Reply to Pope says no to blessing same-sex unions

Forum Index » Religion

Reply to "Pope says no to blessing same-sex unions"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote]So everything hangs on the assumption that Jesus "would have" condemned homosexuality, even though he said nothing about it. And even though he rejected the Old Law.
[/quote]

You make an argument from silence ([i]argumentum ex silentio[/i]) that 'because Jesus did not specifically mention homosexuality, it is not a sin.'  Jesus did not mention wife beating or bestiality so those are okay then?

Of course not.

It is absolutely clear that homosexuality is a sin. Not only that, even from a non-religious standpoint it is abnormal.

--True Fact--

It is biologically impossible for two people of the same sex "mating" with one another to produce offspring.

This is observed science with over 6,000 years of direct evidence that 2 people of the same sex cannot produce babies. It is biologically impossible.  For procreation to occur, it requires the sperm from a male and an egg from a female.

This is what is dividing the church:  will Christians call out an obvious sin like homosexuality, or will they out of fear try to get along with the evil world by saying, "Oh, it's okay, not a big deal...blah blah blah, Jesus did not specifically mention it..."

When people refuse to accept that God made us male and female, it is rebellion against God.  It is why Jesus will say to them "Depart from me you lawless ones."  It says in scripture God gives these people over to a reprobate mind.

Even children understand it takes a man and a woman to make babies because it is such an elementary concept backed up by direct observation from nature.  But wicked elements in our culture, whose home base is in the Democratic party, want to teach these children something different from the truth, hence, you see all the transgender drama going on in a vain attempt to normalize the abnormal.   [/quote]

The entire argument for excluding women from the priesthood is based on Jesus' not choosing female Apostles.  So the Church is free to infer whatever it wants, whenever it wants? It is wrong to assume that the man who said "A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another." The Church denies Jesus' body and blood to sinners.  Jesus [u]never[/u] denied himself to sinners.  He never said "you must be in a state of grace to approach me."

The rest?   You have assumed [u]without proof[/u] that procreation is God's only valid purpose for sex. And yet an 80 year old woman with a hysterectomy can marry and have sex and still be Catholic.  [/quote]

Sex must be procreative AND unitive. If the procreate part isn’t possible, it’s still unitive and designed for man and woman. That’s how NFP works. A woman isn’t fertile everyday but sex is allowed in the infertile part of the cycle even if needing to avoid pregnancy. [/quote]

Sex between gay people can be unitive.  You're still assuming without proof that it has to be between a man and a woman.  [/quote]

I guess it’s just based on what sex is between a man and woman that involve the two different body parts. [/quote]

Unitive in Catholic doctrine means bringing a couple closer together.  It does not say anything about body parts.  [/quote]

But it has to be ordered to procreation. No matter the age or state, ordered involves man and woman as intended by nature. [/quote]

"Has to be ordered to procreation" is still unproven.  There is plenty of homosexual sex in nature.  There is asexual reproduction in nature.  I know of one case in the Bible.  I know of other cases of parthenogenesis of creatures that normally reproduce sexually.  It's science.  It happens.  [/quote]

But two men or two woman can’t by nature make a baby. Impossible. Human procreation/reproduction is one man and one woman. [/quote]

You keep going around and around that the purpose of marriage is to have children - and not by science or adoption or a sperm donor, but "naturally."  But you know that the church allows a man and a woman to marry, even if they have no possibility of bearing children.  A woman can have no uterus and still be married in the Church.  This is a contradiction.  What you really mean has nothing to do with procreative anything.  It is that men and women belong together, and that one type of sex is right and another is wrong.

The Church declares this to be true without support.  They just repeat it over and over again: marriage is between one man and one woman.  How do we know this design?

We could look to the pattern of our creator: we are created in the image of God.  Yet God the Father is not married.  All beings in heaven and earth are his children, not his spouse.  Mary is not his wife.  Mary is Joseph's wife.   Jesus is not married.  The Holy Spirit isn't even gendered.    There is nothing about marriage we can learn from his image and likeness.

So next we inspect the natural world to guess at his design.  Nature is full of homosexuality.  Nature is full of creatures that switch genders.  Nature is full of creatures that switch between sexual and asexual reproduction.  And people can be born with XY chromosomes and female genitalia.  What part of God's design was that, and could he please explain who this person can marry?  No, you have to arbitrarily throw out these many contradictions in nature because they are not the norm.  Guess what?  Celibacy is not the norm, and yet the Church allows it and even expects it of some people.  Why does the Church create an exception to this idea that procreation is fundamental to our design?

There are no good answers.  Science will not vindicate you.  The Church's theology won't lead you to an answer that is other than they declare the Magisterium as the final authority.  [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics