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.

[Ari]

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?

When the Catholic Church tried to cover it up is when.

And they're not just saying that they don't want gays getting married in their church, they're trying (as ever) to foist their ideals on the whole of the UK and state that the UK prime minister is wrong.

Once they have their own house in order, then their opinion might just carry a little validity...

[Ari]

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?

I'd always assumed marriage was about love and commitment, not "status".

Silly me...

[Ari]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Allow me to clarify. The Dictionary definitions of "status" are,

1. the relative social, professional, or other standing of someone or something: high rank or social standing.

2. the official classification given to a person, country, or organization, determining their rights or responsibilities.

In my post I intended to use the word in the context of meaning numbered 2; simply "classification" as opposed to "high rank". As such the mere existence of marriage defines a category of people and results in a classification or status.

There is no disagreement between us.

Fine. So if you marry your heterosexual partner for reasons of love and commitment, where does "status" come into it if a homosexual couple decide (and are able) to do likewise?

Doesn't affect the Hetro couples marriage or reasons for doing so one jot!

[Ari]

MOTORVATOR said:

I'll try it another way. Because you or I cannot redefine what 'god' thinks by changing the law.

As I said above I'm not religious but the church is run by people that are and if that is how they feel then as much as you may want to legislate you cannot change their opinion just because it suits you. They have a right to that opinion as much as you or I have a right to our own.

They have a right to that opinion, but not to expect people not in their club to play by their rules, and to damn them for not doing so. Isn't religion supposed to be about tolerance?

But what leaves a particularly bad taste, is that they've plenty to sort out in their own little club before they start laying judgement on others.

MOTORVATOR said:

And Ok if understanding the act of procreation takes two halves with the right wholes to work as it should then call me a homophobe it matters little to me.

The only thing that matters to me is that the act which I engaged in some 25 years ago is not just altered on the whim of another piece of PC bks.

How is it altered? Would you feel differently about your wife or the commitment you made to her somehow?

MOTORVATOR said:

Gays have their version of marriage already it is called Civil Partnership. Do you view that as any less an act of love or committment than marriage? And if not, why not revere it as the same and be happy with that?

Tell me what the problem is with there being a difference in name only between the coupling of heteros and gays. There is no need for one to impinge on the other.

What's the problem with there not being a difference in name?