am of the belief that a good many folks in this world truly want family directions from their Heavenly Parent (God the Father), and in the course of getting help from the public sector they will have to wade through a whole lot of programs just like the ones that disturb you.
So hang in there-perhaps start looking for modern day saints who have done just that—-even Mother Theresa who helped a whole lot of folks who were from a different culture and religion than her own.
And what about that priest that died in 911—-a large part of his ministry was to the gay culture—I am sure that had to be difficult.
Hope these quick thoughts help.Thank you, I do pray about it. Yet, it is still helpful to know that others have dealt with similar issues in their careers.
I feel like God has provided me with many resources to go to when I am feeling overwhelmed and frustrated.
” title=”Very Happy” />Ok, time to get this topic back on track.
” title=”Wink” />I do not view marriage as a right and I think that the homosexual couples and legislators who support gay marriage are exploiting a clause in various constitutions (whether state or [i:2igwhqda]the[/i:2igwhqda] Constitution) that says all people are created equal or that no one should be denied something based on sexual discrimination.
First off, I’d like to know when sexual discrimination started to include sexual orientation. I always thought it went something like “we do not discriminate on the basis of race, creed, sex, orientation….” To me, sexual discrimination is denying someone something because the person is a woman or the person is a man, not because they’re gay.
Also, how is it that marriage has become this “basic human right” as I see quoted by many gay activists in the news reports I read? I thought basic human rights included access to food, water, shelter and clothing.
Third, and not that we can change this, I think the problem lies in that the government is legislating something that should have been left up to the churches – marriage. It is an institution of God, not of the Constitution.
There are many other things I could get into, but I will leave it at this for now to discuss.
The State has granted legal benefits to married couples so it is not the sole domain of the Church.
[quote:331vxrex]The State has granted legal benefits to married couples so it is not the sole domain of the Church.[/quote:331vxrex]
Ok, that’s one side. What I was referring to was the fact that the state has decided it could marry people as well. That is what I mean.
” title=”Smile” />Granting benefits and performing “ceremonies” are 2 different things.
Did you ever notice that the priest still says he marries you by the power invested in him by the state of XXX? I do not know when the State got to marry people, but the Church lets it.
Well, I’ll have to admit, it has been a while since I have been to a Catholic wedding and although I do not remember the priest saying that, it does not mean he does not say that.
Anyway, I’d still like some solid reasoning as to why marriage is a right. Personally I think it is a privelege like driving a car or choosing what clothes I get to wear everyday.
I voted No, in case you expected me to defend the Yes vote.
Ok, it really would be nice if the people who voted yes could explain their reasoning. This is not a witch hunt, I just want to create some dialogue about this issue.
” title=”Smile” />
Marriage is NOT a right but a vocation! It is as true a calling from God as any other vocation. Those who view it as a “right” generally think our “rights” are the end all to beat all. I’d say just as no one has a “right” to the priesthood, no one has a “right” to get married. So sue me!
[quote:hpfok31e]Did you ever notice that the priest still says he marries you by the power invested in him by the state of XXX? I do not know when the State got to marry people, but the Church lets it.[/quote:hpfok31e]
Erp… I don’t think he says that. In a catholic wedding, the ministers of the sacrament are the two parties getting married who confer the sacrament upon each other. The state agrees that when these vows are witnessed by a priest, then the couple is entitled to the benefits (and obligations) extended by the state to married couples.
But it’s the two people who confer the sacrament and start the process moving. You could argue that gay persons have the right to have a judge witness their vows so that they could enjoy the same benefits and obligations, but it breaks down in certain areas.
The state has agreed to recognize an institution. But the key ingredients in that institution are one man and one woman. The state is not obliged to recognize two men (or two women) as the same institution – because the ingredients are different. This is a form of sexual discrimination on the most basic level, i.e. the acknowlegement that a man is not a woman. It is not, however, unjust discrimination. (Not all discrimination is unjust – for example, “You must be this tall to ride the cyclone” is a form of discrimination, which saves lives). This is simply a recognition that men aren’t women, and vise versa.
The simple fact is that if we say the state is not allowed to restrict marriage to one man and one woman only, then we open a whole can of worms, for that logic opens the door for all sorts of things, I.e.
1. Polygamy(Why can’t the four of us marry one another?)
2. Institutionalized Incest (Why can’t I marry my sister?)
3. And eventually, Institutionalized Bestiality (Rover loves me, he’s a good dog, and for pete’s sake I want marry someone who can bring me the paper in the morning…Why can’t I?)Okay, I’m done.
Dave
” title=”Smile” />[quote:3ktyvcby]The simple fact is that if we say the state is not allowed to restrict marriage to one man and one woman only, then we open a whole can of worms, for that logic opens the door for all sorts of things, I.e.
1. Polygamy(Why can’t the four of us marry one another?)
2. Institutionalized Incest (Why can’t I marry my sister?)
3. And eventually, Institutionalized Bestiality (Rover loves me, he’s a good dog, and for pete’s sake I want marry someone who can bring me the paper in the morning…Why can’t I?) [/quote:3ktyvcby]I absolutely agree with this statement. I think polygamy is more plausible than incest or beastiality (in terms of what the government could legalize).
I mean, polygamy and gay marriage are essentially the same argument. What exactly would stop the government from legalizing polygamy as opposed to gay marriage besides a lack of demand for it? If there was as much hoopla being raised about polygamy I bet some radical states would allow it.
” title=”Very Happy” />
” title=”Wink” />
” title=”Smile” />
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.