11 - 20 of 20 Comments

1. JeanCatherine

   11 months ago

   RC
   
   If you get the chance check out my blog at Jean'sBistro2010's blog: I have the Catechism in my blogroll so click on here.
   
   I also would go to CatholicAnswers on the web which migh have answers for you.
   
   You can also blog some of the key words you wrote from about using what Catholics believe in the sentence. It should bring the topics up for you.

2. Robert Burford

   11 months ago

   Funny how the readings for Saturday hit home. 2 Timothy 4:3-4 speaks how people will accept anything new and shut their ears to the truth. But like Paul in verse 7 we will have fought the good fight . We have to stand up for the truth even at the risk of not being politically correct in the eyes of the world. Good job in speaking the truth and not waivering to our immoral world. I would be ashamed of this country if we did not do something to stop the nightmare of attacks on life and the family.

3. Robert Burford

   11 months ago

   Funny how the readings for Saturday hit home. 2 Timothy 4:3-4 speaks how people will accept anything new and shut their ears to the truth. But like Paul in verse 7 we will have fought the good fight . We have to stand up for the truth even at the risk of not being politically correct in the eyes of the world. Good job in speaking the truth and not waivering to our immoral world. I would be ashamed of this country if we did not do something to stop the nightmare of attacks on life and the family.

4. Drew John

   11 months ago

   And what about bi-sexuals? Conviniently left out of the debate by the promoters of homosexual marriage because if people would only THINK they would see how wrong the whole absurd notion is legally, ethically, morally, practically...
   
   If homosexuals gain their supposed 'right' to claim 'marriage' then how can we logically and morally discriminate against the bi-sexual? Law should be consistent or it will rightly be seen to be unfair and prejudiced (never mind that law itself is by definition necessarily prejudiced and discriminatory). If homosexual marriage is normalised (this is their agenda no less) then three, or greater, party marriages will eventually follow because these (self-designated) bi-sexual people claim to be 'naturally' attracted to both genders and given sexual desire must, in liberal thinking, be expressed lest the individual suffer unhealthy repression there will be no logically consistent argument against it.
   
   So polyamory et al will also be deemed normal by the state in time if it continues to yield to normalising homosexuality. Imagine the confusion and chaos of the possible permutations. If I decide to deem myself bi-sexual I NEED to marry both genders to be true to my sexuality. To do otherwise would be a sham. So I marry a man and a woman. They might marry each other too or perhaps just me and they each chose another spouse (only if they are also bi-sexual like me). Assuming I married 2 bi-sexuals who each don't love and themselves marry my choice of 'other' spouse but marry their own - we are now a group of five who are legally bound to certain others in the group but not all others. I have children with my female spouse. The pre-nups better be good if I want claim to them as our kids given her female spouse might want to parent them too. Lawyers will make a killing when these relationships (or just some of them) break down.
   Even deciding which house to buy is gonna be fun. Probably need mediation, which the government should pay for given, morally speaking, it should be helping relationships that it has legitimized as being beneficial to society.
   
   Polyamory etc is the trailer towed behind the homosexual marriage truck. I can totally agree that not all homosexuals wanting to be married, or their supporters, have this development in their agenda but am positive others will because despite denials history proves so.
   
   When homosexuality was legalized in NZ in 1985 they claimed that all they wanted, nothing more, and that seeking legally recognized marriage would never happen. Despite ~80-90% of the public against it the politicians passed it into law by a slender few votes and then, surprise surprise (not) immediately the fight was on for recognised civil unions. Again the promise "we don't need or want your marriage thing..." but that has been the aim since they won the civil unions bill. And here we are. So who of us can say what else is wanted. I say they will want their marriage status to be 100% normalised which means speaking against it or refusing to wed them or hire church, or other facilities, for such weddings will be criminalised. They want to silence any voice that would dare say their practices are abnormal/harmful/sinful/not ideal.
   
   Read some Tammy Bruce. An ex-liberal lesbian she was on the inside and says these people want nothing less than the total rewrite of social bonds. They hate what is normal because it reminds them they are not. Once Tammy changed her politics she also became one of the hated nevermind her still being a woman and, at least when I read her book, a lesbian.

5. R.C.

   11 months ago

   I hope I am typing this question to the apprpriate people. I have been going to a Catholic Church for the past 6 months and there's so much I would like to know. I have many questions but today's focus on sexuality. Please, understand that I am in no way attempting to be disrespectful. My questions are as follows: Did Jesus Christ evr have sex? Did Mary ever have sex with Joseph after Jesus was born? How was masturbation looked upon? With all the respect in my heart and soul, I want to understand completely. respectfully, R.C.

6. Rob

   11 months ago

   In a country that condoes the killing of children in the womb, sadly, I don't find gay marriage all that shocking. Honestly, I'm suprised it took this long. Did we honestly think that we could treat marriage so poorly and not have this problem we do today? I know, human failure does not change the natural law, but that has never stopped man before. This will be no different.

7. Paul

   11 months ago

   I don't understand why a government institution should be controlled by religious beliefs. The church (Catholic, Christian, or otherwise) can stick to heterosexual marriages but to pretend that only a subset of Americans should have control over what 2 people can and can't be married is a very strange idea.

8. Louisa

   11 months ago

   Dear Mrs. Hartline, You're good, lady! Wow!

9. gfgrosek

   11 months ago

   Love your neighbor, forgive your enemies, and spread the Good News of God's Kingdom. Very simple instructions, but very difficult instructions. God gave no instructions to only love straight neighbors. God gave no instructions to use man's laws to keep neighbors from sinning. God had no intentions to use man's laws to represent God or spread the Good News. Man's government does not represent God or God's kingdom. The church represents God on earth. The sacrament of marraige remains the same in our church. It is still a comandment of God to not kill. We still have the instructions to love our neighbor, forgive our enemies, and spread the Good News of God's Kingdom. Catholic leadership needs to get out of the political arena. Catholic leadership needs to increase the number of parishioners in their flock. We need people to be motivated by God, not man's government.

10. Tanya

    11 months ago

    You are the most articulate person I know. Can't you please run for something????

Leave a Comment