Catholic church oppose gay marriage

[Willy Nilly]

TheHeretic said:

biblical passages

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Forget the religious stuff. Does a committed heterosexual couple with children REALLY want a couple of gays to share exactly the same status?

Anyway, IMO "gay marriage" is obvious nonsense. Once you take away the natural biological parenthood why not let,
a) One bloke and two women all marry into a threesome?
b) Five gay blokes all get married together?
c) A little old lady marry her pet cat?

To my mind it is plain stupid to have laws which permit gay marriage yet send people to prison for bigamy, especially since multi-partner relationships are permitted so long as you DON'T get married.

If you don't agree with gay marriage, then don't marry someone of the same sex. That's all. In case you weren't aware, gay marriage isn't fking compulsory. But if 2 gay people want to marry, why would it effect you? Why do you even care about something that doesn't have any relevence to you or your life. I have no interest in playing golf, but if others want to play, then be my guest.

[Eric Mc]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Forget the religious stuff. Does a committed heterosexual couple with children REALLY want a couple of gays to share exactly the same status?

Anyway, IMO "gay marriage" is obvious nonsense. Once you take away the natural biological parenthood why not let,
a) One bloke and two women all marry into a threesome?
b) Five gay blokes all get married together?
c) A little old lady marry her pet cat?

To my mind it is plain stupid to have laws which permit gay marriage yet send people to prison for bigamy, especially since multi-partner relationships are permitted so long as you DON'T get married.

What warped logic.

Why should a gay couple want to have a multi-partner legal relationship any more than a heterosexual couple?
Are you intimating that perhaps people of a gay persuausion are not capable of legal, monogamus relationships?

[Marf]

Ozzie's bile there is the same as one of the current republican presidential election candidates, he said pretty much the same thing when asked about gay marriage at a press conference. Not sure if it was Santorum or Romney though.

[TheHeretic]

Santa.

[Ozzie Osmond]

Eric Mc said:

Are you intimating that perhaps people of a gay persuausion are not capable of legal, monogamus relationships?

Absolutely not, and it is regrettable that people have chosen to read it that way and shoot from the hip.
Two basic questions,

1. Why is marriage limited to ONE plus ONE?

2. Why can a child not have THREE parents?

[Eric Mc]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Eric Mc said:

Are you intimating that perhaps people of a gay persuausion are not capable of legal, monogamus relationships?

Absolutely not, and it is regrettable that people have chosen to read it that way and shoot from the hip.
Two basic questions,

1. Why is marriage limited to ONE plus ONE?

2. Why can a child not have THREE parents?

So it's YOU that wants multipartner marriages?

[TheHeretic]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Absolutely not, and it is regrettable that people have chosen to read it that way and shoot from the hip.
Two basic questions,

1. Why is marriage limited to ONE plus ONE?

2. Why can a child not have THREE parents?

The tangent went thataway!

Edited by TheHeretic on Sunday 4th March 18:47

[Marf]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Eric Mc said:

Are you intimating that perhaps people of a gay persuausion are not capable of legal, monogamus relationships?

Absolutely not, and it is regrettable that people have chosen to read it that way and shoot from the hip.
Two basic questions,

1. Why is marriage limited to ONE plus ONE?

2. Why can a child not have THREE parents?

These questions only seek to (intentionally)obfuscate the debate.

[AndrewW-G]

Ozzie Osmond said:

1. Why is marriage limited to ONE plus ONE?

2. Why can a child not have THREE parents?

1) Its not, plenty of other societies and cultures permit marriage with more than one partner, feel free to join one of the many groups who would like this to be legal in the UK

2) Many children do have more than two parents, just think about what happens when parents get divorced and later married to other partners

[Derek Smith]

Marriage is not something the curch owns, invented or even discovered. They started of officiate in the marriage of kings and lesser nobs as a means of extending their authority as the church, historically, was a political entity. In this country we were, mercifully, spared the probelms with religion and political interference, by the fact that the church became part of the state, and then more or less controlled by it, thanks to Henry 8. There was a little settling in period and then a fight or two but it all eventually settled with the church marginalised.

The only reason the church in this country has any say in the matter was because the First Marriage (Hardwicke) Act of 1758 (or so) imposed on them the record keeping duties.

Up until that time marriage was something that two people could arrange themselves with no interference from the state.

The state has no right to say who you should form a long term relationship with. If a man and a woman enjoy certain state benefits from being married then so should two people of the same sex.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

"We are gathered here today to avoid inheritance tax"

And why not, I say.

[Ozzie Osmond]

Marf said:

These questions only seek to (intentionally)obfuscate the debate.

Absolutely not. If you have no answers to them then my entirely logical point is proven.

It seems there's a lot of emotion around this subject in certain quarters. So tell me, why can't three people get married?

[Marf]

Why can't they? Societal norms I'd say resulting from a bias towards coupled partnerships in western society leading towards legislation that reflects that bias.

I don't particularly care if people cant enter into a three way marriage since I wouldn't want a polygamous relationship. Do I have anything against it? Not really, assuming all are entering into it consensually that is.

I still don't see that your point is logical in the context of this thread though, which is about the catholic stance on homosexual marriage.

Since the state is responsible for the legal status of marriage, the questions you ask are irrelevant to this thread. Are they a discussion point in general, sure why not.

In relation to this thread?

No.

Rhetoric. Obfuscation. Misdirection.

[TheHeretic]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Absolutely not. If you have no answers to them then my entirely logical point is proven.

It seems there's a lot of emotion around this subject in certain quarters. So tell me, why can't three people get married?

If that os what society deems acceptable, then so be it. You were the one stating that same sex marriage was "obvious nonsense", people responded.

A question... Do you think that a same sex couple should have the same rights as a heterosexual couple? Pension rights, married tax benefits, next of kin consideration, and so on?

[Sticks.]

TheHeretic said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

Absolutely not, and it is regrettable that people have chosen to read it that way and shoot from the hip.
Two basic questions,

1. Why is marriage limited to ONE plus ONE?

2. Why can a child not have THREE parents?

The tangent went thataway!

Edited by TheHeretic on Sunday 4th March 18:47

Not as tangent at all, hit the nail on the head, imo. What is marriage? The definition is the key issue.

[TheHeretic]

Sticks. said:

Not as tangent at all, hit the nail on the head, imo. What is marriage? The definition is the key issue.

So define it.

[smegmore]

Willy Nilly said:

TheHeretic said:

biblical passages

Back?
Have a couple more...
All superstitious bks IMHO.

[fluffnik]

Why are these nasty delusional bigoted nutters allowed to run schools?

[carmonk]

But don't forget the Pope has declared gay marriage one of the biggest threats facing humanity today and one which fundamentally undermines human dignity. Unlike a worldwide network of child-buggering priests, of course.