Catholics For Marriage Equality

  • metta

    Posts: 39144

    Mar 09, 2010 8:46 AM GMT
    Catholics For Marriage Equality

    New web site:
    (C4ME) non-profit based in Maine

    [quote]
    "As Roman Catholics, we differentiate between sacramental marriage and civil marriage. Therefore, we perceive that same-sex civil marriage poses no threat to our Church. While we respect the authority and integrity of the Church in matters of faith, our prayers and discernment have brought us to a new openness on this issue. We do not ask the Church to perform same-sex marriages. We do implore the Church to honor the States’ prerogative to authorize civil marriages for our gay and lesbian family and friends."
    -- From the declaration of Catholics for Marriage Equality
    [/quote]

    http://www.catholicsformarriageequality.net/

    Maine Catholics For Marriage Equality
    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=100453248632


    Another group with the same name but based in Sacramento, CA
    http://www.catholicsformarriageequality.com

    Catholics represent 24% of the US population

    http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/15452/catholics-for-marriage-equality-launches-national-website
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 09, 2010 12:48 PM GMT
    Now there is a nicely worded piece of propaganda, if ever I seen one.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 09, 2010 1:15 PM GMT
    Some of these declarations are nicely worded, and make sense to a rational mind. Of course a "true believer" is the antithesis of a rational mind, so I see this as an uphill fight. Still, my admiration for their trying these approaches.

    As for Holy Mother Church, the simple (and simplistic) reply from them is that civil unions are a sin for all Catholics, even if straight. Only sacramental marriage within the Church is a true marriage in their eyes.

    What they seem to forget is that sacramental marriage has no civil value, either -- it works both ways. When you witness a Catholic or other church wedding you're actually seeing 2 ceremonies combined: religious and civil, the priest empowered by the state to perform a legal civil marriage, along with the religious. That's why the couple must first obtain a civil marriage license, which the priest signs, along with the witnesses, acting as a duly recognized agent of the government.

    If the Church really believed civil marriage was evil, or false, then why are they performing them? Because that is the law of the land, and they know it. Their religious ceremony by itself has no legal standing, except perhaps in states where couples can claim common-law status, especially when they can produce witnesses & evidence. It's the civil part of the service that clearly entitles a couple to full married rights under the law, both state & federal, not the sacramental part.

    So the Church has to play some mental hide-and-seek games here. And most importantly, explain why it tries to impose its view of religious marriage on the entire US, not just on Catholics, by patently prohibited election campaigning under US tax laws.

    I don't really care if Catholics borrow the Colonial practice of jumping over a broomstick to be considered married. But leave me out of it. The state ultimately determines who is or is not legally married, not the Church. Preach to your Catholics, but do not punish me.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 09, 2010 1:52 PM GMT
    It's not even up to the church. It's not even up to the government. According the the US Supreme Court, marriage is a right of the Common Law, antecedent to government; and not subject to regulation thereof.

    Here is the holding from the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Meister v. Moore US (1877):

    "As before remarked, the statutes are held merely directory; because marriage is a thing of common right..."

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

    Mar 09, 2010 2:01 PM GMT
    well good that some have decided not to hate, but frankly they have 1600+ years of evil deeds to make up for.

    it's an long hard road out of hell ..
  • MikePhilPerez

    Posts: 4357

    Mar 09, 2010 11:25 PM GMT
    ActiveAndFit saidwell good that some have decided not to hate, but frankly they have 1600+ years of evil deeds to make up for.

    it's an long hard road out of hell ..


    Who is "they" ?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 09, 2010 11:37 PM GMT
    yep more propaganda.

    But I will not accept a union between two men either. I'm not going to accept anything until it also includes plural unions too.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 09, 2010 11:48 PM GMT
    Pattison saidyep more propaganda.

    But I will not accept a union between two men either. I'm not going to accept anything until it also includes plural unions too.


    Who gives a flying fuck what you'll accept and what you won't?
  • MikePhilPerez

    Posts: 4357

    Mar 09, 2010 11:59 PM GMT
    McGay said
    Pattison saidyep more propaganda.

    But I will not accept a union between two men either. I'm not going to accept anything until it also includes plural unions too.


    Who gives a flying fuck what you'll accept and what you won't?


    Pat is Queen of Oz. If Pat does not accept it, then it will not happen.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2010 12:13 AM GMT
    The propaganda of it all. lets not forget not long before the death of the last Holy father, the Pope. Stated any nation that gives homosexual equality is deranged. This current one has done nothing but back that up. Now his brother is also in boiled in controversy from a church choir he was head of for it's sadist homosexual treatment of young boys.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2010 12:15 AM GMT
    You read it all here first. it;s all Marie Osmonds fault.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2010 12:16 AM GMT
    Pattison saidyep more propaganda.

    But I will not accept a union between two men either. I'm not going to accept anything until it also includes plural unions too.


    Then maybe you should move ot the U.S., become a Morman and start a grassroots movement to move the Morman church back to the days of Brigham Young. When they go back to having multiple wives, then you can start a campaign about you being able to be just as greedy as they are and have multiple husbands, you being a pure homosexual and all. How is that for rationale?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2010 12:36 AM GMT
    ErikTaurean said
    Pattison saidyep more propaganda.

    But I will not accept a union between two men either. I'm not going to accept anything until it also includes plural unions too.


    Then maybe you should move ot the U.S., become a Morman and start a grassroots movement to move the Morman church back to the days of Brigham Young. When they go back to having multiple wives, then you can start a campaign about you being able to be just as greedy as they are and have multiple husbands, you being a pure homosexual and all. How is that for rationale?


    Why move to America, and why be apart of a religion, I have no desire to do either; yuk. But many homosexuals are already "Mormans!" The more men the better.

    But I do see the value in plural marriage, and since many homosexual are fighting for the advancement of minority's, why stop there why not include plural too. So until this is the case I can not accept the concept of one man 4 one man, as it's no diffrent to one man, one women. To broaden it, it needs to include plural. Nothing greedy about it. But I suppose for those who struggle to find or keep one, they may see it that way.

    No I'll only accept gay unions when they also include pleural too. I was blessed to be in a plurel relationship for ten years. Since one was murded just before Christmas, I still have a spare, albeit he is my life companion.. But if another Mr right was to come along, who knows.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2010 12:39 AM GMT
    PAJohn saidIf it is better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt, then Pattison would be wise to shut the fuck up.


    And your cry-baby whinny butt opinion would be?

    Oh wait no pick, no validation, no balls. I don't know what your problem is but I'm sure it's hard to pronounce.

    Sunshine start to pay my mortgage, and then and not before hand, I'll let you to start to live my life for me. So until then I'll keep giving myself the right to voice an opinion; plural evenicon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2010 1:00 AM GMT
    The brother of the Pope says he is willing to testify in the sex scandal rocking Germany's Catholic Church. even though he says he knows nothing about the alleged abuse of boys in a choir he latter led.

    The Reverend George Ratzininer told the Rom daily La Repubblica that there was "discipline and rigour (if thats what he want to call torture) but no terror during his 30 years as head of the Regensburger Domspatzen choir.

    A man who lived in the choir-linked boarding school until 1967 has contended that a "sophisticated system of sadistic punishment in connection with sexual lust" had been installed there."

    Ratzinger led the choir from 1964 until 1994.

    How many catholics here will condemn the Mormons, yet remain silent on their own religion, or remain blind to it's evil?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Mar 10, 2010 1:01 AM GMT
    MikePhilPerez said
    ActiveAndFit saidwell good that some have decided not to hate, but frankly they have 1600+ years of evil deeds to make up for.

    it's an long hard road out of hell ..


    Who is "they" ?
    The Vatican, and anyone else that thinks that a church should dictate a country's laws.
  • MikePhilPerez

    Posts: 4357

    Mar 10, 2010 1:08 AM GMT
    ActiveAndFit said
    MikePhilPerez said
    ActiveAndFit saidwell good that some have decided not to hate, but frankly they have 1600+ years of evil deeds to make up for.

    it's an long hard road out of hell ..


    Who is "they" ?
    The Vatican, and anyone else that thinks that a church should dictate a country's laws.


    OK