Catholic official likens same-sex unions to abortion

MDJ Online ^ | Tuesday, November 18, 2003 3:56 AM EST | Russ Bynum

[Hat-Trick]

The Roman Catholic bishops of America (is there such an organization?), beginning with Always Our Children, have accepted wholeheartedly the liberationist view of "sexual orientation" as a fixed attribute which is both necessary and sufficient to describe a person.

What amazes me is that a bishop actually says that "it's not their choice to be gay", when he of all people knows that God's Word so consistently speaks otherwise. He is one of the "elect" that is leading the sheep astray.

Whatever happened to "No temptation has overtaken you but such as is common to man; and God is faithful who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, and with every temptation will provide a way of escape so that you will be able to endure it"???

Sure hope they've ordered up an adequate number of millstones.

Hat-Trick

[Maeve]

BUMP.

[fatima]

http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/123/32.0.htmlWeblog:
Ontario Court Throws Out Marriage Definition
Plus: A teacher fights to evangelize kids after school, church attacked in India, and other stories from online sources around the world.
Compiled by Ted Olsen | posted 06/11/2003


Christian groups respond to Canadian court's redefining of marriage
The Ontario Superior Court ruled yesterday that Canada's legal definition of marriage—"the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman"—is discriminatory, unconstitutional, and violates homosexuals' human rights guaranteed under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

"The restriction against same-sex marriage is an offense to the dignity of lesbians and gays because it limits the range of relationship options available to them," wrote Justice Harry LaForme. "The result is they are denied the autonomy to choose whether they wish to marry. This in turn conveys the ominous message that they are unworthy of marriage. … I find that there is no merit to the argument that the rights and interests of heterosexuals would be affected by granting same-sex couples the freedom to marry. I cannot conclude that freedom of religion would be threatened or jeopardized by legally sanctioning same-sex marriage."

The new definition of marriage, at least in Ontario, is now "the voluntary union for life of two persons to the exclusion of all others."

It's the latest in a series of Canadian court decisions supporting gay marriage. Last month, the British Columbia Court of Appeal also ruled that the definition of marriage must be changed, but gave the government until July 12, 2004, to do it. A Quebec Superior Court judge issued a similar ruling last fall. But yesterday's ruling in Ontario offered no grace period for the government—homosexual marriages were instantly legal. They took place almost as instantly, as dozens of couples raced to be among the first.

The court decision legalizes two homosexual marriages from January 2001 that occurred at a Metropolitan Community Church in Toronto, but the first new marriage was that of prosecutor Michael Leshner and Michael Stark. "Today is the death of homophobia in the courtroom as we know it," said Leshner.

It's the death of something, agreed Christian groups in Canada and the U.S.

"This change in the common law is not an incremental step

[narses]

Forgive the crudity, but how do they define consumation?

[fatima]

narses,I have no clue,been married to a nice man for 42 years,have 6 children.Marriage is a word,sacrament is living it,we have been thinking of what country to move to.Abortion and homo are never in the same equation.

[narses]

The country you deserve is Heaven. I shouldn't have been so crude, forgive me. Pray for our fallen brethern.

[fatima]

narses,You stated a truth,I have to look up the meaning of the word though.

[sspxsteph]

"Marriage is, in many ways, in a crisis in this country," Boland said.

A very true statement. It is sad to see all 'normal' marriages mess up, and then to have this on top of it.