Archbishop Thomas Wenski of Miami in one of his recent weekly columns:
"...In seeking to redefine the legal definition of marriage to include same sex unions, President Obama and other proponents of "gay marriage" are in effect imposing their views and lifestyle on the larger populace. Once legal, the state's coercive power will punish those who refuse to embrace gay marriages. For example, public officials - regardless of their views on the rightness or wrongness of homosexual acts - will be obliged to officiate at same sex "weddings", and public schools will be required to teach their acceptability to children whether parents concur or not. Even First Amendment freedoms will not be protected from assault.
Marriage has been primarily about the raising of children (who seem to be hardwired to be best raised by a father and a mother who are married to each other). Society has a legitimate interest in favoring such traditional marriages as a way of investing in the future of society by providing for the human flourishing of upcoming generations.
Same sex "marriage" - if allowed to prevail in law - will result in the devaluation of all marriages with terrible consequences to society. That marriage is a life long union between a man and a woman is certainly part of Catholic teaching - in fact, in our teaching, this union is seen as a covenant and is a sacrament. However, marriage as a union between a man and a woman for the sake of family is not a product of religious sectarianism. Nor is marriage a creation of the state. It is founded in nature itself.
Marriage understood as a union between one man and one woman as an institution precedes church and state - if not a creation of Church or state, neither has any authority to change the nature of marriage.
The common good demands that the understanding of marriage as a union between one man and one woman not be lost."
70 Comments
"Imposing His SSM Views on the Country"
Not nearly as much as Mitt Romney who wants to impose his view on the entire country by enshrining it into the Constitution. You guys are grabbing at straws here. Presidents are always going to have opinions on the issues. Face it, you're just throwing a tantrum because our current president won't give your bigotry the validation you're looking for.
More lies, distortion, and fear. Courtesy of NOM and anti-gay bigots.
The Archbishop is telling the truth.
Everyone who has experienced what it is to bring a child into the world knows it.
14th,
Opinions on an issue are one thing; undermining duly constituted laws under the guise of defending them is a crime in any jurisdiction and your Marxist president willfully violated his oath of office in defense of his "personal opinion."
When your "personal opinion" leads you to violate the constitutional rights of your countrymen your "personal opinion" is no longer "personal."
Randy, You do understand that Congress is obligated to operate within the limits of the Constitution, don't you?
14th:
You do understand that DOMA is the law of the land, under the Constitution, don't you?
I can see from the routine political gay-bashing included on the archdiocese website that your readers will benefit from being told about the role that the Catholic Church played in sending homosexuals to be imprisoned, tortured and murdered in concentration camps.
As you know, the Vatican entered into a power-sharing agreement with Mussolini; it got independent nation status, and in exchange, agreed not to criticize Mussolini, who mandated daily lessons in Catholicism in the state schools.
Mussolini was duplicitous in stating that there were no homosexuals in Italy and yet, he worked hard at keeping them oppressed and then sending them to concentration camps. The Church played an active role in demonizing gay people, and then cooperated in the efforts to move them to the camps. Mussolini's granddaughter has stated that it is better to be a fascist than a faggot.
Of course, without knowledge of the Church's Reichskonkordat political treaty with Adolph Hitler, readers will not have a full understanding of how Vatican cooperation with Mussolini led to Italian homosexuals being sent to their deaths in concentration camps, and thus, my proposed article certainly will discuss the Reichskonkordat.
Interesting that the 1st Circuit did not bother to acknowledege that full Faith and Credit protects the Federal from the State; whereas the State is kept from dictating that which belongs to the Federal must be extended to the State.
Adolf Hitler was a Homosexual Jew; where as Mussolini was caught trying to escape dressed as a woman.
Things that make you go hmmm!
Well, Scott, I understand that slanders are just as good as proof for fanatics such as yourself, but please do keep in mind that evidence is a nice thing, because it allows sane people to assess the merits of whatever it is you happen to be shrieking about.
"Adolf Hitler was a Homosexual Jew"
Randy has now offended the holocaust survivors and all Jews in general along with the LGBT community. Thanks Randy for showing us how ignorant and hateful you NOMers are.
Back on topic, I seem to remember an anti-gay group NOM insisting the GOP candidates that they need to sign a marriage pledge to impose their views on the US.
Its not illegal for same sex couples to have children so if saving the kids is the goal, making same sex marriage illegal will will only hurt these children more by making their "parents" pariahs.
If Jew’s and Homosexual’s are offended by the truth than that is of no concern of mine. Hitler was the illegitimate son of a wealthy Jew who refused to acknowledge him as his own; he turned to sexual depravity do to the feeble structure of the single biological parent household.
History bears witness to the decay your depravity will bring for any society that refuses to learn from the lessons of the past.
Randy E King said:
Also he invented Ebonics.
Osama Bin Laden was an avowed heterosexual!
The fact that Randy uses apostrophes to pluralize words and doesn't know the difference between do and due tells us a lot about the level of intelligence we're dealing with here. Studies have shown that the less educated a person is, the more likely they are to be anti-gay.
Studies.
Have Shown.
Righty-o.............
The majority of NOM's followers obviously are very easily propagandized to; NOM demonizes equality supporters as "elites," but meanwhile, NOM's founder has various degrees and teaches at Princeton, Brian Brown studied at Oxford, and Maggie Gallagher studied at Yale. How are those three going to accuse equality supporters of being "elitists"?
The fact that 14th has to fall back to pointing out obvious typographical errors in defense of his proclivity testifies to the desperate condition of his campaign.
"Oh yeah! Well you misspelled the word disparity..."
What's next 14th "I know you are but what am I?"
Scott,
But neither Yale nor Oxford have put the force of their respective institutions on the line in defense of traditional marriage as they have in support of marriage corruption.
And that makes all the difference in the world.
Decadent: undergoing a process of decline or decay, especially in morals
Elite: a small group of people within a larger group who have more power, social standing, wealth, or talent than the rest of the group
Rick: http://www.pewforum.org/PublicationPage.aspx?id=647#3
Actually, Scott, most marriage corruption supporters are not members of any elite. They only wish to wear the proper political fashion of the day.
The actual elites- the social engineers who are destroying our economy and our moral foundation- are infinitely worse than either the poor homosexual or the marriage corruption dupe, both of whom will simply be used and discarded as the social engineering agenda dictates.......
"Marriage understood as a union between one man and one woman as an institution precedes church and state."
Now we're starting to talk turkey! For within that is to be found the starting point of this thing called marriage.
A cabal of anti-homosexual bigots.
Well, remarkably enough, Scoot, it appears we are again at loggerheads, and shall have to agree to disagree.
The good news is, we both get a vote this November
There, there Scoot.
If that was selling in any way at all you should not be staring your thirty third consecutive defeat at the p[olls in the face.
Think about it.
14th,
You do realize the demographic you celebrate are the ones thought most responsible for the decline of this nation; the ones universally referred to as the 'me generation.'
Another item for the "Things That Make You Go Hmmmmm" File:
14th cites a "study" to defend his "conclusion" that intelligence correlates to marriage corruption dupe-hood.
His very now source states right off the bat:
"Overall, Americans with college degrees are divided almost evenly over the issue of gay marriage (49% oppose, 44% favor)"
Nice work there, 14th.
Randy, You're really going to claim that anyone with more than a high school education is responsible for the decline of our nation?
That there doggone book learninz done gone and ruined everthin for us simple God fearin folkz.
College graduates age 65 and older are more than three times as likely to favor gay marriage than are seniors with less education (33% to 9%). Among those age 50-64, college grads are twice as likely to favor gay marriage as their less educated counterparts (43% to 21%). By comparison, education makes relatively little difference among those under age 30, where support for gay marriage runs highest. Since younger generations are more likely to have college degrees than older, this education gap contributes to the overall size of the generation gap on gay marriage.
So, then, 14th.
I suppose what you intended to assert was:
"Only the old are smart".
Nice job again.
You're on a roll.
14th,
The percentage of the population that is over the age of 65 is 13%; the percentage of the population over the age of 65 that is college educated is 3.25% of the population. 43% of 3.25% of the population equals 1.5% of the population; roughly equal to the percentage of the population that self identify as Homosexual.
You need to stick to the blatant lies and falsehoods in defense of you demands for special rights because the actuls do not paint a pretty picture of your proclivity.
But wait!
There's more!
14th's own "study" informs us that 67% of the folks he wants to tell you are smart in the over 65-age group, oppose marriage corruption!
Bravo, 14th.
Great work
Our "higher education..." is part of this whole problem! I would say any responsable and caring person without a college degree has more potential for sanity and clarity of mind than most of the confused scrambled heads coming out of the university factories of our day. Those who do come through the experience while still holding onto reality and good sence, are to be commended and encouraged; as many of the people who are fighting on the side of NOM.
As far as this issue of marriage goes. The thing is, you can be a 5 year old and explain clearly to the university professer why marriage is between a man and a woman and not two people of the same sex. That's the beauty of the subject. It reunieties so many different groups and people, including those with "higher education" (hard to say that without a smile) along with those of a simple education.
14th,
What you need to try to understand is that some of us happen to be college educated professionals who pride themselves on making well informed decisions. My employer expects me to be right 100% of the time and they reserve the right to terminate our arrangement if I happen to make a single mistake; no matter how many years of dedicated service I may have provided.
Go insult somebody else’s intelligence. You will not find any willing victims here.
% in favor of same-sex marriage in 2010
College grad +: 52
Some College: 46
High School or Less: 34
Source: http://www.people-press.org/2010/10/06/support-for-same-sex-marriage-edges-upward/
Tut tut there, 14th. Now that you have admitted that 67% of the people you call "smart" in the over 65 age group oppose marriage corruption, what are we supposed to conclude now?
I think, if we really look at your "studies", and your "conclusions", that they boil down to a bit of handwaving bomfoggery, that "if you want to be perceived as smart then support marriage corruption, here's the data, just don;t look too closely, there's a good fellow."
It is not at all difficult to understand why you guys can't win an election. 14th.
@ 14th
A perfect example of why this country need less college "educated" (manipulated) people and not more!
"if not a creation of Church or state, neither has any authority to change the nature of marriage."
By which he seems to mean "everyone must accept what my church says the nature of marriage is." Bah, popery.
Oh I see, Good News. In your upside world, 8th grade dropouts are independent thinkers with strong analytical skills while those with advanced degrees are malleable, gullible folks who can be taught to believe anything. LOL. So just to be clear, you think what this country needs is LESS education?
Rick,
College grad +: 52
Some College: 46
High School or Less: 34
I don't know how to simplify it beyond that. If you're still having trouble getting it, you have bigger problems.
I would strongly encourage the opposition to add the "marriage supporters are dumb" argument to their repertoire.
People like to be called dumb. Really, they do.
The incredible 14 keeps on swinging his rubber bat, having yet to notice that his assertion of a correlation between intelligence and marriage corruption support has blown up in his face, from his own statistics, cited in his own "studies".
Where did you say you were educated again, there, 14th?
A refund would seem not to be altogether out of the question.
@14
There you go, you're learning. But its only the first day of class. You still have a long way to go. Don't try to take it in all in at once. For now, simply stop trying to think you know it all. And we'll pick up where we left off tomorrow. Remeber, your a good man.
But wait a minute there 14. 67% of the college-educated over 65 *oppose* marriage corruption.
So which is it- are old people with college degrees dumb, while young people with college degrees are smart?
Or is it. after all, just a case of petitio principii:
"smart people agree with 14 on marriage corruption, and dumb people don't?"
You really seem to be having a difficult time with your numbers here, 14......
Barb:
The overwhelming charm, persuasiveness, and effectiveness of the marriage corruption arguments can only be adequately appreciated in light of the thirty three consecutive drubbings they have received when trotted out before the electorate.
Rick and Barb, Your side has had plenty of attempts to make its case in court. You fail miserably time and time again. Must be all those uneducated judges who don't understand the law like you do, right? Face it, you're losing. The majority of Americans reject your bigotry and desire to violate the Constitution by enshrining bigotry into the law. But NOM Blog will always be your safe place - where you can spew your extreme views alongside like minded bigots. Well at least until the Vatican realizes it's throwing good money after bad and NOM ceases to exist.
Excellent article as this is already happening in the six states that have allowed this perversion and also in Canada.
Another sad thing is if you read this article and then read the comments. So many today in the Catholic religion have been led astray. The comments show that they are not following the faith.
Taken things Jesus said out of context and ignoring the obvious proves that you are just delusional.
Well, now, 14th, you seem to have surrendered all your ground, and are left with a few guys and gals dressed up in robes.
I suppose it is, after all, the only ground left upon which you can stand.
But it is a mighty small little sliver of territory, compared to your original statistical pretensions here.
As for SCOTUS, the marriage corruption advocates have pursued quite a brilliant, Gramscian strategy, which suffered from the notable defect of an inability to count to five.
As to the rest of the territory, that will be well in hand after election day.
Oh, and as for making our case in court, 14th, here is the First Circuit Court with some very bad news for the Dream Team:
"Baker is precedent binding on us unless repudiated by subsequent Supreme Court precedent."
"Baker is precedent binding on us unless repudiated by subsequent Supreme Court precedent."
Just as the Dred Scott was rock solid.
Pete, Don't forget Pace v. Alabama.
Rick, The majority of the American people support marriage equality. That's a pretty good sized sliver - I'll take it.
!4th,
What was the result of the 33 votes taken on this subject where we the people actually had a say? If I'm not mistaken; the actuals do not support your ridiculous assertions to the contrary.
The only thing you got going for you, aside from corrupt jurists and politicians, is your copyright pending "no it isn't" and "so what" responses.
Amend:
I don't blame you, but understand that in a democracy it's the ,majority that will determine the outcome of a question like this.
And the majority of the American people have made it incontestably clear, in thirty three straight elections- every single time that have had the chance to exercise their responsibilities as informed citizens-
They have rejected the marriage corruption movement..
You will never secure marriage corruption through the ballot box.
That war is over and we won.
The legislatures are not working for you either- progress is far too slow, and even States which had fallen to the legislative imposition of pseudo-marriage are being reversed.
That leaves the Courts.
Where your side is pursuing two, directly contradictory approaches to somehow inveigling the SCOTUS to bless the kangaroo court of Vaughn Walker.
Heh heh heh......
I've always tried to tell you, Amends, that the big flaw in the Dream Team strategy boils down to an inability to count to five.
14th wrote:
"The majority of the American people support marriage equality."
Here's an appropriate answer to that statement:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtNHuqHWefU
I could not have said it any better Barb. Great link.
Herb: What do you mean 'to have children'? Can adopt or engender? Two persons of the same sex or biological gender cannot engender a child, neither can it be done with human cells from two persons of the same sex. Certainly, same-sex partnerships, given it is not possible to ascertain their so called 'sexual orientation', and considering the sexual act is only possible between opposite sex persons (which is called the sex-ual act), can adopt children. The civility of a person is not decided by their claimed 'sexual orientation', unless, of course, it is a pedophile posing as a particular 'sexual orientation'. Once we allow 'sexual orientation' to be recognized for legal purposes, pedophiles can hide in that sort of ambiguity in the legal code.
Scott Rose: How do you talk about Italy, The Vatican, and Mussolini vs. 'homosexuals' if so called homosexuals could hide in their closets? A Jew you can trace, but not a 'homosexual'.
So called homosexuality is not inherited. I think we are all 'homosexuals', so in essence, Mussolini imprisoned lots of 'homosexuals'. Problem with your logic is that anyone who imprisons any number of people will undoubtedly imprison some so-called 'homosexuals'. Yes, some liars too - because we can all become liars. Lots of organizations thought Hitler was doing some good at first.
The concentration camps were certainly not going to be announced. It wasn't like a vacation resort with diet room and board, to be announced and marketed.
You have no evidence The Vatican knowingly supported any projects to send ANYONE to a concentration camp to be killed. 'Concentration' just means to concentrate, not to consecrate. Japanese people were concentrated in US territory. Any 'homosexuals' there? Your guess. How would that change the measure of atrocity?
14th Amend: This is ad hominem argumentation at your best/worst:
'The fact that Randy uses apostrophes to pluralize words and doesn't know the difference between do and due tells us a lot about the level of intelligence we're dealing with here. Studies have shown that the less educated a person is, the more likely they are to be anti-gay.'
Speaking about level of intelligence, do you even know what ad hominem means? NOM's speller checker doesn't know
But that's a machine. You l on the other hand, can learn.
14th said: "Must be all those uneducated judges who don't understand the law like you do, right?"
It's not education that's the problem with judges; it's their going beyond what the law provides for on the basis of personal and political forces. I mean, look at what that flaming homosexual judge did in the Prop 8 case; what a joke that was.
Here you go, Barb: http://www.gallup.com/poll/154529/half-americans-support-legal-gay-marriage.aspx
Here's the thing though, Amend.
All of your polls are completely bogus, since if they weren't, you guys would have won elections that you have instead, without exception, lost.
It is indeed a great shortcoming of your strategy that polls do not count on election day.
More to come in November.
@ Little Man Re: ad hominem - you mean like this:
"that flaming homosexual judge did in the Prop 8 case"
@14th Amend
Polls have consistently been proven wrong regarding the level of support for SSM. Why do you think this poll is right?
"that flaming homosexual judge did in the Prop 8 case"
Um, he was a flaming homosexual, wasn't he? Isn't "flaming" derivative of "flamboyant?" Boy, we have to be careful; don't want to offend the homosexuals.....
I know you're being sarcastic, saying, "[D]on't want to offend the homosexuals..."
But, seriously, though, I don't care whether they are offended. THEY offend me. It's a two-way street all up'n here.
14th Amend: No, i mean you. You've done it. Don't look for company in your misery.
Supporters of marriage btwn one man & one woman, its no use debating SSM SUPPORTES, they r deceived & r n bondage to perversion and lust. Their minds r blinded to the truth. Only God can help them! God created marriage and only God can change it. The law makers may try, but God has a higher law than mans. We will all face judgement some day and at that time all SSM
Supporters will find themselves spending eternity n hell for rejecting truth. Im sure they wont agree with this post but that doesnt make what I am stating any less true. SSM is nothing more than perversion to the highest & deep down they know it.