Susan's Place Transgender Resources

ADVOCATE.COM



Pope Condemns Marriage Equality in Speech to U.S. Bishops


By Andrew Harmon | Posted on Advocate.com March 09, 2012 04:07:18 PM ET


http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2012/03/09/Pope_Blasts_Marriage_Equality_in_Speech_to_US_Bishops/ (http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2012/03/09/Pope_Blasts_Marriage_Equality_in_Speech_to_US_Bishops/)


In a Friday Vatican address to visiting American bishops, Pope Benedict XVI condemned the growing push for marriage equality in the United States, AFP reports.

"Sexual differences cannot be dismissed as irrelevant to the definition of marriage," said Pope Benedict, who warned of "the powerful political and cultural currents seeking to alter the legal definition of marriage."



(https://www.susans.org/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fhostednews%2Fimg%2Fafp_logo.gif%3Fhl%3Den&hash=edcdded7f7597f8c28e4412912e4613da450fb0c)






Pope condemns gay marriage in speech to US bishops


(AFP) – 17 hours ago | Retrieved from the Internet on March 9, 2012 by SJ


http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iATdXeENApfTcKeHD1XToIaKEvAg?docId=CNG.ed3fc3e016a720a3286d8f3516f0c011.501 (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iATdXeENApfTcKeHD1XToIaKEvAg?docId=CNG.ed3fc3e016a720a3286d8f3516f0c011.501)


VATICAN CITY — Pope Benedict XVI on Friday condemned gay marriage in a speech to bishops from the United States after Maryland last week became the eighth US state to legalise same-sex unions.

"Sexual differences cannot be dismissed as irrelevant to the definition of marriage," the pope said, warning against "the powerful political and cultural currents seeking to alter the legal definition of marriage".

"Marriage and the family are institutions that must be promoted and defended from every possible misrepresentation of their true nature."

We can always pray that God grants this pope an early retirement as an element of favor for what he has done for the morale of his priests, and the institution of marriage.

And we should all fight to defend the notion that love and marriage is for every single living breathing human being.

What other position would you expect the Pope to take?  I don't think any Pope in the foreseeable future will take a different stand.

I don't think his position affects our struggle all that much. The issue is clearly out in the public now and I think people are coming on board with it. We just need to keep it out there.

Well, people have the right to believe what they want (or feel obligated to believe, whatever). The pope represents probably a fraction of christian followers now, so if this bothers some of the members of his current congregation, then they can just pick from one of the many variations of Christianity anyway.

Gotta love the logic here "the powerful political and cultural currents seeking to alter the legal definition of marriage"

Here is a religious leader complaining about how the -government- wants to define marriage. I wasn't aware that anything other that politicians and the public are what defines what is legal. A little thing called separation of church and state people seem to easily forget.

Maybe these guys want us to go back several hundreds years when the church did run the government? And as I recall, that is the whole reason people left Europe to come to America was to get away from that. The church has every right to define what marriage is to them and who they will allow to be married in their church, but they have no right to set the legal definition. Gotta love how he also dismisses any family that isn't a traditional marriage here as well.

If the Pope wants to proclaim the catholic church will never acknowledge these marriages, more power to him. 

The church (defined in a general sense) may never accept gay marriage. That's fine. When people get married, it is usually done twice. One is for the church and one is legally registered. Most people don't realize this because the church is legally authorized to operate on behalf of the government. Why don't we just let the government un authorized these representatives?  Let people register separately with the government. I think it would actually work.

I'm so glad I consider myself an atheist
Frankly a man that has covered for paedophiles has no business making any moral judgements on us or anyone else

I guess that's his right. Even if he does look kinda like a panda. I can't be the only one who sees it.

Quote from: Cindi Jones on September 14, 2012, 06:02:25 PM
The church (defined in a general sense) may never accept gay marriage. That's fine. When people get married, it is usually done twice. One is for the church and one is legally registered. Most people don't realize this because the church is legally authorized to operate on behalf of the government. Why don't we just let the government un authorized these representatives?  Let people register separately with the government. I think it would actually work.

My thoughts are similar to this.

All religious organizations must have the right to set their own definition for the type of marriage they recognize, but their definition cannot limit the legal rights as defined by the government for anyone not part of their organization.

The religious component performed by such an organization does not convey any legal meaning - it is a just a ceremony.   The legality of the marriage contract is determined by completing and filing the official government forms.

I see no need to disallow a religious entity to act as a middleman for the legal paperwork for those that chose to get married in a religious setting.  If you're a member of an LGBT friendly church why should you have to do it in two steps - your marriage official is as perfectly capable of handling the paperwork as is the homophobic one!

-Ani

Quote from: Snowpaw on September 14, 2012, 11:11:51 PM
I guess that's his right. Even if he does look kinda like a panda. I can't be the only one who sees it.

An evil panda, yes. Or at least one that harbors malicious intentions.

Listen everybody, discuss the issue.  Let's not make ad hominem attacks and veiled wishes the Pontiff dies suddenly or is killed.

It violates the bashing rule.

Given his position and the current Church dogma, I would not have expected anything else.  Whether the average believer pays any more attention to him than on any other subject is a different matter. 
As I am not a member of the RCC I am not any more concerned than I was before I read it.

Karen.

"PS: How about another female pope for a change, just been thinking..."

A Popess? Popette?

I seriously doubt a woman will ever be Emperor (Pope) of the Roman Empire (Catholic Church).  The upper echelon is a good old boys club.

We'll be ice skating in hell before there is a female pope.  And there is not much relevance to the whole Pope thing anymore, particularly in the American Catholic Church which looks at most of what the Pope has said and promptly ignored it for the last 5 decades at least.  Just go to any Catholic Church on a Sunday and gaze upon the few people you find there and count the children and it will tell you how much anyone paid attention to the Humanae Vitae birth control deal - which was a HUGE pronouncement.  Catholics regularly remarry in the US too, also against the wishes of the Pope. The Church itself is beyond desperate for priests, and literally can not put a priest in every parish, and that's a condition that has been ongoing for decades now also.  We were 'praying for vocations' like mad when I was in Catholic School (1961-73) and either we were doing it wrong, god wasn't listening, or prayer doesn't work because the situation has become much worse.

If you want to see how this will play out in the end go to Europe where more people take tours of the great churches than worship in them anymore.

I don't think any of our Catholic friends coming here for support feel like their religion is a cult.

A religion is just a cult with a lot of members, a cult is just a religion with few members.

Of course you can trust him he's the Holy Sith Emperor
http://yoyo-guy.tumblr.com/image/26799702599 (http://yoyo-guy.tumblr.com/image/26799702599)
oops I mean Holy Roman Emperor

Quote from: justmeinoz on September 15, 2012, 03:41:02 AM
Given his position and the current Church dogma, I would not have expected anything else.  Whether the average believer pays any more attention to him than on any other subject is a different matter. 
As I am not a member of the RCC I am not any more concerned than I was before I read it.

Karen.

"Attack the issue, not the person."

This is not a hate site.

If someone who I otherwise consider irrelevant doesn't actually act aginst me directly or indirectly then I will ignore them.
If however they act against me then they will be confronted with an enraged Xena clone , who is extremely pissed-off that 6 million of her distant relatives left via the chimney.  This is an extremely silly thing to do.

Why exactly do people care why an old unmarried/never married German man now living in Italy says about US law anyway?

Quote from: Jamie D on September 15, 2012, 04:35:41 PM
"Attack the issue, not the person."

This is not a hate site.

That ^^ is absurd ! What you said is akin as saying attack the  issue of terrorism but do not attack the terrorist.

If the pope or anybody who is head of a major organization takes stand against the rights of others, then he or she better be prepared to be attacked.

The issue at hand is not attacking some nebulous issue on my head, it is attacking my right to marriage whoever I want.

Attack the issue, not the person

The issue in this case is not separable from the person, as - according to Catholic Doctrine - the 'person' in question is 'god's chosen representative on earth'.  What he says is not a matter of 'opinion' or 'a position' but de facto becomes part of the church's Magisterium.  It's not like he's some guy at the end of the bar running his mouth after too many beers.

Ok, so lets stick to the issue (and not what this man was manning in the 1940's).

Why am I not surprised by the speech?

1) Genocides sanctioned by Constantine Anti-pagan laws,
2) Crimes against humanity committed by the crusaders,
3) Inquisition,
4) Cultural and Ethnic Genocide during the "conquest of the America," and the "discovery of Africa,"
5) Flip-flop position during the Holocaust,
6) New cultural and ethnic genocides started by those bent into bringing the "good news" to the South American Indians (1930's to the present)."

So, the issues is that we are dealing with an institution with a long history of attacking those who do not align with their morality or beliefs.

Quote from: peky on September 16, 2012, 04:40:38 PM
Ok, so lets stick to the issue (and not what this man was manning in the 1940's).

Why am I not surprised by the speech?

1) Genocides sanctioned by Constantine Anti-pagan laws,
2) Crimes against humanity committed by the crusaders,
3) Inquisition,
4) Cultural and Ethnic Genocide during the "conquest of the America," and the "discovery of Africa,"
5) Flip-flop position during the Holocaust,
6) New cultural and ethnic genocides started by those bent into bringing the "good news" to the South American Indians (1930's to the present)."

So, the issues is that we are dealing with an institution with a long history of attacking those who do not align with their morality or beliefs.

You forgot the thirty years war.

Anyways on the original subject, Catholics or even Christians for that matter did not invent marriage so they have no more a right to define it than anyone else.

WOW!

For a post that's 6 months old....
_
Remember TOS 15, and keep the discussion on the article subject please!