Archbishop Dolan thinks he was cheated, vows to fight same-sex marriage

  • tazzari

    Posts: 2937

    Nov 27, 2011 2:25 AM GMT
    From today's Advocate:

    "New York's archbishop Timothy Dolan says he wants to help other states prevent the passing of marriage equality, which he calls "very sad, very sobering," while being interviewed on World Over.

    "Dolan shakes his head in disgust and tells host Raymond Arroyo that he has insights he's sharing with his fellow bishops. Dolan also claims that "the believing community" was deceived by the state's politicians leading up to the historic vote in June that allowed same-sex couples to marry in the state of New York. "This was hardly democracy in action," Dolan insists. "We were told when we were fighting hard against this, we said the next step is we're going to be sued if we don't do marriages, we're going to be harassed if we don't do receptions, penalized if we don't allow adoption..." Dolan says he and other bishops examined whether they did something wrong, but determined they had fallen for the assurance of people they considered political allies that "this wasn't going to go anywhere."

  • Menergy_1

    Posts: 737

    Nov 27, 2011 2:58 PM GMT
    Gotta love them "secret insights" he's sharing with fellow bishops......

    Waaaaah Waaaaah Waaaaah
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 27, 2011 3:07 PM GMT
    They're liars.

    "NYCLU's executive director told the Times that the exemptions respect "the right of clergy, churches, and religious organizations to decide for themselves which marriages they will or will not solemnize."

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 27, 2011 3:10 PM GMT
    He's just stupid, and we (NYC) are stuck with him.

    Has anybody ever (successfully?) sued the Catholic church because they won't marry divorced people? Divorce is legal in all 50 states. No church is ever forced by the state to marry a couple if the circumstances go against its beliefs.

    The adoption stuff he's crying about ... as an EMPLOYER and recipient of public funds, a church agency that manages things like adoption is required to follow the same non-discrimination laws as another employer in the state (in any capacity except actual ministry). The church has walked away from lucrative public contracts rather than agree to comply with the law. So if your "principles" force you to give up that money, so be it, but don't freakin' whine about it.

    Meanwhile, the majority of Catholics don't even agree with him on this issue. They poll more in favor of marriage equality than the general population.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 27, 2011 3:34 PM GMT
    jpBITCHva said

    What kind of a fucking infant is this guy?
    A catholic....nuff said.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 27, 2011 4:03 PM GMT
    35bjb5.jpg
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 27, 2011 4:13 PM GMT
    two consenting men: bad

    a priest and an unwilling altar boy: let´s cover this up, not cause a problem.

  • NerdLifter

    Posts: 1509

    Nov 27, 2011 4:16 PM GMT
    TropicalMark said
    jpBITCHva said
    What kind of a fucking infant is this guy?
    A catholic....nuff said.

    I've met reasonable Catholics who support marriage equality, I've also met crazy ones. Ironically, in high school, the lay teachers were the insane inflexible literalists that couldn't handle homosexuality whereas the Benedictine monks that taught me in high school in fact started me on the road of coming out. They were some of the most intelligent people I know and actively questioned many of Catholicism's precepts putting it up for public debate. That school was truly a last bastion of academic thought; I miss it.

    Now, I never quite understood how people can lump an entire religious people, be it Jewish, Catholic, Christian, Muslim, Hinduism, etc and then make a sweeping negative generalization about them and even say it with a half-serious face. There are Catholics out there fighting for our rights, but to say "A catholic....nuff said," blares logical fallacies. Not to mention a complete misunderstanding of the proper number of periods and spacing for an ellipsis to indicate aposiopesis.

    As a simple example, what if someone said, "A jew.... nuff said," isn't that offensive? That person would be lumping all Jewish people with an implied negative connotation. Just be careful what you say, cause I personally know many Catholics, Jews, and Muslims who in fact support and/or are actively fighting for our marriage rights. It's an insult and stab in the back to sweepingly label them all as bigots.

    As for this particular Archbishop, yes, he has major problems and yes is acting rather "infantile." But ever think it's only the crazies that stick out in the news? I so often see people fall into this media-inflated perception of reality then start judging entire groups of people based upon it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 27, 2011 4:28 PM GMT
    Studinprogress said
    TropicalMark said
    jpBITCHva said
    What kind of a fucking infant is this guy?
    A catholic....nuff said.

    There are Catholics out there fighting for our rights, but to say "A catholic....nuff said," blares logical fallacies.


    It's "nuff said" because of the people at the top. They make and enforce their "laws" and even excommunicate people that work for them if they are too pro-gay.

    The maid in Hitler's house might have been a nice lady but the Nazi's were still dicks, nuff said. icon_smile.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 27, 2011 4:49 PM GMT
    meninlove said They're liars.

    "NYCLU's executive director told the Times that the exemptions respect "the right of clergy, churches, and religious organizations to decide for themselves which marriages they will or will not solemnize."

    Key word in your post: solemnize.

    NO CHURCH LEGALLY MARRIES ANYONE IN THE US.

    AND MARRIAGE IS NOT THE SOLE PROPERTY OF CHURCHES, NOR IS IT THEIRS TO DEFINE.

    Legal marriage is conferred by the individual US States, not by religious entities. That's why you must obtain a State marriage license, or else your marriage doesn't legally exist, no matter what you perform in a church.

    The individual Clergy apply for State authority in order to perform a State-sanctioned marriage, exercising the same State-designated marriage authority as a Justice of the Peace or a Judge. Concurrently, they're able to solemnize the marriage in whatever manner their church doctrine prescribes as they wish.

    But I say again, NO CLERGY MEMBER HAS AN INHERENT ABILITY, BASED SOLELY IN RELIGION, TO MARRY ANYONE WITHOUT STATE AUTHORITY.

    At their core, ALL US MARRIAGES ARE CIVIL MARRIAGES, not religious ones, as defined by the State. The Clergy is permitted to perform a civil ceremony, on behalf of the State, for those parties who wish a church wedding.

    Therefore, the archbishop is full of crap. He's trying to maintain the myth that the Catholic Church determines what is a marriage and what is not. For their own religious doctrine purposes, yes, but for anyone else's, no.

    The State is the legal marriage authority, and may define it as it wishes. If the Catholic Church only wants to participate in marriages that satisfy their doctrine, fine. But to attempt to impose Catholic beliefs on non-Catholics, and deny marriage to those not conforming to the Catholic Faith, is a gross violation of the separation of Church & State.
  • rnch

    Posts: 11525

    Nov 27, 2011 5:00 PM GMT
    [quote][cite]Art_Deco said... the archbishop is full of crap. He's trying to maintain the myth that the Catholic Church determines what is a marriage and what is not... [/quote]


    well said/typed/expressed


    icon_idea.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 28, 2011 2:11 PM GMT
    There is a Catholic congregation in NYC which is pro-gay and marches in the Heritage of Pride every year. They were ordered (either by him or his predecessor) "You may not carry a banner with the church's name on it in that parade!"

    So they marched with a blank white banner, and t-shirts, posters and flyers with the church's name on it. He'll have to learn to be more specific next time!