Pope Francis: Second look at civil unions?

posted at 3:21 pm on March 5, 2014 by Allahpundit

Did he really mean this or is this yet another case of the media exaggerating Francis’s more liberal-sounding pronouncements to better suit their agenda? Seems fairly clear, at least, that he thinks the Church could tolerate civil unions between heterosexual couples, although that raises the question of what “tolerance” would mean. Cohabitation presumably isn’t a problem, just as contracts between men and women aren’t a problem. The problem, potentially, is relaxing the sanction against premarital sex.

Pope Francis suggested the Catholic Church could tolerate some types of nonmarital civil unions as a practical measure to guarantee property rights and health care. He also said the church would not change its teaching against artificial birth control but should take care to apply it with “much mercy.”…

“Matrimony is between a man and a woman,” the pope said, but moves to “regulate diverse situations of cohabitation (are) driven by the need to regulate economic aspects among persons, as for instance to assure medical care.” Asked to what extent the church could understand this trend, he replied: “It is necessary to look at the diverse cases and evaluate them in their variety.”

More:

In January, the Pope recalled a little girl in Buenos Aires who told her teacher that she was sad because “my mother’s girlfriend doesn’t like me.”

“The situation in which we live now provides us with new challenges which sometimes are difficult for us to understand,” the Pope told leaders of religious orders, adding that the church “must be careful not to administer a vaccine against faith to them.”

A Christian friend who supports gay marriage has always insisted to me that there’s no real contradiction between her faith and her views on SSM. Religion has its sphere and civil society has its sphere; so long as the Church gets to set the rules in its own house, i.e. by not having to recognize or perform same-sex marriages, it can be agnostic about which sorts of relationships the government chooses to legally recognize. I don’t know if Francis would go that far, although there are credible reports that he privately endorsed civil unions for gays in Argentina as a potential compromise position while the country was debating legalizing gay marriage. Either way, the bit above about taking care not to vaccinate people against faith is consistent with his pronouncements on family/sexual matters so far: He seems reluctant to get caught up in these disputes for fear that they’ll sidetrack his bigger-picture vision for the Church, which has more to do with charity for the poor and less with culture-war flashpoints that risk alienating more socially liberal believers. It’s not quite a “truce” a la Mitch Daniels but more a matter of emphasis. Or so it seems to a humble atheist.

Meanwhile, back home in the U.S., 59 percent now support legalizing gay marriage versus 34 percent who oppose it. Those who “strongly” oppose it are down to 24 percent, the first time in ABC/WaPo’s polling that that number has dipped below 30. The numbers that really grabbed me, though, come from another recent poll on SSM conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute. Can this really be true?

ssm

Only 22 percent of gay-marriage opponents know that most Americans now support the practice? That makes me wonder if, as some SSM supporters (like me) expected, the rash of high-profile court decisions has convinced opponents that legalization is a purely top-down phenomenon imposed by cultural elites rather than something that’s gained wide popular acceptance. Politically, you’re much better off having this done through legislatures to show that the changes enjoy democratic legitimacy than having it done by judges. Oh well. Too late now.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

Does the Eastern, or Greek Orthodox Church still hold to traditional doctrine?

I really don’t know because I’ve never attended Mass there. That is the Church that is closest to Catholicism, and in fact used to be part of it, before Constantinople split from Rome in 1054 over an argument over who outranked whom…

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 3:51 PM

As a non practicing Greek Orthodox Christian but yet know a lot about the Church doctrine I confirm that the Orthodox Church has not deviated from the early teachings of the Fathers…

mnjg on March 5, 2014 at 4:22 PM

Unlike gay-sex marriage supporters, Christians are not believers in blind obedience.

northdallasthirty on March 5, 2014 at 4:20 PM

Lol. Talk about irony.

mazer9 on March 5, 2014 at 4:22 PM

No, it’s true.

Why do you think The Age of Enlightenment, modern Constitutional Republics, the whole concept of Natural Law and INALIENABLE rights we are ENDOWED WITH BY OUR CREATOR arose in a Christian society instead of a muslim, Hindu, or atheist one?

It’s Christianity that fuels freedom. Destroy it, and we will end up back in an age of absolute “divine right” monarchs again.

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:28 PM

No-the Church can’t be agnostic on same-sex marriage.
The Church stands for eternal truths. The eternal truth is that SSM is WRONG.
Either the Church can continue to stand up/ speak boldly about what is right/wrong…those eternal truths-or She can stand for nothing.

annoyinglittletwerp on March 5, 2014 at 3:43 PM

The Church is also against all forms of artificial birth control, it is against divorce, and it is against surrogacy and artificial insemination. However, the Church hasn’t advocated banning the Pill from local pharmacies or overturning divorce laws. This is because the Catholic Church doesn’t operate in a theocracy; it operates in a secular democracy and has to adjust to this reality. There are some liberal religious sects that find marriage between gay couples to be perfectly acceptable and the Church has to deal with that reality.

This is about picking winning fights. Preventing the Little Sisters of the Poor from having to provide employees with birth control or a priest from having to marry gay couples are winnable religious liberty cases. Preventing Suzy Presbyterian from getting access to the Pill or Joe Atheist from marrying Bob Unitarian is going to be a losing fight for the Catholic Church.

Illinidiva on March 5, 2014 at 4:29 PM

Coming soon: Ghey Mafia sues Church that refuses to perform gay “weddings”.
You know it will happen. Christians can already be compelled to bake cakes or photograph these “events” against our will, next we’ll be forced to allow them to use our Houses of Worship.
ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 3:38 PM
Remember the Catholic Church really likes Obamacare except for the mandates that affect them. They don’t mind the mandates on us, but they want to be exempt from the parts they don’t like. Gay marriage will probably be the same for them. They will support a secular version that gives them a religious exemption from lawsuits, but the baker and candlestick maker won’t get those protections.
Wigglesworth on March 5, 2014 at 4:16 PM

The gays will attack the Catholic Church but it will be one of the last & we have years for that. Soon gay marriage will be the law of the land. What use for the activists then? But they ain’t going anywhere & the Catholics have always been their favorite boogie man. They really, really enjoy dressing like priests & especially nuns and mocking us by getting up to all sorts of things. If they force the church to accept them that would be over with.

frank on March 5, 2014 at 4:29 PM

As a non practicing Greek Orthodox Christian but yet know a lot about the Church doctrine I confirm that the Orthodox Church has not deviated from the early teachings of the Fathers…

mnjg on March 5, 2014 at 4:22 PM

Sounds like a logical refuge for Catholics abandoned by our Church’s lurch into idolatry then. Ironic. The Empire in Constantinople long outlasted the Empire in Rome. The same may happen with the Church!

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:30 PM

That is clearly coming next. Pedophilia and incest will be legal in a Blue State near you within the next decade. And it’ll be legal in YOUR state soon as they can get it in front of a federal judge.

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:12 PM

On our current trajectory it’s probably coming, but the left will need some time to set the stage for it. Both are still viewed with revulsion almost universally in America, so it’s going to take quite some time to normalize them.

I think before either of the two issues you brought up, we will see a push for polygamy.

(I think all this stuff will disappear once the economy collapses and people struggle to put bread on the table and keep a roof over their heads, but we’ll see).

Doomberg on March 5, 2014 at 4:30 PM

That is clearly coming next. Pedophilia and incest will be legal in a Blue State near you within the next decade. And it’ll be legal in YOUR state soon as they can get it in front of a federal judge.

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:12 PM

On our current trajectory it’s probably coming, but the left will need some time to set the stage for it. Both are still viewed with revulsion almost universally in America, so it’s going to take quite some time to normalize them.

I think before either of the two issues you brought up, we will see a push for polygamy.

(I think all this stuff will disappear once the economy collapses and people struggle to put bread on the table and keep a roof over their heads, but we’ll see).

Doomberg on March 5, 2014 at 4:30 PM

Pedophilia is a sexual orientation.

Lanceman on March 5, 2014 at 4:31 PM

On our current trajectory it’s probably coming, but the left will need some time to set the stage for it. Both are still viewed with revulsion almost universally in America, so it’s going to take quite some time to normalize them.

I think before either of the two issues you brought up, we will see a push for polygamy.

(I think all this stuff will disappear once the economy collapses and people struggle to put bread on the table and keep a roof over their heads, but we’ll see).

Doomberg on March 5, 2014 at 4:30 PM

As recently as the 1980′s (my formative years) homosexuality was viewed with revulsion. What we have now was unthinkable.

My main problem with gays is that they are unwilling to “live and let live”. They aren’t happy with that. Instead they commit violence against the Constitution and my rights.

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:32 PM

Coming soon: Ghey Mafia sues Church that refuses to perform gay “weddings”.

You know it will happen. Christians can already be compelled to bake cakes or photograph these “events” against our will, next we’ll be forced to allow them to use our Houses of Worship.

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 3:38 PM

That’s some epic strawman right there.

JetBoy on March 5, 2014 at 3:41 PM

Unless something changes to set hard limits on what homosexual advocates can demand, there will be a push within a decade to remove tax-exempt status from any church that speaks against homosexuality.

And about the only thing that would set such a hard limit would be a Constitutional Amendment. Any other law, even if it’s part of a state constitution, can be thrown out by a federal judge, as we’ve already seen over and over and over.

There Goes the Neighborhood on March 5, 2014 at 4:33 PM

Many “Christians” and non-believers break the commandment against carved images (false idols) by creating gods that condone their sin. Those who believe that homosexuality is not a sin are deluding themselves. You don’t need any other scripture except the words that Jesus spoke in Matthew 19:4-5

“”Haven’t you read,” He replied, “that He who created them in the beginning made them male and female,” and He also said: “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two will become one flesh?””

This is God’s definition of marriage any other is sinful. God created man and woman. The sinful conditions that many find themselves having: homosexuality, alcoholism, drug addiction, etc. have been caused by the fall. When we disobeyed God in the garden we brought sin into the world which caused the many different crosses that people have to bear.

kagai on March 5, 2014 at 4:33 PM

No, it’s true.

Why do you think The Age of Enlightenment, modern Constitutional Republics, the whole concept of Natural Law and INALIENABLE rights we are ENDOWED WITH BY OUR CREATOR arose in a Christian society instead of a muslim, Hindu, or atheist one?

It’s Christianity that fuels freedom. Destroy it, and we will end up back in an age of absolute “divine right” monarchs again.

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:28 PM

What part of ii being cool to beat your slaves so long as you don’t kill them is consistent with “inalienable rights endowed by a creator”? Why did slavery exist in the US a full 2,000 years after the death of Christ?

mazer9 on March 5, 2014 at 4:35 PM

And about the only thing that would set such a hard limit would be a Constitutional Amendment. Any other law, even if it’s part of a state constitution, can be thrown out by a federal judge, as we’ve already seen over and over and over.

There Goes the Neighborhood on March 5, 2014 at 4:33 PM

That might not even be enough. Whole swaths of the Constitution have been written out by federal judges. The 9th and 10th Amendments might as well not even exist, as a matter of fact.

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:35 PM

The Church either must change or it will die. Literally. Older conservative Catholics are dying off, and younger people want a more welcoming, less judgmental Church.

Do you not know the meaning of the word “catholic?” How obnoxious–and shortsighted–that the the Christian rightwingers here are dumping all over Pope Francis, mainly because he’s trying to deal with the realities of a changing world.

If there is anything one learns from HA, is that the majority of its far-right conservatives either have no desire or no ability to accept reality.

But it’s nice to know that, in addition to knowing better than everyone in DC, you now know better than the Pope.

Meredith on March 5, 2014 at 4:36 PM

God didn’t insist on perfect Kings in Israel either.

Maybe Pope Francis is a test of Faith?

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:15 PM

So the nice cuddly grandpa figure is your idea of a test of faith? If you would like to read about some actual bad popes, I’d recommend reading about some of the medieval popes (including Stephen VI, Benedict IX, John XII..).

Illinidiva on March 5, 2014 at 4:38 PM

The Church either must change or it will die. Literally. Older conservative Catholics are dying off, and younger people want a more welcoming, less judgmental Church.

Do you not know the meaning of the word “catholic?” How obnoxious–and shortsighted–that the the Christian rightwingers here are dumping all over Pope Francis, mainly because he’s trying to deal with the realities of a changing world.

If there is anything one learns from HA, is that the majority of its far-right conservatives either have no desire or no ability to accept reality.

But it’s nice to know that, in addition to knowing better than everyone in DC, you now know better than the Pope.

Meredith on March 5, 2014 at 4:36 PM

The Bible spoke of other times when the whole World became wicked and that the faithful were but a few…

It’s happened before. I guess it’s happening again.

You don’t understand. The Church is Eternal. It is NOT changeable in these ways, and to attempt to do so is to reject God.

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:38 PM

90% of the Jews and the Christians I know support marriage equality.
thuja on March 5, 2014 at 4:04 PM

You and Paulina Kael can’t believe Nixon won either, huh?

anuts on March 5, 2014 at 4:38 PM

This is God’s definition of marriage any other is sinful. God created man and woman. The sinful conditions that many find themselves having: homosexuality, alcoholism, drug addiction, etc. have been caused by the fall. When we disobeyed God in the garden we brought sin into the world which caused the many different crosses that people have to bear.

kagai on March 5, 2014 at 4:33 PM

2 Samuel 12:8
King James Version (KJV)
8 And I GAVE thee thy master’s house, and thy MASTER’S WIVES (Plural) into thy bosom, and gave thee the house of Israel and of Judah; and if that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things.

mazer9 on March 5, 2014 at 4:39 PM

[4] He answered, “Have you not read that he who made them from the beginning made them male and female,
[5] and said, `For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh’?
[6] So they are no longer two but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder.” – Jesus ( Matt. 5:4-6)

This has been overruled by a higher authority.

Cleombrotus on March 5, 2014 at 4:39 PM

Oh, so you associate with people who you demonize as idiots and fools because they have religious beliefs?

northdallasthirty on March 5, 2014 at 4:08 PM

You are not a happy person and you make stuff up. I know a man in his twenties who has an obese, alcoholic mother who spends her time posting social con rants on the internet. I could get her number for you, if you are looking for a date.

thuja on March 5, 2014 at 4:39 PM

If there is anything one learns from HA, is that the majority of its far-right conservatives either have no desire or no ability to accept reality.
But it’s nice to know that, in addition to knowing better than everyone in DC, you now know better than the Pope.
Meredith on March 5, 2014 at 4:36 PM

Is truth part of reality?

anuts on March 5, 2014 at 4:40 PM

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:10 PM

If he’s wrong, and he’s your “right eye”, it might be time to look elsewhere for your guidance.

Cleombrotus on March 5, 2014 at 4:40 PM

The Church either must change or it will die. Literally. Older conservative Catholics are dying off, and younger people want a more welcoming, less judgmental Church.

Do you not know the meaning of the word “catholic?” How obnoxious–and shortsighted–that the the Christian rightwingers here are dumping all over Pope Francis, mainly because he’s trying to deal with the realities of a changing world.

If there is anything one learns from HA, is that the majority of its far-right conservatives either have no desire or no ability to accept reality.

But it’s nice to know that, in addition to knowing better than everyone in DC, you now know better than the Pope.

Meredith on March 5, 2014 at 4:36 PM

Your ignorance of the Church and of faith are on gleaming display.

Bitter Clinger on March 5, 2014 at 4:41 PM

Your ignorance of the Church and of faith are on gleaming display.

Bitter Clinger on March 5, 2014 at 4:41 PM

Heh. Usually her ignorance of history is on gleaming display in the headlines.

Lanceman on March 5, 2014 at 4:41 PM

The Bible spoke of other times when the whole World became wicked and that the faithful were but a few…

It’s happened before. I guess it’s happening again.

You don’t understand. The Church is Eternal. It is NOT changeable in these ways, and to attempt to do so is to reject God.

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:38 PM

The End Times are likely closer than any of us would care to admit.

Bitter Clinger on March 5, 2014 at 4:41 PM

Look at Meredith. Like wheat in the wind and another insult hurled at HA posters. I cannot imagine why we don’t just make you queen of the prom and dump pig blood on you?

RovesChins on March 5, 2014 at 4:42 PM

As a non practicing Greek Orthodox Christian but yet know a lot about the Church doctrine I confirm that the Orthodox Church has not deviated from the early teachings of the Fathers…
mnjg on March 5, 2014 at 4:22 PM
Sounds like a logical refuge for Catholics abandoned by our Church’s lurch into idolatry then. Ironic. The Empire in Constantinople long outlasted the Empire in Rome. The same may happen with the Church!
ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:30 PM

In many areas you’ll find the Orthodox churches filled with Slavic immigrants both old and young. One things for sure support traditional values & aren’t afraid to say it. They’re good people, good friends and hard workers.

frank on March 5, 2014 at 4:43 PM

What part of ii being cool to beat your slaves so long as you don’t kill them is consistent with “inalienable rights endowed by a creator”? Why did slavery exist in the US a full 2,000 years after the death of Christ?

mazer9 on March 5, 2014 at 4:35 PM

Why did the international leadership of the gay and lesbian community as recognized by the United Nations endorse and support pedophilia?

NAMBLA has been a member of the International Lesbian and Gay
Association for 10 years. We’ve been continuously active in ILGA longer than any other US organization. NAMBLA delegates to ILGA helped write ILGA’s constitution, its official positions on the sexual rights of youth, and its stands against sexual coercion and corporal punishment. We are proud of our contributions in making ILGA a stronger voice for the international gay and lesbian movement and for sexual justice.

But it gets much better:

ILGA’s current positions on man/boy love and pedophilia are
explicit:

– In 1985, ILGA adopted a position on “Age of Consent/Paedophilia/Children’s Rights” that urged member organizations to “lobby their governments to abolish the age of consent law” so long as there is “adequate protection for youth from being sexually abused without the age of consent law.”

– In 1986, ILGA adopted a position that says the group “supports
the right of young people to sexual and social self-determination.”

– In 1988, ILGA declared “this conference recognizes that existing
same-sex age-of-consent laws often operate to oppress and not to
protect; that in many countries, existing laws on sexual coercion
and rules of evidence also often operate to oppress and not to protect; that therefore member organizations are urged to consider
how best children, adolescents, and people of all ages can be
empowered and supported against both sexual coercion and sexual oppression and to work towards that end.”

– In 1990, ILGA “calls on all members to treat all sexual minorities with respect and to engage in constructive dialogue
with them. In another position adopted that year, ILGA declared
that it “supports the right of every individual, regardless of age, to explore and develop her or his sexuality.”

northdallasthirty on March 5, 2014 at 4:43 PM

But it’s nice to know that, in addition to knowing better than everyone in DC, you now know better than the Pope.

There is only one High Priest: Jesus Christ. There is only one authority: God. There is only one source of knowledge of God: the Word.

I don’t need a pope to tell me who God is or act as an intermediary between God and I. Jesus died that I might have direct access to the Father. And all knowledge that I need in respect to God and His will comes through the Bible and prayer.

kagai on March 5, 2014 at 4:43 PM

This has been overruled by a higher authority.

Cleombrotus on March 5, 2014 at 4:39 PM

Yes, it’s always been in the Bible that the authority of some kook from a faculty lounge appointed by a President who gets confirmed by the Senate outranks God.

/not.

Obama may think he’s a god, and people may worship him as if he were, but that doesn’t make it true. Obama, like me, is destined to return to the dust he was made from.

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:44 PM

The church must either change or die…
Meredith on March 5th, 2014 at 4:36 PM

GEE, I wonder whatever happened to that whole ‘and the gates of hell shall not prevail against her’ business.

Cleombrotus on March 5, 2014 at 4:46 PM

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:44 PM

I wasn’t really referring to Obama.

Cleombrotus on March 5, 2014 at 4:47 PM

It’s Christianity that fuels freedom. Destroy it, and we will end up back in an age of absolute “divine right” monarchs again.

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:28 PM

Yeah because Christianity rejects monarchy as a form of government. It says so in the Bible if you jumble the words up the right way.

lexhamfox on March 5, 2014 at 4:47 PM

90% of the Jews and the Christians I know support marriage equality.
thuja on March 5, 2014 at 4:04 PM

You and Paulina Kael can’t believe Nixon won either, huh?

anuts on March 5, 2014 at 4:38 PM

Bad analogy, since the marriage equality side seems to be winning. How will the Christianity attract young people without either accepting marriage equality or downplaying the importance of opposing marriage equality? I went to a Methodist Church in the college student business this weekend with a friend. Its religious leadership is explicit about being pro-gay marriage. The Mega-Church Outlet Store for students near my house never mentions homosexuality. For the last decade, I seriously doubt that any church wanting to attract college students near me has every had anyone from the pulpit mention a need to oppose gay marriage.

thuja on March 5, 2014 at 4:48 PM

Meanwhile, back home in the U.S., 59 percent now support legalizing gay marriage versus 34 percent who oppose it. Those who “strongly” oppose it are down to 24 percent, the first time in ABC/WaPo’s polling that that number has dipped below 30. The numbers that really grabbed me, though, come from another recent poll on SSM conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute. Can this really be true?

.
Listen up. There is no surprise here.
look at the 59% number. Who makes this polled population?
How many of these people are single – never married?
How many of these people do not observe a religious faith?
How many of these people are/have been divorced via a failed marriage?
How many of these people have a relative or friend they know who is Homosexual- and don’t want to offend them ?
How many of these people voted for Idiot Maobama ?
The “down to 24%” who oppose agreeing with HOMOSEXUAL MARRIAGE (same sex is just too watered down for me)as equal – are pretty much those who are church going married people who are the ONLY ones who have “skin in the marriage game” – versus the casual apathetic American saying “yeah- whatever.”
Lets have a Poll of just married people….the 59% goes way down. After all – who best to decide on “Marriage Equality” other than married people?

FlaMurph on March 5, 2014 at 4:49 PM

The Church either must change or it will die..
Meredith on March 5, 2014 at 4:36 PM

Old Testament
New Testament
Modern Testament

mazer9 on March 5, 2014 at 4:49 PM

It’s Christianity that fuels freedom. Destroy it, and we will end up back in an age of absolute “divine right” monarchs again.

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:28 PM

You mean like King David?

mazer9 on March 5, 2014 at 4:51 PM

Old Testament
New Testament
Modern Testament

mazer9 on March 5, 2014 at 4:49 PM

RAAAAACIST! You left out the “Obamatestament”

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:51 PM

The Mega-Church Outlet Store for students near my house never mentions homosexuality. For the last decade, I seriously doubt that any church wanting to attract college students near me has every had anyone from the pulpit mention a need to oppose gay marriage.

thuja on March 5, 2014 at 4:48 PM

Churches that fail to warn their members about the consequences of sin are not serving them.

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:52 PM

thuja on March 5, 2014 at 4:48 PM

A general inquiry, I know, but do truths usually have basis in consensus or even ad populum reasoning?

anuts on March 5, 2014 at 4:53 PM

Get the government out of it entirely.

Marriage was never part of Caeser’s realm. It’s a Union between a Man and a Woman witnessed by God.

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 3:52 PM

The point is that marriages can ONLY be performed by the church, keeping the religious aspect of marriage. The government would only have something to say about unions (or whatever you want to call it, except marriage) then you have your separation of church and state. I mean are they more concerned about legal rights or a name?

Sven on March 5, 2014 at 4:01 PM

The Catholic church considers marriage to be a sacrament, and therefore under their control. I don’t know of any Protestant organization that believes that. I think it leads to Catholics projecting a distinction between civil and church marriage that is mistaken.

You will not find the in the New Testament where the church was put in charge of marriage, or where apostles and prophets were given the charge of controlling who gets married. The one place where the rules of marriage are clearly given was by Jesus, who said that marriage was “from the beginning,” and that this was why a man would leave his father and mother and be joined to a wife.

Churches have a lot to say about marriage, but marriage was not handed over to the church. It is for everybody. When a married person converted in the early church, they did not rush to make it a Christian marriage. The existing marriage was recognized.

Marriage is of God, and the church is of God. But while the Gospel was handed to the church, marriage was given to all men and women.

Trying to split civil and religious marriage into two separate things is too clever by half. While Baptists, for instance, believe in church weddings performed by pastors so you can take your vows before God, they will still recognize the couple who stand before a Justice of the Peace to say their vows.

There Goes the Neighborhood on March 5, 2014 at 4:54 PM

Rich gays with time, money, and an agenda

Church of England may be sued

NativeTexan on March 5, 2014 at 4:58 PM

What part of ii being cool to beat your slaves so long as you don’t kill them is consistent with “inalienable rights endowed by a creator”? Why did slavery exist in the US a full 2,000 years after the death of Christ?

mazer9 on March 5, 2014 at 4:35 PM

It’s Christianity that fuels freedom. Destroy it, and we will end up back in an age of absolute “divine right” monarchs again.

ConstantineXI on March 5, 2014 at 4:28 PM

You mean like King David?

mazer9 on March 5, 2014 at 4:51 PM

You realize you’re trying to criticize Christianity using examples from ancient Judaism, right?

Sockpuppet Politic on March 5, 2014 at 5:00 PM

The church is riddled with Gay men – whatever drives them to the church is an issue – but they are there.

jake-the-goose on March 5, 2014 at 5:00 PM

The Catholic church considers marriage to be a sacrament, and therefore under their control. I don’t know of any Protestant organization that believes that. I think it leads to Catholics projecting a distinction between civil and church marriage that is mistaken.

You will not find the in the New Testament where the church was put in charge of marriage, or where apostles and prophets were given the charge of controlling who gets married. The one place where the rules of marriage are clearly given was by Jesus, who said that marriage was “from the beginning,” and that this was why a man would leave his father and mother and be joined to a wife.

Churches have a lot to say about marriage, but marriage was not handed over to the church. It is for everybody. When a married person converted in the early church, they did not rush to make it a Christian marriage. The existing marriage was recognized.

Marriage is of God, and the church is of God. But while the Gospel was handed to the church, marriage was given to all men and women.

Trying to split civil and religious marriage into two separate things is too clever by half. While Baptists, for instance, believe in church weddings performed by pastors so you can take your vows before God, they will still recognize the couple who stand before a Justice of the Peace to say their vows.

There Goes the Neighborhood on March 5, 2014 at 4:54 PM

Leave it up to the individual churches if they will marry same sex or not. Leave the legal issue to the government and the moral to the churches.

Sven on March 5, 2014 at 5:01 PM

I wonder if the Pope has read this book that, from what I understand, isn’t all that important to Christianity. Some nearly unheard of work called the Bible or something. Y’know, Sodom and Gomorrah, Leviticus, things like that. But I suppose that’s only of interest to religious folks, and not people who are in secular positions of authority like the Pope.

Stoic Patriot on March 5, 2014 at 3:44 PM

He is also throwing Saint Paul, who wrote half the new testament, under the bus. Paul had a direct communication from God, similar to Moses. Its all, or nothing

This Pope is not only off-Bible on gay marriage.

Both old and new testaments also warn in the last days people will follow their own law. So the Pope says if people have their own morality, what the hey …

IMHO this new Pope is either toying with the non believing world to gain favor, or he really believes what he is saying. Neither possibility is admirable.

When Francis recently dropped the F bomb on mic
in St Peters square, it made sense he was in the middle of a redistributionist screed

“If each one of us does not amass riches only for oneself, but half for the service of others, in this f–k [pause], in this case the providence of God will become visible through this gesture of solidarity,” Francis said to the faithful gathered in St. Peter’s Square, Italian media reported.

Yes, Jesus says if you amass half your wealth for the service of others, this gesture of solidarity would make visible the providence of God…

F bomb. He blew the high point just when he was connecting Jesus to Marx

Shame really. Benedict was so good

entagor on March 5, 2014 at 5:01 PM

thuja on March 5, 2014 at 4:48 PM

Well they could always try being Christian. I don’t see why that would be so hard.

nobar on March 5, 2014 at 5:02 PM

A Christian friend who supports gay marriage has always insisted to me that there’s no real contradiction between her faith and her views on SSM.

I had to stop right there, AP.

Christian = Christ-follower.

Christians accept the New Testament as the rule of faith & practice.

Christians oppose homosexuality because it’s sinful, as clearly outlined in the NT, & because it’s in many ways very unhealthy.

It’s a pathetic symptom of our times that people claim otherwise.

Which is worse, gender confusion or religious confusion?

The latter, I suppose, because if your religion is right–if you really follow Jesus–you’ll become healed from other confusions.

itsnotaboutme on March 5, 2014 at 5:05 PM

There is only one High Priest: Jesus Christ. There is only one authority: God. There is only one source of knowledge of God: the Word.

I don’t need a pope to tell me who God is or act as an intermediary between God and I. Jesus died that I might have direct access to the Father. And all knowledge that I need in respect to God and His will comes through the Bible and prayer.

kagai on March 5, 2014 at 4:43 PM

I don’t know how protestants cannot see the incoherence of their position. It is so obvious.

How do you know what books are inspired? Have you read all books ever written? Is the canon closed? Why? Why not? Is the book of Mormon inspired? Why not? How can you tell a Mormon that it isn’t? How is his authentication worse than yours?

Sola scriptura is simply incoherent.

GoDucks on March 5, 2014 at 5:06 PM

ILGA’s current positions on man/boy love and pedophilia are
explicit:

– In 1985, ILGA adopted a position on “Age of Consent/Paedophilia/Children’s Rights” that urged member organizations to “lobby their governments to abolish the age of consent law” so long as there is “adequate protection for youth from being sexually abused without the age of consent law.”

– In 1986, ILGA adopted a position that says the group “supports
the right of young people to sexual and social self-determination.”

– In 1988, ILGA declared “this conference recognizes that existing
same-sex age-of-consent laws often operate to oppress and not to
protect; that in many countries, existing laws on sexual coercion
and rules of evidence also often operate to oppress and not to protect; that therefore member organizations are urged to consider
how best children, adolescents, and people of all ages can be
empowered and supported against both sexual coercion and sexual oppression and to work towards that end.”

– In 1990, ILGA “calls on all members to treat all sexual minorities with respect and to engage in constructive dialogue
with them. In another position adopted that year, ILGA declared
that it “supports the right of every individual, regardless of age, to explore and develop her or his sexuality.”

northdallasthirty on March 5, 2014 at 4:43 PM

As I said earlier, ND30 is unhappy and dishonest person. NAMBLA is no longer in ILGA. They were kicked out in 1994. Gay organization have become progressively more mainstream as the acceptance of gays has lead less politically extreme gays to become active in them. It was the mainstream, average Joe, gays who wanted marriage equality. The NAMBLA accepting kooks wanted to destroy marriage instead. They still want to destroy marriage, but it is hard to find anyone who supports them.

thuja on March 5, 2014 at 5:09 PM

You realize you’re trying to criticize Christianity using examples from ancient Judaism, right?

Sockpuppet Politic on March 5, 2014 at 5:00 PM

Matthew 5:17 KJV
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

mazer9 on March 5, 2014 at 5:10 PM

I think the real question remains why you are changing what marriage is just to accommodate the mentally ill.

crrr6 on March 5, 2014 at 5:12 PM

Why do folks get married in the first place? Do religious folks get married for different reasons than heathens like me? Don’t know, but from my experience folks get married for basic reasons like, love, companionship, increased financial security, child rearing (my favorite), society pressure, following God’s will, family pressure, social standing….heck lots of reasons. Guess some get married for sex only, but that comes with the package in most instances.

Geez, what the heck is my point? Seems to me there is a fixation on sex for those who want to retain traditional marriage. Sex being only appropriate within marriage and between consenting adults…being one man and one woman. Okay fine. Then I hear the FEARS about plural marriage, same sex marriage, marriage between siblings, marriage between parents and children, marriage between old folks like me and dead goats and such. Am I still kinda on course?

Okay, so…….. good behavior equals missionary style between married adults…one being a woman (need to put the woman first this time) and one being a man? Hey, having a little fun here…relax we are adults. And bad behavior equals everything else? So, far what have I missed?

Couple of questions and I need to bug out for a while.
(1). How does the definition of marriage affect underlying behaviour? Does changing the definition of marriage result in dads all of a sudden realizing they want to…….…with their sons…..not even going to type the rest as you know where I am going….or was the this behavior already there?

(2). Currently the limiting factor for marriage….. is folks not closely related and being an adult chick and dude. Can an exception be made to add same sex adults and limit all the rest? I understand the slippery slope argument okay….just asking.

(3). If question two can be agreed upon, will same sex folks agree that a Church has the right to define marriage as the Church deems. To be blunt, will same sex folks respect the Catholic Church’s tenet not to recognize or perform same sex marriage.

(4). Will same sex folks agree not to lower the age of consent?

(5). Has anyone thought of all the tax laws, civil law (family court), child ownership and adoption laws, and many more that need to also be discussed? I had a post over ten pages that addressed these issues and I only scratched the surface.

Sadly, I think the time to discuss this from a common sense level has long passed and we are in for a wild ride. Nothing worse than being 100% right and 200% wrong. Both sides dug in and here we are; ’cause just like abortion, the train is screaming down the tracks.

Finally, how did I get both sides to dislike me on this issue?

HonestLib on March 5, 2014 at 5:14 PM

Why do Gays have to take the name marriage? I mean than the Girl Scouts should be able to use the name Boy Scouts. Or Obama could be called Carter etc.

Sven on March 5, 2014 at 5:17 PM

If there is anything one learns from HA, is that the majority of its far-right conservatives either have no desire or no ability to accept reality.
But it’s nice to know that, in addition to knowing better than everyone in DC, you now know better than the Pope.
Meredith on March 5, 2014 at 4:36 PM

Go tell it to President Romney!

melle1228 on March 5, 2014 at 5:17 PM

A general inquiry, I know, but do truths usually have basis in consensus or even ad populum reasoning?

anuts on March 5, 2014 at 4:53 PM

“What is Truth?” Best line from the NT in my opinion.

Clearly, my argument is that there is no Truth to the definition of marriage. What we call marriage is pretty much up to us, but we are constrained by wanting what we call marriage to have what we consider good outcomes.

thuja on March 5, 2014 at 5:18 PM

HonestLib on March 5, 2014 at 5:14 PM

The purpose of lawful marriage is to create a stable environment for babies that happen when a man has sex with a woman. It’s more for the protection and welfare of the kids than anything else.

crrr6 on March 5, 2014 at 5:22 PM

If all these reports about this Pope are correct, it seems to me that this guy is too much into practicing his piety in order to be seen by men.

The problem you get into when you adjust your message to please men is that THEY and their opinions become your benchmarks.

Cleombrotus on March 5, 2014 at 5:25 PM

I don’t know how protestants cannot see the incoherence of their position. It is so obvious.

How do you know what books are inspired? Have you read all books ever written? Is the canon closed? Why? Why not? Is the book of Mormon inspired? Why not? How can you tell a Mormon that it isn’t? How is his authentication worse than yours?

Sola scriptura is simply incoherent.

GoDucks on March 5, 2014 at 5:06 PM

I believe that God is powerful enough to make sure that His word is preserved as He sees fit, so I believe that the Holy Bible, as it stands, is God’s holy word preserved.

As for mormonism; they deny the trinity, they deny the divinity of Christ and they are a works based religion. That’s how I know that it isn’t the inspired word of God.

But, you are free to believe as wrongly as you choose.

kagai on March 5, 2014 at 5:25 PM

The Catholic church considers marriage to be a sacrament, and therefore under their control. I don’t know of any Protestant organization that believes that. I think it leads to Catholics projecting a distinction between civil and church marriage that is mistaken.

You bring up a good point…The Catholic Church considers marriage a sacrament. A couple married within the Church can get a secular, legal divorce…but unless the Church grants an annulment, they are considered still married, in the eyes of the Church.

The state can’t force the Catholic Church to recognize a secular, legal divorce…any more than secular, legal gay marriage or civil union can be forced upon it.

JetBoy on March 5, 2014 at 5:26 PM

Sola scriptura is simply incoherent.

GoDucks on March 5, 2014 at 5:06 PM

Only to those who don’t understand it.

Cleombrotus on March 5, 2014 at 5:27 PM

Cleombrotus on March 5, 2014 at 5:25 PM

.
It prolly doesn’t hurt that half the Vatican Curia are/were practicing Homosexuals…….
.
Again, more serious problems than Dysfunctional American culture for the Pope to worry about.
.
“Lighten up, Francis…”

FlaMurph on March 5, 2014 at 5:29 PM

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.

mazer9 on March 5, 2014 at 5:10 PM

Read a few verses further…

Sockpuppet Politic on March 5, 2014 at 5:29 PM

There is only one High Priest: Jesus Christ. There is only one authority: God. There is only one source of knowledge of God: the Word.

I don’t need a pope to tell me who God is or act as an intermediary between God and I. Jesus died that I might have direct access to the Father. And all knowledge that I need in respect to God and His will comes through the Bible and prayer.

kagai on March 5, 2014 at 4:43 PM

I don’t know how protestants cannot see the incoherence of their position. It is so obvious.

How do you know what books are inspired? Have you read all books ever written? Is the canon closed? Why? Why not? Is the book of Mormon inspired? Why not? How can you tell a Mormon that it isn’t? How is his authentication worse than yours?

Sola scriptura is simply incoherent.

GoDucks on March 5, 2014 at 5:06 PM

All of those questions were answered before the first pope ever came along. The foundation of the church were the apostles and prophets. The New Testament was complete before all the apostles were dead. John, in fact, wrote the last book — Revelations. Peter recognized Paul’s epistles as scripture. Paul wrote to the Galatians that they should not accept any preaching that contradicted the gospel he had preached. Jude wrote to everyone (general epistle) to “earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered to the saints.”

There Goes the Neighborhood on March 5, 2014 at 5:29 PM

<blockquote>It was the mainstream, average Joe, gays who wanted marriage equality. The NAMBLA accepting kooks wanted to destroy marriage instead. They still want to destroy marriage, but it is hard to find anyone who supports them.

thuja on March 5, 2014 at 5:09 PM

Not necessarily. The “NAMBLA” accepting kook types are the ones using gay marriage as a bludgeon against religious individuals. I think they are alive and well within the movement.

melle1228 on March 5, 2014 at 5:30 PM

The state can’t force the Catholic Church to recognize a secular, legal divorce…any more than secular, legal gay marriage or civil union can be forced upon it.

JetBoy on March 5, 2014 at 5:26 PM

So is the Pope suddenly supportive of heterosexuals living together outside of marriage as long as they have a “contract?” Why or why not?

melle1228 on March 5, 2014 at 5:32 PM

Lol. Talk about irony.

mazer9 on March 5, 2014 at 4:22 PM

That’s why I think nd30 might be a moby. It’s like I’m playing teeball here.

alchemist19 on March 5, 2014 at 5:32 PM

“What is Truth?” Best line from the NT in my opinion.

The best line from the New Testament is from the ignorance of Pilate as he stands there challenging the truth and the light personified?

Clearly, my argument is that there is no Truth to the definition of marriage. What we call marriage is pretty much up to us, but we are constrained by wanting what we call marriage to have what we consider good outcomes.
thuja on March 5, 2014 at 5:18 PM

Are you a professional theologian? And if you are of the Christian ‘brand’ do you then preach that truth as claimed in the Bible really isn’t so?

anuts on March 5, 2014 at 5:33 PM

All of those questions were answered before the first pope ever came along. The foundation of the church were the apostles and prophets. The New Testament was complete before all the apostles were dead.

…wow, it’s not every day you see a christian’s ignorance extend so incomprehensibly into the domain of his own religion.

clearly, you know nothing absolutely nothing about how your scriptures developed and apparently even less about how the canon ultimately came to be.

jaxisaneurophysicist on March 5, 2014 at 5:33 PM

That’s why I think nd30 might be a moby. It’s like I’m playing teeball here.

alchemist19 on March 5, 2014 at 5:32 PM

Or he could really just be really fed up with idiots saying they represent him.

melle1228 on March 5, 2014 at 5:35 PM

Or he could really just be really fed up with idiots saying they represent him.

melle1228 on March 5, 2014 at 5:35 PM

I don’t know if that’s true but seeing as how he claims Dan Savage and some weird street sex fair in San Francisco are representative of gay people (except him, I guess) then it would be kinda funny to see the tables turned on him.

alchemist19 on March 5, 2014 at 5:38 PM

Why do Gays have to take the name marriage? I mean than the Girl Scouts should be able to use the name Boy Scouts. Or Obama could be called Carter etc.

Sven on March 5, 2014 at 5:17 PM

Because our society assigns a higher value to the word “Marriage” than the words “civil union”. The word “Marriage” is a status symbol much like “Tiffanys” or “Rolex”. There lots of redefinition going on. I am opposite-sex married and Ellen has a “wife”. Sorry, these relationships will never be equal so we shouldn’t call them the same name.

The Catholic Church should copyright/trademark “Genuine Marriage” and start issuing certificates of authenticity.

monalisa on March 5, 2014 at 5:38 PM

HonestLib on March 5, 2014 at 5:14 PM

The purpose of lawful marriage is to create a stable environment for babies that happen when a man has sex with a woman. It’s more for the protection and welfare of the kids than anything else.

crrr6 on March 5, 2014 at 5:22 PM

Why did I waste all that time writing? Chuckle.

Marriage defines ownership of children being the parent(s) and not the state/government…that we agree. Historically, marriage is also about property rights for women also as long ago women got the short end of the stick when us men would not stay around and take responsibility for the kids and wife when a better ticket walked by.

Seems us straight men needed laws to force some of us to do the right thing. Marriage is about a lot of things. Again, we agree and I just like to type.

Tell me you did not read all my long blather above!

HonestLib on March 5, 2014 at 5:40 PM

Not necessarily. The “NAMBLA” accepting kook types are the ones using gay marriage as a bludgeon against religious individuals.

unquestionably there are more “NAMBLA kook types” immured within the hallowed cloisters of the catholic episcopacy than can be counted among the ranks of those who identify as homosexual in modern america.

i can see how much it hurts you that the apparatus of the state will no longer force your antiquated xenophobic morality upon the entire populace, but having your fantasies of theocratic tyranny crumble before your eyes is hardly commensurate to being “bludgeoned” with freedom and equality.

jaxisaneurophysicist on March 5, 2014 at 5:40 PM

All of those questions were answered before the first pope ever came along. The foundation of the church were the apostles and prophets. The New Testament was complete before all the apostles were dead. John, in fact, wrote the last book — Revelations. Peter recognized Paul’s epistles as scripture. Paul wrote to the Galatians that they should not accept any preaching that contradicted the gospel he had preached. Jude wrote to everyone (general epistle) to “earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered to the saints.”

There Goes the Neighborhood on March 5, 2014 at 5:29 PM

All of these questions were answered before the first Pope ever came along? Umm… think about that one for a second. (Peter was the first Pope.)

As John Henry Cardinal Newman observed, to be deep in history is to cease being a Protestant.

You say: the foundation of the church is the Apostles and prophets. That sounds awfully Catholic (i.e. you are appealing to the Church to determine scripture).

You say, the NT was complete before the Apostles were dead. You are begging the question because your premise assumes what the NT does and does not contain. Apparently you’ve read all the books written from the death and resurrection of Our Lord until the death of the last apostle, which date you know for certain.

You can’t say the book of Mormon is not scriptural by appealing to scripture. That again is circular reasoning. What if early christians applied that logic? How were they to know when the canon closed? Is that in the Bible anywhere?

GoDucks on March 5, 2014 at 5:42 PM

That’s why I think nd30 might be a moby. It’s like I’m playing teeball here.

alchemist19 on March 5, 2014 at 5:32 PM

Or he could really just be really fed up with idiots saying they represent him.

melle1228 on March 5, 2014 at 5:35 PM

Oh please…I say the same thing, yet I don’t go around spreading accusatory lies like he does. He’s a miserable troll. If you want to defend his hateful, angry bullcrud go right ahead. But it will speak to your character if you do.

JetBoy on March 5, 2014 at 5:42 PM

I don’t know if that’s true but seeing as how he claims Dan Savage and some weird street sex fair in San Francisco are representative of gay people (except him, I guess) then it would be kinda funny to see the tables turned on him.

alchemist19 on March 5, 2014 at 5:38 PM

I don’t see him say that. What I see him say more often than not- is the gay movement will go after Christians for “hatred, and prejudice” but it exist in droves in their ranks. Is ND30 a little caustic? Yeah, but so am I- so I can’t complain too much. I think he is probably as fed up with a movement that claims it is about “live and let live’ and liberty all the while it has no problem pushing its morals and taking the liberty of others.

Let the gay movement keep suing private people. Let them keep shutting up dissenting opinions. That “good” wave SSM supporters is going to turn. Because all I see of the movement is “more, more, more.” And the apublic will say stop eventually.

melle1228 on March 5, 2014 at 5:44 PM

Oh please…I say the same thing, yet I don’t go around spreading accusatory lies like he does. He’s a miserable troll. If you want to defend his hateful, angry bullcrud go right ahead. But it will speak to your character if you do.

JetBoy on March 5, 2014 at 5:42 PM

Then let it speak to my character. I like dissenting opinions even those that others consider trolls. I always engage libfree, brushingmyhair.

melle1228 on March 5, 2014 at 5:44 PM

Sola scriptura is simply incoherent.
GoDucks on March 5, 2014 at 5:06 PM

2 Corinthians 4:4 gives a succinct explanation for why it may be difficult for some:

In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them.

This is precisely the message Christ was speaking in Mark chapter 4 in His parable of the four soils.

I think Kierkegaard reminds us the reasoning here:

The matter is quite simple. The bible is very easy to understand. But we Christians are a bunch of scheming swindlers. We pretend to be unable to understand it because we know very well that the minute we understand, we are obliged to act accordingly.

anuts on March 5, 2014 at 5:47 PM

unquestionably there are more “NAMBLA kook types” immured within the hallowed cloisters of the catholic episcopacy than can be counted among the ranks of those who identify as homosexual in modern america.

i can see how much it hurts you that the apparatus of the state will no longer force your antiquated xenophobic morality upon the entire populace, but having your fantasies of theocratic tyranny crumble before your eyes is hardly commensurate to being “bludgeoned” with freedom and equality.

jaxisaneurophysicist on March 5, 2014 at 5:40 PM

Hey ignoramus– I am an agnostic, but thanks for the ranting. Let me ask you a question lunatic–when religious freedom goes and all your religious boogiemen are gone; who exactly do you think they are coming at next?

melle1228 on March 5, 2014 at 5:48 PM

This is about the lawsuit against the Church of England. Francis thinks he can find common ground for the Euro Church bodies.

When it turns out that the progs don’t care and move to sue anyway, I don’t know if he’s ready for that.

But do you know who is? Putin.

From the beginning, Putin’s been playing this card. His in-roads to Eastern Euro start with ethnic Russians which broadens into Orthodox Christians. Putin watched the pushback in France and took notes how the French Muslims marched with the Christians. It was an inversion of multi-culturalism.

So undermine the EU’s authority by splitting the culture. Take their leverage away by controlling the natural resources and flood the money back into their financial sectors.

Euro progs better take Francis’ olive branch.

budfox on March 5, 2014 at 5:57 PM

FlaMurph on March 5, 2014 at 5:29 PM

I remember, even as a 10 year old altar boy, knowing enough to stay far away from the new seminarians. That was 50 plus years ago.

Cleombrotus on March 5, 2014 at 5:58 PM

How many names does LibFree now post under?

I’ve got three so far.

budfox on March 5, 2014 at 6:00 PM

JetBoy on March 5, 2014 at 5:42 PM

JB, not picking on you…just yapping with ya.

I have tried twice to have a genial conservation about this topic and it always turns into a cat fight. Not blaming you or anybody, but if gays and religious folks want to suck up all the air…so be it, but us straight guys just living our lives also have an opinion. I tell you, the fight of the Mary’s is painful and guess the train wreck is going to happen and I will watch from the sidelines.

I swear…hand on hips….Chuckle!!!!

HonestLib on March 5, 2014 at 6:00 PM

I am not Catholic. That said, let the Catholic Church determine what Catholic Doctrine will be in area of civil unions. I will respect whatever they determine is doctrine.

SC.Charlie on March 5, 2014 at 6:03 PM

Hey ignoramus– I am an agnostic, but thanks for the ranting. Let me ask you a question lunatic–when religious freedom goes and all your religious boogiemen are gone; who exactly do you think they are coming at next?

the idea that the state apparatus’ active endorsement of religious intransigence has anything to do with “religious freedom” is about as intellectually serious as the claim of a petulant child regularly quick on the “FOAD” trigger to tolerate — nay, like — dissenting opinions.

being as i am already constantly under attack from statist types who are eager to use the power of government to coerce others to live as they would live — “religious freedom”, in your telling! — i’m under no illusions as to where “they” will come at next. luckily, i’m as prepared for the next fight as i’ve been for any other, which is to say reliant on the largely symbolic and inefficacious exercise of my voting rights and a hope that public opinion will eventually return to the ideals of freedom upon which this once-great national experiment was founded.

judging by the speed with which you’ve degenerated into obscenity-laden insults and borderline hate speech in the past — when confronted with those dissenting opinions you enjoy so much — you’re clearly fully invested in the government’s adherence to the old xenophobic marriage paradigm, and whether you yourself are agnostic or not, it’s a paradigm which is rooted in the inflexible observance of millennia-old religious mores whose practical essence has long since expired.

jaxisaneurophysicist on March 5, 2014 at 6:05 PM

Then let it speak to my character. I like dissenting opinions even those that others consider trolls. I always engage libfree, brushingmyhair.

melle1228 on March 5, 2014 at 5:44 PM

I love the way your buddy handles dissenting opinion. A model for us all, he is. Anyhoo…the best way to deal with trolls is to not feed them. You’ll notice I very rarely call anyone a troll…I can’t even remember the last commenter I even labelled as such.

Anyway…moving on…

JetBoy on March 5, 2014 at 6:07 PM

Not necessarily. The “NAMBLA” accepting kook types are the ones using gay marriage as a bludgeon against religious individuals. I think they are alive and well within the movement.

melle1228 on March 5, 2014 at 5:30 PM

I don’t think you have had as much contact with crazy, gay leftists as I have. I haven’t seen this as one of their objectives. Admittedly, I tend to insult them over how their theoretical justification for the existence of bisexuality blatantly contradicts their support for transsexuals. That is, the rhetoric in support of LGBT rights is incoherent. Why bisexuals can exist in queer theory is because sexuality is more fluid than we imagine. To deny this fluidity as I do is be guilty of the queer theory intellectual sin of “essentialism”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essentialism#Essentialism_and_society_and_politics

But to claim that the only possible interpretation of your mental state is that must get a sex change operation is obviously to sin the sin of essentialism. I am not an essentialist on this topic. It seems pretty basic to me who you are attracted is much less fluid than how you perceive your gender. For instance, I have gotten more masculine as I have aged. I blame my masculinity all on being a Republican (it’s a joke).

melle, what do you think of my argument against the leftist gay loons?

thuja on March 5, 2014 at 6:07 PM

A Christian friend who supports gay marriage has always insisted to me that there’s no real contradiction between her faith and her views on SSM. Religion has its sphere and civil society has its sphere; so long as the Church gets to set the rules in its own house, i.e. by not having to recognize or perform same-sex marriages, it can be agnostic about which sorts of relationships the government chooses to legally recognize.

I think that’s right, actually. Biblical Christians clearly see an America which makes Sodom and Gomorrah sound like a sane and responsible society, and wish to have almost nothing to do with our sickening culture. Christians, by and large, take no credit nor blame for the lawless, immoral pagan/Democrats who run the government and all of its institutions.

And I think many of us couldn’t care less what the pagans do. Acknowledge sin; repent of it sincerely, or languish in it until your eternal damnation. But no, we won’t call it “marriage”.

Jaibones on March 5, 2014 at 6:07 PM

JB, not picking on you…just yapping with ya.

I have tried twice to have a genial conservation about this topic and it always turns into a cat fight. Not blaming you or anybody, but if gays and religious folks want to suck up all the air…so be it, but us straight guys just living our lives also have an opinion. I tell you, the fight of the Mary’s is painful and guess the train wreck is going to happen and I will watch from the sidelines.

I swear…hand on hips….Chuckle!!!!

HonestLib on March 5, 2014 at 6:00 PM

How bad is it I originally read that as “genital conversation”…

Ahh…but what about gays who are religious folk…like myself (Catholic)? I gotta hear it from both sides…although it’s usually non-Catholic Christians who give me the most crud from the religious side.

JetBoy on March 5, 2014 at 6:14 PM

Not being Catholic I do not get all atwitter when somebody supporting SSM or sodomy takes the bones of what the Pope says and claims that they have discovered a new doctrine out of Rome.

That being said, Pope Francis just opened the Papal gardens at the summer retreat to the public (or any of the public with 26 Euros anyway) an area essentially off limits for centuries. Compare with America’s rat-eared wonder who has gone out of his way to keep the public out of the White House- a space that has been open to the public for centuries.

Happy Nomad on March 5, 2014 at 6:19 PM

Nothing in the First Amendment limits religious belief to just “the church”. It is a guaranteed right of the individual to profess and practice their religious beliefs without discrimination by their government.

And gay-sex marriage is nothing more than an attempt to force discrimination against people based on their religious beliefs.

northdallasthirty on March 5, 2014 at 3:42 PM

That speaks for my views, too. Very well said, northdallasthirty.

Lourdes on March 5, 2014 at 6:21 PM

but what about gays who are religious folk…like myself (Catholic)? …

JetBoy on March 5, 2014 at 6:14 PM

One either is Catholic or isn’t. Being Catholic involves submitting one to the instruction provided by the Church and in that, by and through the Bible.

Calling onesself ‘Catholic’ while being opposed to what God instructs isn’t a lucid declaration.

Lourdes on March 5, 2014 at 6:24 PM

Jaibones on March 5, 2014 at 6:07 PM

Spot on.

kingsjester on March 5, 2014 at 6:27 PM

Pope Benedict publicly addressed the issue of ‘homosexuality’ on behalf of the Church, and Pope Francis nor any other Papal associate has defied Benedict’s clarification about it:

“homosexuality is instrinsically disordered” in reference to Christianity and the Church. Pope Benedict is a superior academic on all aspects of the Bible, despite the Left’s hatred of the man.

Lourdes on March 5, 2014 at 6:27 PM

I don’t know if that’s true but seeing as how he claims Dan Savage and some weird street sex fair in San Francisco are representative of gay people (except him, I guess) then it would be kinda funny to see the tables turned on him.

alchemist19 on March 5, 2014 at 5:38 PM

He’s not saying that Dan Savage represents every gay person but your side won’t even acknowledge he exists and has a lot of influence and that the most vocal and powerful elements of the gay lobby – culturally and legally – are driven by hatred, revenge, bigotry etc.

gwelf on March 5, 2014 at 6:28 PM

Thuja you’re subhuman.

CWchangedhisNicagain on March 5, 2014 at 6:29 PM

judging by the speed with which you’ve degenerated into obscenity-laden insults and borderline hate speech in the past — when confronted with those dissenting opinions you enjoy so much — you’re clearly fully invested in the government’s adherence to the old xenophobic marriage paradigm, and whether you yourself are agnostic or not, it’s a paradigm which is rooted in the inflexible observance of millennia-old religious mores whose practical essence has long since expired.

jaxisaneurophysicist on March 5, 2014 at 6:05 PM

Gonna have me arrested for hate crime? HeyDumbazz (hateful enough for you) if you followed my posts as well as your lunatic rant says you do then you would know that the state should be OUT OF MARRIAGE all together.

melle1228 on March 5, 2014 at 6:33 PM

Lourdes on March 5, 2014 at 6:24 PM

Somehow I do not recall you being so reasonable.
Interesting. Might start reading your posts again.

astonerii on March 5, 2014 at 6:35 PM

Sigh…I will wait till Sunday for Ed’s post for some good vibes and thoughtful comments on the subject of religion. Just sigh as far as this thread is concerned.

HonestLib on March 5, 2014 at 6:35 PM

melle, what do you think of my argument against the leftist gay loons?

thuja on March 5, 2014 at 6:07 PM

LMAO that was a mouthful. ;)

melle1228 on March 5, 2014 at 6:35 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4