Catholic church oppose gay marriage

[Ari]

So to be clear, according to the Catholic church it's ok for men to bugger choirboys, just do long as they don't marry them.

[Eric Mc]

There's a surprise?

[anonymous-user]

Cults can say what they want and get away with it!

[Marf]

They really should direct their ire at the straight people who keep making gay babies.

[TheHeretic]

I do think it is weird.

If it is because of the biblical passages, then why ignore the others? Why don't they condone killing children for being disrespectful, etc?

If it is because families should have a mum and a dad, and for making babies, then do they disagree with sterile adults marrying?

They just like to interfere. Nothing more, nothing less.

[Eric Mc]

Catholics don't read tghe bible so it can't be anything from that source.

[Pints]

Eric Mc said:

Catholics don't read tghe bible so it can't be anything from that source.

Pretty much this. And yet there will be those (probably in the majority) who will tar Christians with the same brush.

BTW do you have a source for this, OP?

[Zaxxon]

BBC News website

[TheHeretic]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17249099

He says it will be a shame on Britain, and a grotesque subversion. He also seems to link gay marriage with adoption, for some reason.

[smileymikey]

They are just looking out for us. Priests know from experience that gay sex is much more exciting if you keep it as "our little secret"

[AndrewW-G]

Yet more nonsense from delusional nut jobs.

If they or any other cult wish to tell their members, that they shouldn’t do something, fine. It is after all part of their cult . . . however to try and impose their ideas onto people who don’t share their iron age belief system should be outlawed, as it has no place in any progressive and arguably enlightened society.

[jeff m2]

Of course they would, they wouldn't their priests leaving to get married.

[cymtriks]

Ari said:

So to be clear, according to the Catholic church it's ok for men to bugger choirboys, just do long as they don't marry them.

What a silly statement.

When have they ever said that groping a choir boy is OK?

Marriage is intended, by their rules which perfectly reasonably apply to marriages performed in their churches, to be between men and women.

Assuming that you don't have a problem with your freedom of speech, and you doing what you want on your own property, why do you have a problem with him saying he doesn't want gays getting married in his church?

[TheHeretic]

cymtriks said:

What a silly statement.

When have they ever said that groping a choir boy is OK?

Marriage is intended, by their rules which perfectly reasonably apply to marriages performed in their churches, to be between men and women.

Assuming that you don't have a problem with your freedom of speech, and you doing what you want on your own property, why do you have a problem with him saying he doesn't want gays getting married in his church?

You mean there was no cover up so as to keep their 'reputation'? They may not think it was "OK", but their response to the abuse was atrocious.

[AndrewW-G]

cymtriks said:

Assuming that you don't have a problem with your freedom of speech, and you doing what you want on your own property, why do you have a problem with him saying he doesn't want gays getting married in his church?

It is the churches prerogative to decide who does or doesn’t get married in their churches, in the same way that they can tell their subordinates in their cult, what they should or should not do . . . . . .however when we have people like this sitting in the House of Lords, then the subject becomes a little less clear cut and a tad morally offensive

[B Huey]

AndrewW-G said:

It is the churches prerogative to decide who does or doesn’t get married in their churches, in the same way that they can tell their subordinates in their cult, what they should or should not do . . . . . .however when we have people like this sitting in the House of Lords, then the subject becomes a little less clear cut and a tad morally offensive

The sooner people like this have no say in our affairs the better.

[TheHeretic]

B Huey said:

The sooner people like this have no say in our affairs the better.

And this is why we have active secularists.

[Eric Mc]

AndrewW-G said:

cymtriks said:

Assuming that you don't have a problem with your freedom of speech, and you doing what you want on your own property, why do you have a problem with him saying he doesn't want gays getting married in his church?

It is the churches prerogative to decide who does or doesn’t get married in their churches, in the same way that they can tell their subordinates in their cult, what they should or should not do . . . . . .however when we have people like this sitting in the House of Lords, then the subject becomes a little less clear cut and a tad morally offensive

Are there Catholic Bishops in teh House of Lords - or are they banned?

[TheHeretic]

Eric Mc said:

Are there Catholic Bishops in teh House of Lords - or are they banned?

The Lords Spiritual. 26 of them sit in the house of Lords. No RC bishops though.
However...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/david-cam...

Edited by TheHeretic on Sunday 4th March 13:54

[TheHeretic]

Guam said:

^^^^^^

This I dont understan what any ones problem is, their belief structure in their churches, their rules surely?
Isnt that why Registry offices exist?

So you can dispense with the Religous stuff and just get the job done?
Go to a registry office end of problem!

No-one has an issue with the church not allowing gay marriage, it is their little club. The issue is when they start prattling on about what the country should do.

PS, a religious marriage isn't legally binding. What is is the thing you sign out back, which is essentially what the registry office stuff is. Marriage is a legal issue, not a religious one. If the church tries to change public legislation based on their bronze age opinions, then people will tell them where to get off.