Posted on 08/12/2010 10:05:25 PM PDT by GonzoII
|
www.catholicnewsagency.com
Ruling against Prop. 8 makes marriage unconstitutional, Archbishop Kurtz says
.- In an exclusive interview, Archbishop Joseph Kurtz spoke to CNA about the decision of District Judge Vaughn Walker to overturn California’s Proposition 8, which defined marriage as being between one man and one woman. Archbishop Kurtz remarked that the ruling against the proposition “in a sense … declared marriage to be unconstitutional.” Archbishop Kurtz, who is the Chairman of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops Ad Hoc Committee for the Defense of Marriage and Family Life, stated in his interview with CNA that Judge Walker’s decision “to say that marriage as the union of one man and woman is now to be considered unconstitutional ... precisely because as he said, he could not find a compelling rational purpose for marriage,” could truly be considered "outrageous." He also affirmed interviewer Dr. John Haas’ statement that, “in a sense, he has declared marriage to be unconstitutional, because there is no such thing as ‘gay marriage’,” since true marriage requires a man and a woman. Describing the implications of the ruling, Archbishop Kurtz recalled a reaction he heard to it, saying, “marriage has simply become a governmental registry of friendships. It’s simply looking at adult friendships and turning them in a sense into what we call marriage.” The archbishop also noted that the Catholic Church’s teaching on the nature of marriage is based in the natural law and not on the popular vote or on polls. However, he did mention that in every single state where marriage has been “brought before the people, they have all confirmed, in every state, the fact, the conviction, that marriage is the union of one man and one woman.” It is still imperative to fight for marriage, Archbishop Kurtz declared, saying also that the Church must continue her efforts to pastorally support married couples “so that they could live the fullness of their married life.”
|
I’ve often wondered how they can rule against polygamy if two men or two women may marry one another?
Polygamy frankly makes more sense to me than homosexuality does. Some of the greatest figures in the Bible practiced polygamy, for example, Elkanah with Hannah and Peninnah; Hannah gave birth to the prophet Samuel. Never and nowhere, insofar as I know, does the Bible ever endorse homosexuality or portray non-negatively any of its unrepentant practitioners. Perhaps the Mormon (religious, politically conservative) historic practice of polygamy in this country makes that lifestyle choice too politically incorrect for the courts to endorse it.
At some point, and not too far off, the American people need to take up the reins.
Their is now an absolute need to grab this judge, and any other such example of perversion, by the back of the neck, and PHYSICALLY remove him. Literally toss these dupes and goons out the door into the mud on their insolent asses. We should do the same with many of the imbeciles that occupy our legislatures.
I actually hope a polygamist sect of Mormons take a run at this judge.
I can not figure out why the LDS church came out in support of prop 8. I honestly would have thought that they would have been more low key.
This is a great stepping point to allow polygamy again. The LDS doctrine D&C 132 requires that LDS members practice polygamy in order to gain entrance into the highest degree of glory. I also heard someplace that the vote concerning gay marriage passed with one of the smallest margins of any state in Utah.
I have already posted my stance on this whole thing. Short story is that I will abstain from voting on this issue. It has no bearing on my personal salvation whatsoever.
They can’t. Legalized homosexual marriage opens the door to everything up to group marriage. If 10 men and 10 women all profess their love and want to engage in consensual sex, with all the benefits of a married entity, there is absolutely no basis to ban the practice once you say marriage is no longer one man to one woman.
Prohibitions on any number or type of marriage become indefensible as soon as homosexual marriage becomes legal. A Grandmother could marry her grandson.
A man could marry his horse.
Read it again: D & C 132
This same section only allows those plural marriages, really polygyny not polygamy, by ordination of God only under the new and everlasting covenant of marriage.
Interestingly, the plural marriage part is rescinded here:
but the requirement for "celestial marriage" continues for the highest degree of glory, only now it is monogamous.
The LDS mainstream church will never again have polygamy. The "restoration of all things" purpose has been accomplished already.
That’s why the real target is destroying marriage.
Civil unions, along with common contract law and powers of attorney, satisfy the legal requirements of homosexual relationships giving them full protection less marriage.
It is the natural outgrowth of permanently immature sexuality seeking recognition (unattainable) and in the service of the evil one.
Bookmark
I’m honestly convinced that Obama and the homosexual lobby will not be satisfied until they have torn down every cultural tradition we have.
The real target is destroying Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular; their unwavering opposition to abortion, re-marriage, and artificial contraception has put them in the crosshairs of some powerful, wealthy groups and individuals.
Polygamy is a way to strengthen the family when women were in excess (e.g.men killed in war) or to allow the men sexual pleasure with another wife while abstaining so his wife won’t get pregnant too often (yes, there are prostitutes, but that makes it more likely to give the wife diseases, and infertility is one problem of STD’s).
Polygamy is actually biblical according to the old testament, but rabbis and European custom recognized that it made women unhappy and therefore men miserable, so it gradually died out before Christian times. The Chinese sign for “trouble” shows two women under one roof...so most folks saw polygamy’s problems.
Indeed, in modern countries where polygamy is legal, it is actually rare, less than 25 percent..
All of this is based on biology, that women need a man to protect them when they bear children. It is older than most religions, and has a biological basis (given to us by God or Darwinian evolution) that lets males and females split the work to enable more kids to thrive
Gay marriage however is based on the idea that family is a social construct, there is no essential difference between men and women, and that sexual pleasure has nothing to do with marriage, fidelity, or even bearing children.
Laws that ignore biology are utopian, and ultimately dangerous because they are based on a lie that denies the differences between men and women.
Polygamy is biblical in the same way that divorce is: because of the hardness of men’s hearts. The first man to have 2 wives was an admitted murderer.
BTW, women who live together and/or who are having sex with the same man would become regulated by pheromones and tend to have fertile periods and periods at the same time.
I think you’re right. A group employing Cloward-Piven strategies to overload the economy would also necessarily want to remove what they view as obstacles to their remaking society, which would definitely include the Church. Words truly fail to give the depth of my feelings on this side of their evil. On the other hand, looking at what the Church lived through with the Romans, there will be a way...no matter what Weasel Boy and his effete Posse of Evil do.
That is correct; no matter what may happen in the short term, Jesus said His Church was eternal, and that is enough for me. I don’t know what form it will take (back to the catacombs?), but the Church will survive these trials as it did the Roman persecutions, the Reformation, Vatican II...
Then how about disciplining, excommunicating if necessary, those within the RCC who affirm and endorse this perversion, Archbishop Kurtz? They are identifiable, open and unrepentant. Why does the RCC coddle them and soft peddle its teaching against homosexuality?
BTW, God never created, suggested or endorsed polygamy is Scripture. EVER!
Speaking of Polygamy the SCOTUS issued rulings that Congress had the power to forbid immoral marriages back in the 1890s when it was suppressing Mormon polygamy. Those might make good precedents to argue in defense of real marriage, if the Prop.8 fiasco ever gets to SCOTUS.
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.