Here is what the Archdiocese of Boston wants for the priesthood...

In a Blog post which may be found here, Deacon Ryan Duns argues that same-sex "marriage" could actually be beneficial to society.

Deacon Duns quotes from Louis Dupre, who said that, "The quality of a civilization may be measured both by the complexity of its ingredients and by the harmony of their order. The more diverse elements it succeeds in integrating within a harmonious and unified balance, the greater its potential and, usually, its achievements are." (Louis Dupré, Passage to Modernity, 29).

Then this confused soul writes, "...the Supreme Court's decision to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) has yielded simultaneously great rejoicing from some, much hand-wringing from others. From Twitter to Facebook, blogs to news sites, the Court's actions were debated and discussed, celebrated and denounced. Mike Huckabee tweeted that 'Jesus Wept' and the USCCB called it a 'tragic day for marriage and our nation.' The New Ways Ministry website likens the experience to 'justice rolling down like a river,' washing away what Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg referred to in March as 'skim-milk marriage.'

Well, he is a Jesuit...the gayest order in the US and everywhere else, from what I know.

St Ignatius de Loyola is probably whirring so fast in his grave that the ground is exploding, but that doesn’t matter. The Jesuits (even though there are some very good, non-gay ones, such as Fr. Fessio) have been completely coopted by the gays.

And don’t forget that the current pope, Pope Francis - aka, Pope Foolish Trendy the First - is a Jesuit.

Thank you for referencing that article cleghornboy. Please bear in mind that the following critique is directed at the article and not at you.

"...the Supreme Court's decision to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) ..."

FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument

Evidently even after all this time since United States v. Windsor was decided, people still don’t understand that the Supremes struck down only one of two major privisions in the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

Section 1. Short title
This Act may be cited as the “Defense of Marriage Act”.
Section 2. Powers reserved to the states
No State, territory, or possession of the United States, or Indian tribe, shall be required to give effect to any public act, record, or judicial proceeding of any other State, territory, possession, or tribe respecting a relationship between persons of the same sex that is treated as a marriage under the laws of such other State, territory, possession, or tribe, or a right or claim arising from such relationship.
Section 3. Definition of marriage (ruled unconstitutional by the Supreme Court)
In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife.

Note that Section 3 was appropriately ruled unconstitutional, imo, for the simple reason that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate marriage. So the feds don’t even have the power to define marriage.

Also note that DOMA Section 2 remains in effect. Section 2 is appropriately based on Congress’s constitutional authority, under Full Faith and Credit Clause (4.1), to regulate the effect of one states records in the other states, Section 2 clarifying that the states are not obligated to respect gay marriages by other states.

But regarding Section 2, also consider that the corrupt Court is now seemingly doing a complete turnaround with respect to wrongly ignoring 10th Amendment protected state power to prohibit gay marriage.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.