Prop. 8 Judge: Pope Hurt Homosexuals

LifeSiteNews.com -- Your Life, Family, and Culture Outpost ^ | August 9, 2010 | By James Tillman

[topher]

Monday August 9, 2010

---

Prop. 8 Judge: Pope Hurt Homosexuals

By James Tillman

SAN FRANCISCO, California, August 9, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- In the 136-page ruling overturning California's ban on "gay marriage," Judge Vaughn Walker cites a document signed by then-Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI, to show that "religious beliefs that gay and lesbian relationships are sinful" can "harm gays and lesbians."

William May, chairman of Catholics for the Common Good (CCG), told LifeSiteNews (LSN) that it was shocking for a federal court to rule that "Catholic teaching and [that] that of other religions are harmful to anyone." 

He also said that Walker's ruling demonstrates how "freedom for religious expression and the private interests and feelings of individuals" are on a collision course.

"Religion has always been seen as a good," he said, but "now it is being seen by an increasing number of people as harmful.”

The document that Judge Walker quoted, entitled "Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions Between Homosexual Persons," was issued in 2003 by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF) and signed by Cardinal Joseph  Ratzinger, who was then prefect.

The ruling quotes the document's statement that "Sacred Scripture condemns homosexual acts 'as a serious depravity.'"

The ruling also quotes the statement that 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," as well other short statements summarizing Catholic theology.

These quotations are offered in support of the ruling's 77th "finding of fact": "Religious beliefs that gay and lesbian relationships are sinful or inferior to heterosexual relationships harm gays and lesbians."

Walker's ruling has fully 80 findings of fact, which are separated from the "conclusions of law" in which he decides the case.  Appellate courts are typically deferential to a lower court's findings of fact, which has lead most commentators to agree that Walker's ruling was specifically written to withstand appeal.

As evidence that religious beliefs harm homosexuals, Walker also quotes resolutions from the Southern Baptist Convention, the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, the Free Methodist Church, the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, and the Orthodox Church of America.

None of these resolutions recommend violence against homosexuals; all of them generally state only that homosexual behavior is contrary to God's will.

Many of Judge Vaughn Walker's quotations from the CDF document were indirectly pulled from the website of Catholics for the Common Good, an apostolate for the evangelization of the culture.  It runs training and formation programs to prepare Catholics to deal with the current corrosive influence of the culture on marriage and family.

Chairman William May of the CCG told LSN that although the Church "is threatened by attitudes like Walker’s, the response must be love” instead of a response that others interpret “as merely ideological."

The battle for marriage is not simply in the courts, he explained, but in people's minds and imaginations.

"New ways must be discovered for inculturating the truth and beauty of our faith to help people understand the reality of the human person in God’s plan for creation and the path to true love, true freedom, and true happiness.”

In his ruling, Judge Walker did not note that the CDF document he quotes also condemns unjust action against homosexuals.  The document says that the "whole moral truth" is contradicted "both by approval of homosexual acts and [by] unjust discrimination against homosexual persons."

It also condemns any attempts to redefine marriage between a man and a woman to include same-sex "unions."

"If, from the legal standpoint, marriage between a man and a woman were to be considered just one possible form of marriage, the concept of marriage would undergo a radical transformation, with grave detriment to the common good," the document states. "By putting homosexual unions on a legal plane analogous to that of marriage and the family, the State acts arbitrarily and in contradiction with its duties."

URL: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/aug/10080907.html

---

Copyright © LifeSiteNews.com. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivatives License. You may republish this article or portions of it without request provided the content is not altered and it is clearly attributed to "LifeSiteNews.com". Any website publishing of complete or large portions of original LifeSiteNews articles MUST additionally include a live link to www.LifeSiteNews.com. The link is not required for excerpts. Republishing of articles on LifeSiteNews.com from other sources as noted is subject to the conditions of those sources.

[Waverunner]

If this judge thinks the Pope is tough on Homosexuality, wait until sharia law is introduced.
You know what I mean Vern.

[saltus]

You are right.
The problem is that the defense—the attorneys arguing for upholding Prop 8—were incompetent zealots. They never thought about getting expert testimony that would establish “facts”. Their two witnesses were self-contradictory and rambling, as properly recognized by Judge Walker.

A pathetic defense by a faith-blinded group of lawyers seriously deficient in establishing legally-based facts-—they lost. And we all lost. Sheer arrogance on their part in rejecting amicus arguments (I submitted one).

No judge—Dem, Rep, activist, gay, Christian,...— can rule in opposition to the facts presented—and Judge Walker did not. The ACLJ, Thomas More, et al., screwed up here-—just as they did in the Dover ID case. The ACLU does competent law. The Prop-8 defendents screwed up big by praying much and establishing little. Almost nil for an appeal.

Faith does not win legal—or other arguments. Stupid attorneys are not a source of pride for us conservatives.

[Monorprise]

By the “legal reasoning” of the Federal judge, no State Constitution can meaningfully exist cause it is an infringement upon “the rights of the people” not ceded to the Federal Constitution. “rights” which the Federal court cherry picks to enforce and define in order to effect their own policy’s.

This is why the “bill of rights” including the 9th and 10th amendments could not be applied to the states the result would be a madness that would effectually abolished the states and the people’s right to form and govern them.

But that is the legal reasion of the federal court in its dictated meaning of the 14th amendment in not only this ruling but Roe V. wade(same logic or lack there of).

Short of disputing the insanity of the courts edict i would very much prefer given the other problems with the same amendment that we just repeal the 14th amendment in favor of something more simpler(harder to corrupt) and to the point.

My suggestion would be a Federal Constitutional Amendment something like this:

{

Section 1:

The Fourteenth article of amendment to the Constitution of the United States is hereby repealed.

Section 2:

No Government of the United States shall in anyway discriminate on the account of race.

}

[Chances Are]

When I smoke a fag, I expect superior, smooth taste. That's why I call for Phillip Morris...!

How about Lark?

"Richly rewarding, yet uncommonly smooth!"

CA....

[HiTech RedNeck]

Faith is great, but God has warned us that faith is dead if it doesn’t, or won’t, walk.

That said, there still could be an out against this garbage. Didn’t the USSC rule not too long ago about the “quality of science” issue? The quality of the purported research stinks even on the surface. How much venereal disease has the belief that homosexual relations are a sin stopped, for just one thing? Doesn’t that count for something in the hedonic calculus?

[BlackElk]

ping for later

[shibumi]

Whatever the Pope may or may not have done to cause distress to homosexuals, it pales in comparison to the damage they do to themselves with their deviant, profligate lifestyle.

When they learn to honor themselves (by respecting the good order that God has set for their lives) then they will naturally be honored and respected by their fellow men.

[DesertRenegade]

At least Vaughn Walker’s idiotic ruling will be overturned. He should have recused himself on day 1. It’s as absurd as having a proud polygamist preside over a polygamy trial or an avowed pedophile judge decide a NAMBLA case. This is pure liberal activism in action.

[markomalley]

He should have recused himself on day 1.

That would have required personal integrity on his part (or Kagan's part when the case reaches SCOTUS). Wouldn't that be asking a bit much from our judiciary? (personal integrity, that is)

[markomalley]

The problem is that the defense—the attorneys arguing for upholding Prop 8—were incompetent zealots. They never thought about getting expert testimony that would establish “facts”. Their two witnesses were self-contradictory and rambling, as properly recognized by Judge Walker.

Oh, and one thing else to make your day. If I understand the appellate process, the arguments at the appellate level are arguments about the law, not arguments about the facts. So the incompetent work done by the pro prop-8 attorneys have established the facts of the case for all levels.

In other words, the appellors will be appealing with one hand tied behind their back before they even start.

[Gay State Conservative]

This Judge is more than just wrong. He’s hideously wrong.

This judge is more than just hideously wrong.He's amoral.

[narses]

+

Freep-mail me to get on or off my pro-life and Catholic List:

Add me / Remove me

Please ping me to note-worthy Pro-Life or Catholic threads, or other threads of general interest.

[massmike]

-Prop. 8 Judge: Pope Hurt Homosexuals-

What about how the homosexuals have hurt the church?

Gay Priests and Gay Marriage
What the one issue has to do with the other.

By Stanley Kurtz, from the June 3, 2002, issue of National Review

“The sex-abuse scandal currently plaguing the Catholic priesthood has already grown to the point where it poses a serious threat to the power, prestige, and credibility of the American Catholic Church. The sky, so to speak, is falling. An institution whose fundamental strength and continuity (whatever its many problems) could once be taken for granted is experiencing a genuine crisis.”

Yet, over and above its significance for the Catholic Church, the greatest lesson of this scandal has yet to be drawn. The uproar over priestly sex abuse — especially the calls to do away with both priestly celibacy and the Church’s traditional teachings on sexuality — offers spectacular confirmation of nearly every warning ever issued by the opponents of gay marriage.

The argument over gay marriage has always turned on the question of whether marriage will reduce gay promiscuity, or whether gays instead will subvert the monogamous ethos of traditional marriage. The priesthood scandal is a stunningly clear case in which the opening of an institution to large numbers of homosexuals, far from strengthening norms of sexual restraint, has instead resulted in the conscious and successful subversion of the norms themselves. Historically and theologically, moreover, priestly celibacy and marital fidelity have always been intimately related. Indeed, there is already good evidence to suggest that today’s attack on priestly celibacy heralds tomorrow’s assault on the ethos of marital monogamy.

......The priest scandal also teaches a critical lesson about the time that it takes to undermine an institution. Defenders of civil unions in Vermont, for example, are fond of saying that since the advent of civil unions two years ago, “the sky has not fallen.” The answer is that the effect of civil unions and gay marriage on the ethos of marriage will likely percolate for years before the harm becomes evident — after which time it will be too late to turn back.

This is exactly what has happened to the Church. It has been at least 30 years since the homosexual presence in the priesthood began to increase markedly. All along there were signs of trouble, yet no profound institutional crisis. Only now, after three decades, is the Church experiencing an authentic emergency, one that has provoked calls for at least two sorts of solutions — removing or reducing the presence of homosexuals in the priesthood, or the abolition of celibacy itself. The first solution would drive away liberal Catholics, and devastate a priesthood that is now substantially homosexual; the other would represent a tremendous blow to traditional Catholics. After 30 years of gay marriage, it would be equally difficult to go back — yet the subversive effects of gay marriage on the ethos of marital monogamy could, by then, have reached a similar stage of emergency.

....Advocates of gay marriage are fond of comparing those who warn against it to racists who purveyed silly scare stories about the effects of miscegenation. But the real model for gay marriage is the priesthood scandal. Here is a case in which gay sexual culture has not been tamed by, but has instead dramatically subverted, a venerable social institution — “

[Mrs. Don-o]

Can you supply links showing evidence of the incompetence of these attorneys?

I have not been follow the case closely, but it was my impression (just from skimming the headlines) that the attorneys for Prop 8 were working with CA Attorney General Jerry Brown's office and may have deliberately used weak evidence and "losing" arguments, and "thrown" the case, because they were going along with the State's intention.

Maybe I got that all garbled up --- as I say, I haven't followed it closely --- so I am looking for links now, to provide whatever insight I may find.

If you can help me out here, thank you.

[massmike]

http://old.nationalreview.com/03june02/kurtz060302.asp

[Mrs. Don-o]

You are quite right about that.

Moreover, the Pope has been most compassionate and exact about people who experience homosexual temptation,. He does not say they are damned for their inward confusions or disorders. He says they should pray, grow toward spiritual maturity and healing, "go and sin no more" -- which is good advice for ALL sinner, you and me included.

[darkangel82]

Disrobe and disbar. He far overstepped his bounds here.

[Antoninus]

Catholic beliefs hurt homosexuals but sodomy and STDs don’t? The world truly has turned upside-down.

[Jacquerie]

Homosexuality was accepted among ruling elites during other periods of social decline. The late Roman, high medieval Islamic, 1930s English come to mind.

Never before have societal elites condoned and promoted homosexuality with the intent of establishing homosexual marriage. This is an historical first, the imposition of a perversion upon an unwilling public. I suppose the elites believe that a society that accepts the barbaric crime of partial birth abortion will also accept fag marriage. They may be right.

The once slow decline of our civilization has become a freefall.

[HiTech RedNeck]

What really galls is that, although they may have been acting as though it were a private matter in California, they knew darn well that the queering of the “facts” would have drastic implications for the entire country. Only way I can see to get a mulligan on the “facts” is to litigate this much better in other circuits, in time for the results to hit the USSC together with this.