True marriage is the union of one man and one woman. Legal recognition of any other union as "marriage" undermines true marriage, and legal recognition of homosexual unions actually does homosexual persons a disfavor by encouraging them to persist in what is an objectively immoral arrangement.
"When legislation in favor of the recognition of homosexual unions is proposed for the first time in a legislative assembly, the Catholic lawmaker has a moral duty to express his opposition clearly and publicly and to vote against it. To vote in favor of a law so harmful to the common good is gravely immoral" (UHP 10).
UHP Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Considerations regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons
Mr. Prud'homme. God created man and woman and told them to be fruitful and multiply. Homosexuals cannot accomplish this task. It's really that simple.
Baptism is not a "rule". Its a covenant and commitment between parents, sponsors, congregations and God.
Any one of those parties mentioned can refuse the baptism.
This signature issue is utter sillyness...it cheapens the sacrament. The baptism should not be refused, the child should be brought in to the church without its "parents" and get baptized. The act of baptism is not represented in the piece of paper you get.
"If two mothers or two fathers come to baptize a baby, how can you turn down baptism? To me it's insane. Even if they have to change the ruling of the baptism certificate. Who tells me that two mothers or two fathers cannot raise the child in the Catholic faith?"
Being a Jew and not a Catholic, I couldn't be positive, but I do believe it...oh, yes...WRITTEN IN THE BIBLE. It's not ok in the Tanakh (old Testament), and it's not ok in the New Testament, which makes it positively not ok in Catholicism at all. Or in any Judeo-Christian denomination worthy of the description.
Homosexual Agenda "This is Just the Beginning" Ping.
Just the beginning. More to follow - no doubt things we can't even imagine in a nightmare are now percolating as we speak. Abominations R Us.
I have an alternative rallying cry: "Stop legislating immorality!"
Freepmail me if you want on/off this pinglist.
I'm sure that if the actual, a/k/a real, parents wanted to sign, there would be no problem.
Calling a homosexual couple the "parents" of a child is perverse and should not be allowed.
Not for you to decide, jerk.
Who tells me that two mothers or two fathers cannot raise the child in the Catholic faith?"
Well gee, moron, if THEY are not Catholic (which they are NOT) then why should they teacj anything relating to Catholicism? Idiot.
Either way, it really won't matter. Baptism of children or adults doesn't save, nor does it reduce sin in any way.
Same sex "couples" do not have children. The rest is irrelevant.
these kinds of cases raise alot of interesting and difficult issues. On one hand, it seems reasonable to not baptize a child whose "parents" are a homosexual couple. If a child is baptized, he or she needs to be raised in the faith. It is impossible for two sexually active homosexuals to do this. Furthermore, there is the complication of the consent of the parents - a gay couple cannot be parents. One wonders why a gay couple would even want their child baptized Catholic in the first place. Why would you want a sacrament from a church that tells you that you are living in sin?
On the other hand, baptism is a source of enormous grace. If we Catholics are serious about the necessity of baptism, then the idea of denying baptism to a child is very troubling. Who knows what plans God might have for that child? Who's to say that the baptismal grace the child of a gay couple receives will not someday lead that child to embrace Christ and reject the lifestyle of his/her parents? I am reminded of Graham Greene's novel "The End of the Affair." The novel concerns an affair between a man and a married woman named Sarah during WW2. Sarah is intially not religious at all, and has never been so. But one day, her lover is almost killed in a bombing raid on London. Sarah turns to God at this moment and promises that if God allows her lover to live, she will end the affair. The lover lives and Sarah immediately stops seeing him. Unbenknownst to her former lover and husband, Sarah is drawn to Catholicism and discusses thoughts of conversion with a priest. Sadly, she becomes ill and dies before she can join the Church. After her death, Sarah's mother reveals that she had had Sarah baptized by a Catholic priest as an infant. Sarah was not raised a Catholic beyond that, yet in the end the grace she received in baptism came through (or at least this is what the novel implies). Yes it is fiction, but it's not implausible. With the grace of God, children raised in sinful homes can change and become saints.
As a non-Catholic, I don't know the ins & outs of their doctrines; is an infant baptism alleged to be of significant spiritual benefit to the child? If so, how is it right to do spiritual harm to the child just because the parents are recalcitrant sinners?
"If two mothers or two fathers come to baptize a baby, how can you turn down baptism? To me it's insane. Even if they have to change the ruling of the baptism certificate. Who tells me that two mothers or two fathers cannot raise the child in the Catholic faith?"
This is almost as stupid as the infamous "who is the Church to say who can recieve communion" uttered during the '04 election cycle.
How can a gay couple have children?
One of the key points of this article that I think bears repeating and emphasis is the following quote: "Mr. Prud'homme, a Catholic, said the church should not be free to refuse baptism under any circumstance. "It's a question of rules, but I consider a baby a gift of God," he said in an interview."
I think he just gave us an important peek at his cards. Emphasis on: "the church should not be free to refuse baptism under any circumstance."
I would not be at all surprised if step two is the introduction of "civil rights" legislation designed to force churches to perform baptisms on demand. Perhaps not with criminal penalties per se, but as a requirement to retain such things as tax-free status.
One thing that surprises me about history is how forthright evildoers are about their plans.
A distinction without a difference
Straining at knats and swallowing camels
A distinction without a difference
Straining at GNATS and swallowing camels
Mr. Prud'homme what do you consider homosexuality -a gift of Government -an abomination sanctioned by fools like you?
"Who tells me that two mothers or two fathers cannot raise the child in the Catholic faith?"
How about the Church you are supposedly a member of? Homosexuals can not raise children let alone raise them to be Catholic -if the children are correctly catechized it will be in spite of the depraved homosexuals that they may have to endure exposure to and abuse from...
For those interested -some links to documents and some excerpts:
Catholic documents and teaching on subject of homosexuality:
- The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality - Guidelines for Education within the Family
104. A particular problem that can appear during the process of sexual maturation is homosexuality, which is also spreading more and more in urbanized societies. This phenomenon must be presented with balanced judgement, in the light of the documents of the Church. Young people need to be helped to distinguish between the concepts of what is normal and abnormal, between subjective guilt and objective disorder, avoiding what would arouse hostility. On the other hand, the structural and complementary orientation of sexuality must be well clarified in relation to marriage, procreation and Christian chastity. "Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained". A distinction must be made between a tendency that can be innate and acts of homosexuality that "are intrinsically disordered" and contrary to Natural Law.Especially when the practice of homosexual acts has not become a habit, many cases can benefit from appropriate therapy. In any case, persons in this situation must be accepted with respect, dignity and delicacy, and all forms of unjust discrimination must be avoided. If parents notice the appearance of this tendency or of related behaviour in their children, during childhood or adolescence, they should seek help from expert qualified persons in order to obtain all possible assistance.
For most homosexual persons, this condition constitutes a trial. "They must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity. Every sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided. These persons are called to fulfil God's will in their lives and, if they are Christians, to unite to the sacrifice of the Lord's Cross the difficulties they may encounter from their condition". "Homosexual persons are called to chastity".
- Persona Humana - Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics
VIII At the present time there are those who, basing themselves on observations in the psychological order, have begun to judge indulgently, and even to excuse completely, homosexual relations between certain people. This they do in opposition to the constant teaching of the Magisterium and to the moral sense of the Christian people.A distinction is drawn, and it seems with some reason, between homosexuals whose tendency comes from a false education, from a lack of normal sexual development, from habit, from bad example, or from other similar causes, and is transitory or at least not incurable; and homosexuals who are definitively such because of some kind of innate instinct or a pathological constitution judged to be incurable.
In regard to this second category of subjects, some people conclude that their tendency is so natural that it justifies in their case homosexual relations within a sincere communion of life and love analogous to marriage, in so far as such homosexuals feel incapable of enduring a solitary life.
In the pastoral field, these homosexuals must certainly be treated with understanding and sustained in the hope of overcoming their personal difficulties and their inability to fit into society. Their culpability will be judged with prudence. But no pastoral method can be employed which would give moral justification to these acts on the grounds that they would be consonant with the condition of such people. For according to the objective moral order, homosexual relations are acts which lack an essential and indispensable finality. In Sacred Scripture they are condemned as a serious depravity and even presented as the sad consequence of rejecting God. This judgment of Scripture does not of course permit us to conclude that all those who suffer from this anomaly are personally responsible for it, but it does attest to the fact that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered and can in no case be approved of.
- Letter to the Bishops of the Catholic Church on the Pastoral Care of Homosexual Persons
10. It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves condemnation from the Church's pastors wherever it occurs. It reveals a kind of disregard for others which endangers the most fundamental principles of a healthy society. The intrinsic dignity of each person must always be respected in word, in action and in law.But the proper reaction to crimes committed against homosexual persons should not be to claim that the homosexual condition is not disordered. When such a claim is made and when homosexual activity is consequently condoned, or when civil legislation is introduced to protect behavior to which no one has any conceivable right, neither the Church nor society at large should be surprised when other distorted notions and practices gain ground, and irrational and violent reactions increase.
11. It has been argued that the homosexual orientation in certain cases is not the result of deliberate choice; and so the homosexual person would then have no choice but to behave in a homosexual fashion. Lacking freedom, such a person, even if engaged in homosexual activity, would not be culpable.
Here, the Church's wise moral tradition is necessary since it warns against generalizations in judging individual cases. In fact, circumstances may exist, or may have existed in the past, which would reduce or remove the culpability of the individual in a given instance; or other circumstances may increase it. What is at all costs to be avoided is the unfounded and demeaning assumption that the sexual behaviour of homosexual persons is always and totally compulsive and therefore inculpable. What is essential is that the fundamental liberty which characterizes the human person and gives him his dignity be recognized as belonging to the homosexual person as well. As in every conversion from evil, the abandonment of homosexual activity will require a profound collaboration of the individual with God's liberating grace.
- Some Considerations Concerning the Response to Legislative Proposals on Non-discrimination of Homosexual Persons
II. Applications10. "Sexual orientation" does not constitute a quality comparable to race, ethnic background, etc. in respect to non-discrimination. Unlike these, homosexual orientation is an objective disorder (cf. "Letter," No. 3) and evokes moral concern.
11. There are areas in which it is not unjust discrimination to take sexual orientation into account, for example, in the placement of children for adoption or foster care, in employment of teachers or athletic coaches, and in military recruitment.
13. Including "homosexual orientation" among the considerations on the basis of which it is illegal to discriminate can easily lead to regarding homosexuality as a positive source of human rights, for example, in respect to so-called affirmative action or preferential treatment in hiring practices. This is all the more deleterious since there is no right to homosexuality (cf. No. 10) which therefore should not form the basis for judicial claims. The passage from the recognition of homosexuality as a factor on which basis it is illegal to discriminate can easily lead, if not automatically, to the legislative protection and promotion of homosexuality. A person's homosexuality would be invoked in opposition to alleged discrimination, and thus the exercise of rights would be defended precisely via the affirmation of the homosexual condition instead of in terms of a violation of basic human rights.
- Third World Meeting of Families: Conclusions of the Pastoral Theological Congress
Mention should also be made of recent attempts to legalize adoptions by homosexual persons, and this must be strongly rejected. It is obvious that this is not the situation for authentic up-bringing and personalizing growth. “The bond between two men or two women cannot constitute a real family, nor much less can the right be attributed to a union of this kind to adopt children without a family”. With regard to foster care and adoption, the great principle to be applied is always the child’s higher interests which much prevail over other considerations.
- Fourth World Meeting of Families: Conclusions of the Pastoral Theological Congress
We reaffirm the rights and dignity of all children. They should never be neglected and abandoned on the streets. They should be protected, especially when threatened by exploitation through prostitution, pornography, child-labor, drug trafficking, homosexual adoption and immoral "sex education". A new threat to children is posed by the misuse of the Internet, when this intrudes into family life and undermines the rights and duties of parents.Children are the "crown of marriage", the real wealth of humanity. The natural place for their education is the family. It is here, in the community of life and love, that they are formed as members of Christ's Church. It is here that, honoring and loving their parents, they can enrich the lives of all members of the wider family.
- Considerations Regarding Proposals To Give Legal Recognition To Unions Between Homosexual Persons
4. There are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God's plan for marriage and family. Marriage is holy, while homosexual acts go against the natural moral law. Homosexual acts “close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved”.7. Homosexual unions are totally lacking in the biological and anthropological elements of marriage and family which would be the basis, on the level of reason, for granting them legal recognition. Such unions are not able to contribute in a proper way to the procreation and survival of the human race. The possibility of using recently discovered methods of artificial reproduction, beyond involving a grave lack of respect for human dignity, does nothing to alter this inadequacy.
Homosexual unions are also totally lacking in the conjugal dimension, which represents the human and ordered form of sexuality. Sexual relations are human when and insofar as they express and promote the mutual assistance of the sexes in marriage and are open to the transmission of new life.
As experience has shown, the absence of sexual complementarity in these unions creates obstacles in the normal development of children who would be placed in the care of such persons. They would be deprived of the experience of either fatherhood or motherhood. Allowing children to be adopted by persons living in such unions would actually mean doing violence to these children, in the sense that their condition of dependency would be used to place them in an environment that is not conducive to their full human development. This is gravely immoral and in open contradiction to the principle, recognized also in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, that the best interests of the child, as the weaker and more vulnerable party, are to be the paramount consideration in every case.
- Religiosorum Institutio
30. Those To Be Excluded; Practical DirectivesAdvantage to religious vows and ordination should be barred to those who are afflicted with evil tendencies to homosexuality or pederasty, since for them the common life and the priestly ministry would constitute serious dangers.