The public is increasingly dismissive of pronouncements concerning
morality from the Catholic hierarchy. The general feeling is that the
“Emperor has no clothes.”
As the civil rights of homosexuals are concerned, the Church is
increasing putting itself a position that is not only unlawful under
the U.S. Constitution but oppressive and cruel as far as those rights
are concerned. At some point, if this path continues, the Bishops
will be written off in the public discourse.

“We have a set definition of marriage that has been part of the human endeavor from time immemorial.”
Really? Like women being purchased as property? Or blacks only able to marry with permission of their slave owner? When marital rape was legal? Stop discriminating and letting God take the fall for you. It’s disgusting.

I just love his last line - ‘four outs to every inning’ - classic Dolan and wonderfully put!  Push onward soldier of Christ, push onward!

FOUR outs per inning?!?! Is that down from 6 outs per inning or does he mean 4 per half inning?  Is the “People will be able to marry their pets” argument just not frightening people like it used to?

Thank God for Archbishop Dolan and the bishops and cardinals that are not afraid to speak out on these very important issues.  I’m hoping that under Archbishop Dolan’s leadership, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops will be clear, concise and vocal on all 5 of the non-negotiables: abortion, stem cell research, cloning, euthanasia and gay marriage, and encourage our priests to speak and defend the Church’s teachings on these and other issues.  Thank you Archbishop for speaking out and God Bless!

“You think it’s going to stop with this? You think now bigamists are going to want their rights to marry? You think somebody that wants to marry his sister is going to now say “I have a right”? I mean, it’s the same principle, isn’t it?”
———————-
No, it isn’t the same principle at all. This implies that if you stop discriminating against one particular issue then you can’t discriminate against other issues. That simply isn’t true. The reasons for banning incestuous relationships have nothing to do with a consensual relationship between two non-related adults (which also describes heterosexual marriage). They are clearly not the same thing.

Thank you Archbishop Dolan for your leadership, you are inspiring many to stay the course!

Roman Catholic Archbishop Timothy Dolan no doubt rejoiced upon learning that white supremacist and former Ku Klux Klan leader James Edwards this week joined with the Roman Catholic Church in Her efforts to halt marriage equality, and — even more shockingly — embraced African-American football player and former New York Giant David Tyree for his participation in the same oppression.  Yes, that’s right:  the KKK and an African-American have set aside their centuries-old differences, because they think oppressing lesbians and gays is more urgent.

The KKK isn’t the only such group helping the Catholic Church.  Among the 1,002 organized fierce, frightening groups identified by the Southern Poverty Law Center are 17 other organizations that are notorious hate groups which also are aligned with the Catholic Church’s campaign, including:  National Organization for Marriage, Traditional Values Coalition, American Family Association, Family Research Council, and Westboro Baptist Church.

Archbishop Dolan must ask himself, on the way to his next confession:  when avowed, confirmed hate groups such as these are so eager to help us, can there really be any justice in what Holy Mother Church is doing?

Yeah, we have all the “elites”.  Meanwhile, the poor folks at NOM are so ashamed of their wretched fund raising that they refuse to disclose to election officials the names of their donors.  Millions and millions of dollars in unreported campaign donations.  Blatant disregard for the law which requires disclosure.

And you wanna bet a certain “Mr. Dolan” isn’t on that list?

Dolan talks of the powers against his position. It seems to me this a position taken when one knows they are on the losing or wrong side of the argument. Where was Mr. Dolan and his church when they knew about the abuses under their noses? One example-they closed their eyes, and sent Mr. Law to exile in Rome,

Archbishop Dolan:
Jesus would disagree with your stance on equality.  Matthew 25:40.

As for your comment about marrying one’s family member have you forgotten Genesis 19:30-36?  How does Lot & his daughters work into your logic?

Why does equality for all that does not come at the expense of others scare you so much?

THANK YOU BISHOP DOLAN !!!!!!! Your comments and perspective are “spot on”. I hate to think what group will next, want their “rights” Scary!!!God Bless you !!!!

I’m not sure why people have such a difficult time seeing the conflict between same-sex “marriage” and Christianity.  Wherever government touches our lives, only one or the other can be accommodated - the other one loses out.  Permitting one where the other already exists manufactures conflict that negates any perceived good it might do.  It is the singular most un-American phenomenon I have ever witnessed in this country.

I am fully behind New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan on this issue of the definition of marriage. If the definition of marriage is changed to support a life style, it will be harmful to all Americans, Christian and Non-Christians. Our country has become Liberal in allowing this issue to come up for a vote. All Christian Churches in America need to focus on their congregations casting responsible votes. Too many Catholics or claim to be, have become Liberal Catholics. This is not the way of Jesus, when He cleaned out the Temple, it was because He knew what the definition of “His Father’s House” was. And we as Catholics need go out and clean “Our House” too.
Thanks for the good work Archbishop Timothy Dolan

Thank you, Your Excellency, for your strong and courage support of Marriage as God has designed it to be, not at the “Homosexual Activists” are determined to re-create marriage to suit their purposes.  Thank you for publically stating your veto for the Bill now under consideration, to the New York lawmakers, escpially those who have withheld their support or are undecided.  How greatly those of us who strive to live the Truth and Teachings of the Church, need more strong voices as yours, all across the Country.

So, Archbishop Dolan, you feel that an “elite” such as the one you say supports marriage equality, should not dictate public policy for everyone else. That may be valid. But by the same token, should a religious elite consisting of unmarried, celibate Catholic clergy be able to dictate public policy for everyone who is not Catholic, or even Christian?

Just a question.

God bless you, good bishop.

Today is the Feast Day of St John the Baptist who was beheaded for speaking out on the adulterous marriage of Herod.

You are certainly following his example and not being intimidated or silenced by those clamoring for acceptance of homosexuality in mainstream America. (I don’t think it’s all about marriage- it’s about “normalizing” homosexual acts in society.)

Thanks for the article updating us.

I respect your beliefs, Archbishop Dolan but regardless of any outcome, the Church needs to pull back and examine its actions in this entire marriage equality controversy. Ask yourself has the church stooped to unethical and immoral means to defend what it feels to be a Christian virtue. This is playing out on a world stage, everyone is watching - especially the young - and the Catholic Church really isn’t looking noble right now.

Archibishop Dolan, you’re embarrassing me and almost every young Catholic I know.

Hey there national Catholic Register…Why the word “marriage” in scare quotes? If they are given marriage rights, it will *be* marriage, plain and simple.
Perhaps then given our recent knowledge of the expoitive, abusive boy-sex escapades of too many Catholic priests we in the mainstream would feel mightily entitled to similarly use scare quotes for the fakely holy Fathers’ “celibacy” which certainly has proven to be far more bogus and predatory than the sincere vows of fidelity uttered by same-sex adults.
How much time have you devoted to the predatory sexual sickness of too many Catholic priests, compared with the undeserved condemnation you heap on loving consenting adults who happen to be of the same gender?  How dare you cast judgment on non-exploitative love. How dare you.

Too little too late. Do you think this would have happened in the time of Cdl O’Connor? It possibly would have. Imagine a castle with concentric exterior walls. If we give up ONE, the enemy might leave us alone. Sooo, the first was divorce, then contraception, then abortion and now same sex marriage. My heavens! There are no more walls!!! Now what do we do? We have nothing left to say. THE GOOD NEWS: Now there are clear lines drawn.
As Newman said: “I want a laity, not arrogant, not rash in speech, not disputatious.but men who know their religion, who enter into it, who know just where they stand, who know what they hold and what they do not, who know their creed so well they can give an account of it, who know so much history that they can defend it.” John Henry Cardinal Newman
This quotation was given by Pope Benedict in Westminster Hall on his recent visit to Britain.

SHAME on the Catholic Church! How can they spread lies? I’m a Filipino, and came from a very Catholic nation, Catholic clan, and Catholic educaion but I’m very blessed that God woke me up from the evil teachings of this corrupt religion. Wake up Catholics, they are a lot of teachings in the Bible that the Church didn’t even care to follow. Don’t cherry pick the word of God because ya’ll know that He is a God of Justice and He will punish everyone who use his name for profits, and telling lies. I’m a believer of Christ, but I would not impose my beliefs to other, let them be free to search the truth. Catholic Church shouldn’y say statements like this because it will just discredit them considering the embarrasing scandals the church had. But as a Christian who believes in jdugement day, I know all Catholics will know the truth of their religion. I just hope it’s not too late for all Catholics. Repent and Change! LOVE one another, and don’t be hypocrite!!!w

God Bless Archbishop Dolan!

I must say it’s pretty disgusting to see all these pro-gay marriage proponents trying to re-frame this issue as one about “equality” or “rights”.  As usual, when facts and substance contradict the argument of liberals, they resort to insults and “holier than thou” crusades for the latest “rights” that they’ve decided to make up on a whim.  Marriage is NOT a right.  It is an institution, one that you may or may not participate in.  If marriage discriminates against gay people, than it also discriminates against those who remain single and unmarried.  By the same logic… it discriminates against blind people to not allow them to drive… or it discriminates against white people if they can’t join the NAACP… or against people with diabetes if they’re not allowed to join the military.  Can gay people vote?  Are they segregated?  If gay Americans are “oppressed”... they are the most privileged and pampered “oppressed” group in world history.  Statistically, they have very high incomes, are well off living in high society, more so than any demographic group.  Gay people have all the “rights” that they’re entitled to, just like the rest of us living right now in America.  Look at the list of latest liberal “rights”... life (unless you don’t want the baby), liberty (unless it means you have to take care of yourself), and the pursuit of happiness (unless someone else is happier than you, in which case you can impede their pursuit in order to improve your own pursuit by taking from them to give to yourself)... and apparently “rights” to health care, marriage, free food, free housing, free daycare, retirement plans paid for by others… absolutely disgusting.

Deb S- when the United States Supreme Court declared that African Americans were property, not persons, did that change the fact that they were really persons?

You let arbritary goverments rather than nature dictate reality?  That’s also why the German government declared that Jews here not human- they refused to look at nature and only their own ideology.

The same is true in Mass., in Iowa, Hawaii, etc. Just because a goverment has declared that two people of the same sex are “married” doesn’t make them married by the nature of marriage.

We DO dare comment on unnatural sex acts being crammed down the throat of society as “normal.”

No matter how you spin it, homosexual acts are against nature.

Shame, you listen to people who tickle your ears. See that happens in the Phillipines!

Today is the Feastday of St. John the Baptist, who was beheaded because he dared speak out on the adulterous marriage of Herod.

I’m sure there were traitorous Jews who shouted, “Shame on you, JB! How can you spread lies?”

It’s much easier to flow with the cultural fads out there than to remain with the Truth, Jesus Christ.

May God bless Archbishop Dolan for speaking the truth like John the Baptist, and I’m sure Dolan is JUST AS brave as John was in his time of trial!

So, Archbishop, if (when) your dire predictions do not come to pass after the passage of same-sex marriage in New York—as is almost certainly going to be the case, since they haven’t come to pass in Connecticut or Massachusetts or Canada—then we can conclude that either (1) you were lying, (2) your God is a false God or (3) your religion is false. Is this not the case?

I look forward to the crow-eating ceremony.

Well, we now know they approved gay marriage in New York.  It was good to hear how the bishop worked to oppose it however, his opposition failed.  He should and must take action against those so called “catholics” who voted for this.  If no action is taken then his words are hollow and empty.  Already politicians and less than faithful Catholics are laughing at the bishops when they meet.  They can pass all the decisions they want, but if they don’t inforce what is already there they are wasting time and money.  Be the bishops you were selected to be or move aside and let a man strong enough to fight step up.

I am gravely distressed that our bishops have not publicly condemned that actions of so-called Catholic Gov. Cuomo and Catholic legislators who voted in favor of gay marriage!  I think that the bishops should publicly, clearly express the gravity of what these so-called Catholic’s have done.  What are they not excommunicated from the Catholic Church?

Liseux, the Catechism suggests that some people are born with homosexual tendencies and calls them to live a difficult but chaste life.  That begs the question, how unnatural is it if God created them that way?  Just asking.
Also, it’s times like these I like to take a deep reading of Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman at the well; how he reproved her with a firm gentleness that both challenged and encouraged her.  I wish I could capture that approach and practice it all the time.  I don’t seem to be very adept at it, though; I don’t see many of us who are.

Yay NY! Don’t be a hater Mr. Dolan!

Time to excommunicate those Catholic politicians who voted for this abomination.

First it was abortion, now it is same-sex marriage.  Next would either be any of the following:  (1) assisted suicide, (2) cloning, (3) embryo stem cell harvesting, (4) whatever they could think of next to win the next election.

lol u mad bro?

I would be angry with Mr. Dolan but that would be a waste of energy. Gay Marriage passed, and will be signed into law; and even if it had not I would still pray for him. He is the Tin Man dressed as a Man of God who needs our prayers more than our anger - so that he might one day be able to discontinue his unending prayer to God “If I only had a BRAIN!

Well done archbishop, you have articulated our case so well, wouldn’t add a thing. The usual suspects are out in force on this forum, with not a substantial argument in sight. In response to the argument about homosexual marriage and incestuous marriage being completely different, tell me how you would explain that difference in terms of justifying ‘discriminating’ against the latter but not the former?? It’s an ugly, taboo comparison that gay activists like to avoid and disregard by turning it into a joke. Well please, enlighten me- you can’t, because guess what, there is no practical difference between the two- and if that makes your skin crawl, welcome to how us pro marriage activists feel about the idea of equating real marriage with this unnatural counterfeit version based on the lifestyle desires of a minority.

I have read what Archbishop Dolan had to say on this matter and I have read the comments in response. Frankly, I am disappointed at the apparent lack of critical thinking. I see Robert George’s talking points being regurgitated without much thought or introspection.

I am not at all certain that I understand how the Church justifies involvement in these contests. In doing so, the Church is essentially asking lawmakers to disregard the First Amendment to the US Constitution. But that aside, marriage is a legal covenant and status between two people. Some marriages are religious unions and some are not. The only lawful decision that the Church gets to make on these matters is whether or not it will recognize same-sex unions. It has no business interfering in secular law.

Now the Archbishop, who I know, respect and have spoken with, makes statements about a radical redefinition of marriage and that just doesn’t make sense. He fails at offering any coherent argument that same-sex marriages have any effect on traditional marriages. The available evidence does not support that conclusion. Massachusetts had the lowest divorce rate in the country before gay marriage and it is lower and still the lowest divorce rate in the country after gay marriage.

Furthermore, gay couples in New York are raising thousands of children. Those kids deserve the legal protections of married parents. Gay parenting is not at issue but every published and peer reviewed study confirms that children raised by gay parents are as happy, well adjusted and successful as their peers.

What business does the Church have in imposing its religious beliefs on others? According to that logic, Jews should be protesting every shop that sells pork and they should be lobbying lawmakers to make the consumption of shrimp and lobster illegal.

Finally, when it comes to cogency, the slippery slope remains a sure sign of baloney. Gay marriage doesn’t open the door to people marrying pets, plants, relatives, two other people or anything that says Maytag.

“I worry too about government intrusion. On my blog I said this seems to have a lot of traction in places like North Korea and Cuba and China. They’re used to government butting in and telling you, “We’ll tell you what your values are. We’ll tell you what marriage is. We’ll tell you what family is. We’ll tell you what human life is. We’ll tell you what a home means. We’ll tell you where you can live. We’ll tell you where you can work. That’s antithetical to everything the American project stands for. And yet that’s what we’ve got: the government now butting into the most intimate, sacred defined principles of human existence.”

—While I agree with Dolan’s overall message, he must be very careful.  He is contradicting himself, as he is definitively asking the government to “tell you what marriage is.”  The opposite of the government legally defining marriage is is the government allowing the individual to provide his own legally valid definition of marriage.  That is the very thinking that brought about the enshrined “right” to abortion in this country…radical self-determination.

This made me laugh out loud:

“We’ll tell you what family is. We’ll tell you what human life is. We’ll tell you what a home means. We’ll tell you where you can live. We’ll tell you where you can work. That’s antithetical to everything the American project stands for. And yet that’s what we’ve got: the government now butting into the most intimate, sacred defined principles of human existence.”

Come one, Mr. Dolan: its you who is trying to say that my brother and his husband and their kids don’t form a family and aren’t entitled to the same rights as other families. 

But the animus of your hyperbolic attacks has shown me, more clearly than anything else, that the Church is morally and spiritually bankrupt.  If I actually had a membership card, I’d burn it right now.

Regardless of what kind of laws get passed, it is IMPOSSIBLE for two people of the same sex to be married because they cannot consummate the marriage. You can call it whatever you want but it’s not sex. I love the analogy of David v. Goliath that Archbishop Dolan uses…..the stone in the slingshot that Christ has given us to sleigh the “Goliath” of confusion in our time is Blessed John Paul II’s Theology of the Body. It allows people to understand the why behind the what of Catholic moral theology better than anything ever produced. Learn it, Live it, and SPREAD it!

Archbishop Dolan and his anti-gay allies need to ask themselves a SERIOUS question today: Whose side is the Lord on? I noted two days ago how Gay Marriage Opponents prayed for God not to let Gays be given their rights to [legally] marry. On the other hand, many Christian gays and their supporters also prayed to God for them to be given their just rights to marry, AND here we have it - The Bill was passed in the favor of homosexuals, therefore, don’t gays have a right to say their prayers were answered - Shouldn’t gays use the outcome to say God supports them getting married? Surely had the vote cast against gay marriage, Dolan and other gay opponents would be shouting how much God disapproves of Gay marriage and so, has answered their prayers - Well, if Dolan and other opponents of gay-marriage truly believe in God, they will take this experience as a sign that God DOES support EQUALITY and has no problem with gay-marriage!

Never again attempt to use your bibles to bar me from the courthouse door!

This is not about the right to marriage, but rather making homosexual activity a normal part of society…which no matter how you spin it, is totally unnatural and abnormal.  I’m tired of all the gay marriage activists citing “all the happy” same-sex couples in committed relationships and then singling out problemmatic traditional marriages.  Bottomline - a normal marriage is between one man and one woman; otherwise why not all “Adams” or all “Eves”.

As far as Archbishop Dolan is concerned, he represents the majority of practicing Catholics - the keyword here being “practicing”.  And let’s not forget that it is not only Catholics who object to same-sex marriage, but Orthodox Jews, 70% of Africian-Americans and most Christians object as well.

Richard, we live in a fallen world. I was born with the tendency to sin called concupisence. That doesn’t mean that God wants me to sin.  If you are a Christian, then you realize that in the Bible homosexual acts are always sinful. Please don’t say that people can sin just because we’re born with a tendency to.

We have grace and free will. Thanks God!

Same sex marriage well send more souls to heel because of improper sex. In the old testament God says you shall not lie with a man as lie with a woman. Homosexual sex is not fun. Heteosexual sex is fun. Whom wants to go to hell for sexual pleasure that is not fun not me.

“They’re used to government butting in and telling you, “We’ll tell you what your values are. We’ll tell you what marriage is. We’ll tell you what family is.”

But why is it that catholics should get to tell us these things? The constitution protects me too. Catholics don’t have to change anything, just don’t have a same-sex marriage.

Religious freedom is for everyone, not just catholics.

I am continually astounded Archbigot by the way you misuse your position in a “christian” church.  I and my family of 4 were once Catholic.  Both of my boys attended Catholic school.  Both were raised in the church.  I have recently formally renounced this farce of a religion due to the way you have vilified, demeaned and discriminated against my gay son.  A most fabulous young man with a heart as big as all outdoors, a brilliant mind and most importantly a loving human being.  That is the way my God made him, in his own image and likeness.  I am sick and tired of this church that obviously feels it AOK to molest innocent children but finds fault with two consenting, loving adults of the same sex loving each other so much as to want to seal that love by getting married.  How sad for you that people are running from this criminal enterprise in droves.  Yes in droves, due to your hypocrisy, bigotry and all out hatred for a segment of our population that you know NOTHING about!! I don’t hate you, I PITY YOU and all those brainwashed fools who are incapable of thinking for themselves. You have lost in New York and as a New Yorker I am ecstatic as are all equality minded, loving people.  I have never felt so free as when I formally washed the filth that is the RCC from the lives of myself and my beautiful family.  You, Timothy Dolan are a miserable human being who gets his jollies hurting those unlike himself. SHAME ON YOU AND YOUR NAZI LEADER. You have the blood of all our beautiful, innocent LGBTQ children, who have taken their lives due to your reprehensible message, on your hands.  Sleep well BIGOT…................

“In response to the argument about homosexual marriage and incestuous marriage being completely different, tell me how you would explain that difference in terms of justifying ‘discriminating’ against the latter but not the former?”

We can PRETEND not to recognize the difference but that is all that it is - pretense used to make a vacuous slippery slope argument. As a society we accept the fact that gay couples will fall in love and live as partners. I have many gay friends who have been together 25, 30, often 40 years in monogamous relationships. Some have raised children and some of those children are now married and raising children themselves.  Frankly, my gay friends are as boring as the rest of us.

Society has never - and will never - accept incestuous relationships. There is no correlation of marriage equality to the acceptance of incest. Simple enough I hope.

Gee, till recently that’s what the catholic church has done to me.

One thing you don’t seem to understand: you don’t have to have a gay marriage.

We are blessed to have such a strong voice in Archbishop Dolan. Thank you Lord Jesus for giving him to us.

How long will it be before the state legislature and the governor allow someone to marry their chimpanzee? After all, aren’t chimps 99% genetically the same? Who are we to deny them their rights? Far fetched? Sick? That’s what society thought about abortion and same sex marriage 40 years ago.

@Richard. God didn’t create Homosexuals we (society) did. God gives us fee will and with that free will we have pumped innocent victims minds with relativistic philosophy, pornography, ideas that homosexuality is okay. People have been manipulated into thinking that homosexuality is acceptable.

We (society) have also injected estrogens and estrogen mimicking hormones from birth control pills, plastics, and other chemicals into our drinking water resulting in the physiological changes in the brain that may lead to homosexual tendencies.

Man-made psychological and physiological vectors are the cause of homosexuality, not God. 

Homosexuals should seek out medical treatment for their condition rather than attempting to get everyone to accept that it is natural. After all, don’t we medically treat depressions, bi-polar disorder, schizophrenia, and physiological diseases such as allergies, cancer, and various bacterial infections?

As a Christian, I am in favor of helping homosexuals lead normal, natural, ordered lives. I am even in favor of paying for medical treatment and religious formation to help them do that.

“Love thy neighbor as thy self”.  Enough of the illogical attempts at rationalizing the Church’s stance on homosexuality.  Embrace the message of love proclaimed by Jesus and end the unjustified and hurtful homophobic rhetoric.  The RC church is such a positive force in the world (education, health care, social justice), but its magisterium chooses to retain, instead of reject, faulty doctrinal beliefs that have real-life negative consequences in the lives of so many of its believers.  The Church teaches us to accept fault when wrong, it’s high time She does the same.  I have hope.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4895637

Woo Hoo!!! IN YOUR FACE!!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4895637

I take it my last comment wasn’t accepted.

Too Liberal for ya, huh?

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/06/new-york-state-senate-passes-marriage-equality-bill.php?ref=fpb

I can’t seem to get a news link on this post. New York just passed a good law!

The archbishop references what people say in backyard barbeques.  Fair enough.  He should head to one of those barbecues and ask about the Catholic Church’s predatory pedophile priest problem and ongoing coverup/enablement of same—as well as the impact on millions of children around the world.  The discussion will be far more “animated” than a discussion about whether two men or two women should have the same constitutional rights as opposite gender couples.  I guarantee it.

You guys are way overthinking this. The Catholic church is a laughing stock as are all religions that blindly follow invisible gods. It’s more a shame that people kill themselves over invisible gods. Just enjoy life people. There is nothing more. If gays want to marry so what.

These politicians aren’t excommunicated because the Catholic church needs their money. Can’t anger the hand that feeds them. That’s why religion is such a joke and the numbers of agnostics and atheists grow each day. The Catholic church is a business. Most of the world could care less what their leaders have to say.

Let’s go back to Christopher Columbus & every president after & see who they say our government is established by. From what I’ve read they’ve all given thanks to God. They all acknowledge & give thanks & glory to God for the many gifts he’s given us, true or not? How can a catholic partake of the Eucharist & than vote for same sex marriage!? The Lord , in the Catholic Faith & his word “The Bible” (Bulwark} tells us how we get to know him, what is pleasing & not so pleasing & Hell & Purgatory& that we should know scripture, well… apparently the catholics that voted yes don’t know scripture & apparently don’t know about the Divine Mercy, of our Lord Jesus: should we tell them about it?To all sinners out there, even those in same sex relationships, you need to repent, go to confession, make amends for your mortal sin & do a devotion to the Divine Mercy to cleanse you from hell! I highly suggest this devotion, if you choose not to,that’s ok, as long as the Lord knows on my day of answering I did try to save my fellow brothers & sister.. May God Bless You All! Repent!!!! Lois

Archbishop Dolan is right - God designed marriage to be between a man and a woman, for the purpose of bringing beuatiful children into the world, so that these children can be brought to church to be molested by their preists.  If we allow homosexuals to marry, they might adopt a child from an orphanage run by the Catholic Church, which leaves less children for the priests to have sex with.  God has reserved marriage for heterosexuals; the only acceptable homosexual relationships are those between ordained clergy and unwilling pre-adolescent boys.

Wait ‘til the first “gay marriage” divorce cases start getting filed. And if there are kids involved…
God help us!!!

Archbishop Dolan and all the pretenders around his throne can never achieve what they hope for because of one simple, overriding fact:  America is a democracy, not a theocracy.

The U.S. Constitution separates all religious sects from government.  Dolan is free to believe in whatever deity, sect, assumptions, folklore, and junk science he wishes, but his beliefs are not everyone’s, and he may not use government to impose his beliefs upon anyone, ever.

Dolan and his sycophants screech about the many harms that they feverishly imagine might occur if lesbian and gay couples ever got married.  Well, the roughly 10% of society that is lesbian or gay has existed throughout recorded history, often as couples, and often as relatively celibate priests and nuns.  Same-sex couples began marrying in the United States over 7 years ago, yet not a single one of the disastrous, dire disasters Dolan imagines ever materialized, thus proving his nightmares to be nothing but groundless, homophobic fears.

In a theocracy, one religion is the law, and all others are outlawed.  Dolan and others who yearn for theocracy should cease their efforts in America, and should move to Iran, where they can participate in having gay teenagers savagely whipped — and then executed — by their own government (“Violence Against Sexual Minorities in Iran,” Human Rights Watch, 29 December 2010, 108 pages.)

They hypocrisy of the Church leadership is amazing. The consistent covering up of child molestation by your entire organization. What moral high ground does the Church have?  Child molesters are the lowest of the low, and the Church protected and sheltered the molesters and did nothing for the children until decades later. It is a perversion to hear anyone from the Catholic Church talk about morality.

Plus it doesn’t say anywhere in the Bible that marriage is between one man and one woman. Ask King Solomon about his 700 wives; Lot having sex with his two daughters in the same evening; and Jesus not having any spouse at all. Marriage as written about in the Bible, is a contractual arrangement.

So off the alleged moral high ground, built on the bodies of molested children.

“Let’s go back to Christopher Columbus & every president after & see who they say our government is established by.”

Um, Columbus was not a president. He discovered South America and destroyed multiple cultures as did many who followed. Those cultures were stable and prolific over centuries and millenia.

The catholic church should worry about whats going on behind their closed doors .For so many years there have been priests doing things to children and so many other priests having affairs with the people in there churches.Making woman pregnant, and so on.Just because the bible might say man and woman I don’t think god would ever turn his back on us just because we fell in love with the same sex.I think maybe the church is hiding a lot of gay people.Maybe it’s time for the church laws to be rewritten the first thing would be make priests and nuns marry.Make a woman be able to become a priest.It’s time the church comes up to the times of today.Stop judging people who don’t follow their ways,but if a gay person offered them money they would take it with no problem.

“Same sex marriage well send more souls to heel because of improper sex. In the old testament God says you shall not lie with a man as lie with a woman.  Whom wants to go to hell for sexual pleasure that is not fun not me.”

Let’s break this one down:
““Same sex marriage well send more souls to [hell] because of improper sex.”

That’s what your religions says and my practices are not your concern. Anything else is interfering with my religious freedom and forcing yours on me.”

“In the old testament God says you shall not lie with a man as lie with a woman.”

A lot has changed since then, including availability of hygiene and the new testament which does not mention homosexuality until decades after Jesus died.

“Homosexual sex is not fun. Heteosexual sex is fun.”  Are you telling me that although I have no attraction toward women that I would still find heterosexual sex “fun”? Are you actually saying I should just go against my own feelings and have sex, raise a family and go to your church just because you say so? And that I’ll like it? This tells me you don’t have any understanding of the subject. Why would I listen to anyone who doesn’t even grasp the basic issue?

” Whom wants to go to hell for sexual pleasure that is not fun not me.”

But that’s your own religion, not mine. If you believe that, don’t have sex with someone of the same gender.

“This is not about the right to marriage, but rather making homosexual activity a normal part of society…which no matter how you spin it, is totally unnatural and abnormal.”

Regardless of how abnormal you think we are, we will be a normal part of society, we always have been. We just aren’t forced to cover up our lives because of taunting and bullying. You just don’t see it because we don’t have sex in the street—hence neither homosexual or heterosexual “activity” is not really normal unless you consider the countless displays of heterosexuality such as baby pictures being shoved in everyone’s faces, wedding announcements in the paper, pictures on office desks and wedding rings.  But to think that gays are going to live in the closet as your church has forced so many to do, that’s just not going to keep happening. Whether gay marriage is legalized nor not, we’re here, get used to it.

By the way, the feelings we have are god given, normal for us and not harmful to you—unless you want to watch, but that would be your choice, then again, how would that harm you?

“It allows people to understand the why behind the what of Catholic moral theology better than anything ever produced. Learn it, Live it, and SPREAD it!”

that right there, when you cross into legislation is imposing your religion on others against their first amendment rights.

Most of the molesters were homosexual priests! That’s why if someone is homosexual they are no longer allowed to become priests. We’ve learned our lesson - hopefully. Thank God and the Church for the current process to “weed” them out before they become priests and they do more harm to children, themselves, and the Church.

Seriously Bobx,  you really should fact check your statements!!!  First, the FBI profile of a pedophile states that 90% of pedophiles are HETEROSEXUAL, middle aged white men who identify as Christian!!!!!!  Second, the Catholic Church did their own study on their twisted and sick sexual abuse of children, YES, a study paid for by the NAZI BIGOTS themselves and had to RETRACT their disgusting rants on the gay community.  Now they’re blaming it on the 70’s and Woodstock!!!  BWAHAHA!!!!!  FACE IT, the criminal enterprise that is the RCC is a FRAUD who thrives on keeping people incapable of thinking for themselves scared, who soaks their parishioners for as much money as they can just to spend it on discriminating, vilifying and demeaning an entire segment of our population!!!!!  I guess they feel that money is better spent hating the gay community than feeding the hungry and sheltering the homeless.  PATHETIC!!!

Joseph R Yungk, your suggestion that laws that recognize marriage as being only between a man and a woman are somehow imposing someone’s religion on you are completely baseless unless you can show that someone with no religious affiliation at all could not develop the same philosophy without the influence of faith.  Even some pagan cultures and practices do not accommodate same-sex unions:  http://www.twpt.com/paganculture.htm

No matter how much they legitimize anything which is against God’s Law, it will not prosper.  It is still illegitimate, invalid and immoral.  Pride itself is what Lucifer brought him to where he is now. Tsk, tsk, tsk…

Mr. Rahe,
none of that matters as long as my religions does accommodate same-sex marriage. Using your dogma to legislate my home life is imposing your religion on me.
there is no rational reason for one faith to have complete freedom from any sign of someone with different views and feelings. This is what your church asks when they claim that open homosexuality is going to bring down society. We’re still going to be out of the closet now anyway.

We thank God the Creator who in His infinite wisdom created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve. God did not create a second man as a companion for the first Adam but a woman(Eve) instead and Adam delighted in her…Bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh, Adam exclaimed satisfactorily. We can chose any friend or confidant we want but for marriage, man and woman He created them. Jesus answered the crowed that even asked about divorce,” because of the sturbboness of your heart… but from the beginning, it was not so. So Jesus said,” if you love me, keep (obey) my word. No wonder St. John of the Cross indicated,” Love is like flame of fire thus becareful of what you love as you becomes what you love…” We are pilgrimes on earth and each of us have appointed time to leave(die) and go back to God for judgement on what we have done wrongly and what we have failed to do rightly. God have mercy on us and our generation. Please know that our Priests including Archbishop Dolan are ordinary men with extra ordinary mission.

I don’t understand why a religion that doesn’t recognize same-sex marriage means nobody should marry please explain. It’s the ones who do who are being imposed on by not being allowed to marry. If there was a law that catholics could not marry in a church that would be a problem just like a same-sex couple not being able to marry in the first place.

It is the people who want to marry and who’s beliefs allow it that this would apply to. All the people who don’t believe in gay marriage just don’t have to have one.

Joseph R Yungk said, “Using your dogma to legislate my home life is imposing your religion on me.”
By ignoring my admonition, you’re essentially saying is that it is not reasonable for someone with no faith at all to find that marriage should only be considered the union of a man and a woman.  I’m only asking you to support that assertion, rather than merely focusing on the object of your ire.

By ignoring my admonition, you’re essentially saying is that it is not reasonable for someone with no faith at all to find that marriage should only be considered the union of a man and a woman.
This sort of statement reflects a profound lack of insight, and it especially confuses me that a Catholic person would argue it, considering all the ire and venom fired at Catholics by other religions (as well as atheists).  It’s a bit like arguing that “since Baptists, Pentacostals AND many atheists agree that Catholicism is a cult, it must be a cult.”  As for demanding that others counter your opinion of their personal lives with logic that the majority will accept, I issue a counter-challenge—do the same for your personal faith beliefs.  Faith, after all, is a choice—sexual orientation is not.

Brian Miller, I am not asking someone to counter my opinion of their personal life.  I merely am asking them to back up implications evident in their own arguments.  Faith and sexual orientation have nothing to do with it.

Brian Miller said “Faith, after all, is a choice—sexual orientation is not.”

And yet, for an allegedly innate human attribute, no same-sex cultural gleanings have survived through the centuries.  Surely if sexual orientation is innate there would not have been such a need to market it; things like “gay rams” would have been recorded at the advent or writing and the entire nonsense would have been avoided as same-sex sexual orientation would have been deemed “natural.”  Monotheism, on the other hand, has some 5,000 years of persistent history.  Perhaps the assertion should be reversed: faith is innate and sexual orientation is a choice.

Anonymous “SteveP” assumes — incorrectly — that “no same-sex cultural gleanings have survived through the centuries.”

That’s untrue.

Enormous treasure troves of such gleanings cross all centuries, continents, and cultures.  But that cultural human heritage was often accompanied by the oppressive, suppressive forces of ignorance, stereotyping, and the pervasive use of marriage as a business contract for husbands to control wives the same way they did livestock.

Anonymous “SteveP” assumes — incorrectly — that if sexual orientation is innate then it needs no educational campaign.

That’s untrue.

Each one of the 5 orientations (bisexual, lesbian, homosexual, heterosexual, asexual) is innate only in each person where it occurs; the other orientations are unknown, and remain unfathomable without significant amounts of education.  In fact, with some people, no amount of education is effective, as seen in those American states and foreign theocracies where religious sect beliefs are used to outlaw entire classes of society based solely on orientation.

Anonymous “SteveP” assumes — incorrectly — that same-sex orientation is something new, and not recognized as natural for thousands of years.  That’s untrue.  It has existed at least since ancient writing began, and — precisely because it was consistent and recurring — explanations were scarce, because none were necessary.  Defining orientations and lobbying for gay rights became necessary only in modern times, after some orientations, people, and cultures had begun to be violently outlawed, silenced, and eradicated by forces disguised as Nazism, communism, and Catholicism.

Anonymous “SteveP” wonders whether faith is innate and whether orientation is chosen.

No, they’re not.

Faith requires language and indoctrination, whereas orientation occurs even with no coaching at all.  Also, faith depends upon concepts of shame, guilt, loathing, and fear, whereas orientation exists automatically, without any such social pressure.  Finally, no science can identify or detect a person’s faith, but there is plenty of science linking orientation to genetics and biology.

It is faith that must be built and re-built, brick by brick, and it is orientation that arises with no effort at all.

“. . . no science can identify or detect a person’s faith, but there is plenty of science linking orientation to genetics and biology.”
Is it not true that an MRI of a person at prayer’s brain shows a markedly different activity pattern when compared to a person not at prayer while a MRI of a homosexual person’s brain while “copulating” is the same as a copulating heterosexual person’s brain?  That is, as you are intent on using science, what is the observable difference in a homosexual’s biology and a heterosexual’s biology?

Anonymous “SteveP” is confused about why the brain scans of people amid sexual relations don’t differ based on their partners’ characteristics, yet the brain scans of people praying differ from those who aren’t praying.

He has confused himself by making the simplest of scientific errors:  he is comparing apples to oranges, and doesn’t know it.

Firstly:

1.  Brain scans of people who are copulating differ from the scans of those who aren’t copulating.
2.  But brain scans of copulating people don’t differ based on their partner’s characteristics.

Likewise:

3.  Brain scans of people who are praying differ from the scans of those who aren’t praying.
4.  But brain scans of praying people don’t differ based on their deity’s characteristics.

Activities such as copulation and prayer do show up in brain scans, but the characteristics of a sex partner or a deity do not show up in brain scans.  In other words, it doesn’t matter whether you are making love to Madonna or praying to The Madonna; both action affect the brain scan, but neither object of desire affects the scan details.

None of the above facts is useful for anything, except to illustrate the basis of how “SteveP” got confused, which he probably could have avoided if he copulated more, prayed less, and just paid attention.

Anonymous “SteveP” also wants to know the observable differences in homosexual versus heterosexual biology.

Male homosexuality occurs in 22% of non-identical twins, but in 52% of identical twins.  Why this occurs remains unknown, but it demonstrates biological underpinnings.  Also, homosexual and heterosexual men’s brains respond differently to sexual arousal odors, and gay men’s brains respond the same as straight women’s brains, but the biological connection is clear, although whether these response differences are a cause of — or an effect of — sexual orientation remains unknown.  Further biological links can be seen in studies that compared birth order, finger length, fingerprints, hair pattern, handedness, hearing, vocal pitch, eye blinks, verbal fluency, stress, and sweat.  Some of these differences exist among Caucasians, but not African-Americans, which strengthens, without explanation, the biological links.

The eugenicists and neo-Nazis are desperate to get every last detail about this biology, so they can start genetic engineering that eradicates sexual orientation from human experience.  On the other hand, Christian power brokers flatly refuse all such biological science, because it destroys their core tenet (“no one is born gay; all gays are just heterosexuals who prefer sin”) and replaces it with the scientific fact that LGBT people are just humans living the way that they were designed to live.

It’s surprising that anyone as keenly occupied with all things homosexual as “StevenP” would also be so uninformed about the basic biology.

“I would be angry with Mr. Dolan but that would be a waste of energy. Gay Marriage passed, and will be signed into law; and even if it had not I would still pray for him. He is the Tin Man dressed as a Man of God who needs our prayers more than our anger - so that he might one day be able to discontinue his unending prayer to God “If I only had a BRAIN!”

MY REPLY: 1) That’s Bishop Dolan, NOT Mr.—Have some respect.  2) He is one of the greatest Bishops—I wouldn’t be surprised if he’d be up for pope in years to come. 3) It was the scarecrow Who was the one that wished he “only had a brain”, The Tin man wanted the heart.  4) If anyone needs prayers its gay people and their misguided followers that support gay marriage.

Ned_Flaherty: And I meant to express my sympathy: you indicated your great-great-great grandfather kept your great-great-great grandmother as chattel.  That must be a terrible burden for you to bear.  Fear not – Jesus Christ is Peace!

Anonymous “SteveP” knows that civil marriage for most of the last couple thousand years was a mainly business contract by which husbands owned wives, yet he misunderstands why that crucial fact gets mentioned today.

Here’s why.

Those who want to illegally and unconstitutionally turn America from a democracy into a theocracy keep saying — incorrectly — that marriage has always been just one thing, never anything else, and cannot change.

They are wrong.

Marriage’s many legal definitions have been regularly updated throughout recorded history, across all geographies and epochs.  Marriage has never been static.  The business contracts that were common for hundreds of years recently gave way in the 20th/21st centuries to more egalitarian civil laws that respect human rights, civil rights, women’s rights, and sexual orientation rights.  These modern civil laws prevent any clergy from treating a nation’s people as though they are nothing more than wicked cherubim, seraphim, sycophants, and pretenders to a supernatural throne, with no human rights of their own.

The constantly changing nature of marriage is an important historical fact because it destroys the arguments of those who still oppose equality.  Those arguments — that civil marriage has always stayed frozen, and that civil marriage is incapable of updating — are myths.  They are false notions promoted by all who want to replace democracy with theocracy, and all who want to replace fairness with bigotry, via religions to which most citizens don’t belong, in the names of elaborately defined deities in which most citizens don’t believe.

Ned Flaherty: I’m embarrassed for you; nobody believes what you have written.  You can shout louder if you wish but I don’t think anyone will hear anything but your deep, immovable prejudice.  You reflect poorly on those who identify as being same-sex attracted.

Ned Flaherty said, “The business contracts that were common for hundreds of years recently gave way in the 20th/21st centuries to more egalitarian civil laws that respect human rights, civil rights, women’s rights, and sexual orientation rights… The constantly changing nature of marriage is an important historical fact because it destroys the arguments of those who still oppose equality.  Those arguments — that civil marriage has always stayed frozen, and that civil marriage is incapable of updating — are myths.”
Those arguments sound like they come from someone who wants to improve marriage by making it stronger, rather than weaken it.  Perhaps you could elaborate and show us how same-sex “marriage” might do that.  Just as a point of reference, my own view of marriage - and that of many other Catholics - is that it is something of a heroic undertaking, where one makes a rather dramatic decision to embark on a new direction in life in which one makes a commitment not just to another person, but to God and whomever He sees fit to put in your life as a result of that relationship - i.e. children.  The strength of that commitment lies in the fact that when it’s made it’s impossible to predict whether, when or how many children will be conceived in that relationship, or even whether some of those conceived won’t survive to birth.  Can you identify a commensurate commitment that exists or may exist between same-sex couples?

@ Kevin Rahe: Since religious beliefs are NOT a requirement to getting married (non-religious straight couples get married every single day), your entire argument is irrelevant pertaining to same-sex couples. You are trying to apply your CHOSEN belief system to all Americans, when non-Catholic straight couples aren’t even applying it to their own lives. Why are you assigning standards to gay citizens that don’t have to apply to straight ones? How is this reasonable or fair?

You seem to acknowledge that procreation is not required for marriage. In fact, straight people have been known to procreate without a marriage license. (My nephew being one of them.)  Add to this, one-third of married gay couples ARE raising children. So, yes, there is the exact same commensurate commitment between same-sex couples. Do you not think there is a selfless “heroic undertaking” when a couple decides to adopt a child (or raises a child from a previous relationship)?

Common sense would tell you that promoting long-term monogamous relationships is good for society as a whole… regardless of the person’s sexual orientation. How does it benefit society to ostracize a group of people because they have a different sexual orientation? Does that help straight couples in any way? Wasn’t that the specious reasoning behind DOMA? That if you prevent gay couples from getting married that somehow it would help straight couples procreate responsibly. Someone will need to explain to me how discriminating against one group, actually helps another group.

@David:  If you take the reference to God out of my comment, the rest remains just as relevant to someone who does not share my faith.  I am not assigning standards to same-sex couples that I don’t assign to anyone else.  What I am saying is that even a same-sex couple who wants to rise to the highest standard of marital commitment simply cannot, while a traditionally-married couple who would prefer to avoid that standard of commitment (e.g. by using artificial contraception) often doesn’t.

As for adopting children, I certainly applaud those couples who choose to do so (whether or not they’re able to have children of their own), as well as single people (regardless of whether they experience same-sex attractions) who choose to do the same when a married couple isn’t available to parent an orphan child.  (I don’t include same-sex couples in this group because they introduce a paradox into the family relationship that I find to be a negative.)  However, we cannot forget that in an ideal world there would be no children for anyone to adopt.

You say that “common sense would tell you that promoting long-term monogamous relationships is good for society as a whole.”  I say that disinterested friendships are also tremendously valuable and result in far fewer problems for the rest of society to deal with than intimate relationships that aren’t based on the highest standards of marital commitment.

At one time we had a set system of government. It involved kings and priests who led and dominated society and the laws. Indeed, 1000 years ago the Catholic church, in league with variou kings, emperors, barons, dukes and earls, dominated society. They stated what people could and could not do. Of course, government evolved to mean the rule of the people. To limit marriage to so call defend it is very weird. The catholic church, nor any other religion, does not control secular government and secular society. They do not get to define and run our lives.

David in Houston said: “Someone will need to explain to me how discriminating against one group, actually helps another group. “  It is very simple: there is not one recorded instance, in history, of a homosexual society flourishing.  Indeed, it is clear, from history, that homosexual activity destroys community rather than builds community much less society or culture.

Well said, SG.  Now, how do i get my Pastor to speak about this from the ambo?

Marriage has always been discriminatory in our society: siblings cannot marry, nor can minors, or more than three people.

Already, in countries and states where homosexual marriage is legal, we see people in triad relationships and even siblings seeking marriage.

Redefining marriage is a pandora’s box.

@ Kevin: I’m not sure I understand what you mean by “the highest standards of marital commitment”? Is that having to do with the uncertainty of whether or not a straight couple will procreate, and how they might lose their unborn child and have to pull together to cope with the loss? Every couple faces uncertainty and trials and tribulations. That isn’t the basis for whether a couple has the right to marry. If marital commitment is measured in time, there are gay couples that have been together for decades. Meanwhile there are straight people that go through marriages like they were potato chips (Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich come to mind). I don’t think they’re living up to the “highest standards”. Yet they can still get divorced (once again) and remarry tomorrow if they want. Again, how is this reasonable or fair?

@ SteveP: There is also not one recorded instance, in history, of a red-headed society flourishing… or a blind society flourishing… or a left-handed society…

Gay people have existed throughout history. Alexander the Great, Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, Julius Caesar, Michelangelo, Leonardo Da Vinci, Tchaikovsky, etc. So, yeah, homosexuals have flourished. They may have been closeted, and virtually invisible at the time, but they were there.

“Indeed, it is clear, from history, that homosexual activity destroys community…”

Really? Which societies have been destroyed because gay people were treated as equals? There are currently 10 countries that have legalized same-sex marriage. I seriously doubt that the downfall of Canada will be caused by John and Fred getting married.

David in Houston: You list of “gay” men is markedly incorrect; at best you might say that some on that list were bisexual.  However, none were “gay.”  My point stands.

David, homosexuals are being treated as equals in Texas. They have the same rights as you and I do- to marry a person of the opposite sex.

They want special rights, not just equal rights.

@ liseux: Marriage has been “redefined” multiple times throughout history. The Bible states that a man could marry as many women as he could afford to keep. A little over a hundred years ago, women were considered the “chattel” of the men they married; and of course, 50 years ago interracial marriage didn’t exist. So, why is it that when marriage changed all those times, adults didn’t suddenly want to marry minors, and people didn’t demand polygamous marriages?

Slippery slope arguments are a funny thing. You can basically make up any scenario that you want, and you don’t have to prove that it will ever happen. “If gays can marry, then what’s to stop me from marrying my dog?” Sound familiar?

You do realize that there is a world of difference between two consenting NON-RELATED adults, and a brother/sister relationship, right? ...or an adult/child relationship? Historically, polygamy has been a solely “straight” endeavor. (one man and multiple wives) The reasons to ban polygamy have nothing to do with same-sex marriage.

There has to be a rational basis to prevent gay couples from marrying each other. Same-sex marriage harms no one. It is a private, personal decision between two people. Moral disapproval is not a rational basis. When interracial marriage bans were in place, over 70% of the populous morally disapproved of race-mixing. The Supreme Court didn’t care how the majority of the public felt. The Constitution guaranteed equal protection under the law.

By the way, first cousins CAN get married in 17 states right now. So heterosexuals have already opened up their own pandora’s box.

@David:  I’ve already described the type of commitment that sets the standard for opposite-sex couples.  While you might prefer to avoid recognizing it, I don’t think I’ve left room for much confusion.  I’ve asked for someone to identify a commensurate commitment that could exist between same-sex couples.  I’ve still not seen anyone present anything to that end.
—
‘Meanwhile there are straight people that go through marriages like they were potato chips (Rush Limbaugh and Newt Gingrich come to mind). I don’t think they’re living up to the “highest standards”. Yet they can still get divorced (once again) and remarry tomorrow if they want. Again, how is this reasonable or fair?’
“If people are especially horrified at the failure of Christian practice it must be an indirect compliment to the Christian creed.” -G.K. Chesterton

It seems that many people haven’t read their Bible which tells of God creating the world and everything in it.  It tells of God creating man (Adam) and taking one of Adam’s ribs and creating woman.  Adam himself said that he now had someone just like himself.  This is the first “marriage”.  Then God says to increase and muliply to them.

Have people forgotten that it takes a man and a woman to procreate?  Homosexual marriage in itself cannot do this.  Homosexuals have to rely on going to a sperm bank to enable them to have children; or they now adopt children because they know they cannot produce children themselves.  Doesn’t this scream to you that homosexual marriage is a warped way of looking at what marriage is?  What is wrong with people???

@ Kevin:  The Leffew family in Santa Rosa, California exemplifies the “commensurate commitment” you’re referring to:

http://www.youtube.com/user/depfox

Their bio on YouTube:
“I am 40, my husband Bryan is 38. We have been together for fourteen years. We have two kids: a son 10 and a daughter 5 (That straight couples didn’t want to adopt.) We also now have 3 foster kids ages: 4, 2 and 15-months, that were taken away from my niece.”

Both of them are also very religious, and go to a “welcoming” church.

Regardless if you even consider them a family (obviously they are), procreation and raising children are NOT a legal requirement to getting married. The state and the government do not care if straight couples EVER procreate. It’s none of their business. The fact that non-religious straight couples can marry, makes any religious argument against same-sex marriage invalid.

liseux wrote:
David, homosexuals are being treated as equals in Texas. They have the same rights as you and I do- to marry a person of the opposite sex.
They want special rights, not just equal rights.
———————————-
So instead of marrying the person I’m attracted to and have fallen in love with, I should marry a woman that I don’t love and don’t find attractive, just to make straight people like you happy? ...and what about the straight woman I’m about to marry? Doesn’t she deserve to marry a heterosexual man, that loves her and is sexually attracted to her? Why are you trying to force people together that clearly don’t belong together? ...and why is same-sex marriage suddenly a “special” right, when it isn’t a special right for straight people?

PS: I did legally marry my partner of 16 years in California, before we moved to Texas. We’ve been legally married for 3 years… and somehow none of our neighbor’s marriages or families have been destroyed because of it. Isn’t that shocking?

Given the statements “The Bible states that a man could marry as many women as he could afford to keep. A little over a hundred years ago, women were considered the ‘chattel’ of the men they married; and of course, 50 years ago interracial marriage didn’t exist . . .” perhaps this is not so futuristic: “this future society emphasizes anti-intellectualism, popularity, sexual attraction, and hedonism.” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiocracy)

Wow, the anti-Catholic bigots are out in full force on this. On behalf of the Archbishop and myself, a faithful Catholic, thank you.  You bless him and the whole Church with your hate when he is only teaching the Truth of Christ.  “Blessed are you when they hate and revile you untruly for my sake…”

Romans 1…read it.

Also, ‘Fallacy does not cease to be fallacy just because it becomes fashion.’-the great G K Chesterton.  Homosexual ‘marriage’ is just that, a fallacy.  No man-made law will ever make it true.

Hello David,

When God created marriage, David, it was between one man and one woman:

The creation of marriage is recorded in Genesis 2:23-24: “The man said, ‘This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called “woman,” for she was taken out of man.’ For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh.” God created man and then made woman to complement him. Marriage is God’s “fix” for the fact that “it is not good for the man to be alone” (Genesis 2:18).”

Any Old Testament traditions of men you might have in mind were not God’s original plan, as Adam had one wife- Eve.

Dave, do you think that three consenting adults should be allowed to marry? What about two consenting siblings, especially if they already have children.  Would you deny them what you say you seek?

I am well aware that first cousins can marry, especially in Texas.

I do not believe that this is about the “right” to marriage, it’s all about acceptance of unnatural homosexual acts. You can’t MAKE people accept what is unnatural and unhealthy, Dave.

Marriage is for the betterment of the spouses as well as raising children. Children have a right to have a mother and a father. Homosexual “marriage” denies this right. That’s a sane reason, Dave.

Also, your marriage is not recognized in the state of Texas, nor do I believe that it is even recognized in CA anymore, as the entire state voted Prop. 8 down.

You have the same rights as I, Dave, to marry an adult of the opposite sex who is not your sister. If you have a male partner you want to live with, go ahead.

However, you have no right to redefine marriage for the rest of society, particularly when two men living together cannot provide for society one of its main benefits: children.

Ergo, you don’t need the protections of marriage that society gives.

David wrote: ‘The Leffew family in Santa Rosa, California exemplifies the “commensurate commitment” you’re referring to:’

While it’s possible that this couple made a commitment to accept any children for whom they might feel an obligation to care for even if they didn’t “plan” on such children, the likelihood that that would happen is so much smaller than the likelihood that a traditional couple will find themselves in the same situation makes it a much smaller commitment than it is for an opposite-sex couple.  In other words, same-sex couples can make this commitment knowing that the chances of them having to fulfill it are quite small, which is very different than opposite-sex couples making the same commitment.
—
“Regardless if you even consider them a family (obviously they are), procreation and raising children are NOT a legal requirement to getting married.”

And I never said they were.  In fact, if they were, I’d say it would be putting the cart before the horse.
—
“The state and the government do not care if straight couples EVER procreate. It’s none of their business.”

That’s true as far as an individual couple.  However, the government being myself and my fellow citizens, I would say that a great number of us are interested in married couples as a group procreating enough to maintain at least a stable population.
—
“The fact that non-religious straight couples can marry, makes any religious argument against same-sex marriage invalid.”

I would never use an argument against same-sex “marriage” to influence public policy that could not be found reasonable by someone not of my faith, or even someone of no faith at all.

David, one more thing about same-sex couples adopting.  Unlike an opposite-sex adoptive couple or even a single person adopting a child (regardless of whether that person experiences same-sex attractions), a same-sex couple adopting a child introduces a paradox into the family - a conflict between a child’s biological and functional/legal parents - that doesn’t exist in the other situations.  It is possibly for this reason that adoption by same-sex couples usually finds significantly less support among the public than does same-sex “marriage.”  Most European countries that recognize same-sex “marriage” or unions did not initially permit joint adoption by same-sex couples, and some still don’t.

Instead of complementing the governor the good Archbishop should commence steps toward excommunicating the anti-Catholic “catholic”. Cuomo is automatically excommunicated by his overt behavior but the Bishop should make it formal and binding for all Christians to witness.

All the people calling for Cuomo to be “excommunicated” are really going to get their end goal—if that end goal is accelerating the church’s demographic decline in the USA into full-blown collapse.

Do you really think Catholic politicians will give up their careers—and oaths to the Constitution, not the Vatican hierarchy—to avoid being “excommunicated?”

Do you think non-conservative Catholics will stick around after watching social liberals get bullied while pro-war Catholic politicians and laity get coddled?

Do you honestly believe that, after such a high-profile event, secular Americans and Americans of other religious beliefs would EVER vote for another Catholic politician?

All such madness would do is ensure that the old blood libel of “Catholics serve foreigners in the Vatican, not Americans” would roar back to life—with purpose.

The Vatican was wrong in opposing heliocentric views of the solar system.  It was wrong in its war on physics.  It was wrong in coddling the Nazi regime.  And it is wrong on this issue too.  It’s time for the haters to accept this, as their stubborn insistence that the Vatican flex muscle to promote hatred will not destroy the hated groups, but the religion itself.

“And yet, for an allegedly innate human attribute, no same-sex cultural gleanings have survived through the centuries.”

True.

Well, other than the poetry of Sappho; the cities of Alexander the Great; the artwork of Michelangelo that adorns the Vatican itself; the music of generations of people; modern computing (invented by Alan Turing, a gay man); fashion (including the pope’s favorite, Prada); and I daresay quite a few people today who ensure that your paycheck is paid, pension is funded, car continues to drive, and electricity stays on.

Oh, I guess not so true after all.

“a great number of us are interested in married couples as a group procreating enough to maintain at least a stable population”

So presumably, you support legislation that would mandate procreation as a condition of marriage—and ban all infertile people from marrying?

Brian Miller said, “So presumably, you support legislation that would mandate procreation as a condition of marriage—and ban all infertile people from marrying?”

Aside from the practical impossibility of doing so, that is obviously not necessary in order to ensure that “married couples as a group procreate enough to maintain at least a stable population.”  The key is to recognize the rule and the exception.  Infertile couples are obviously the exception to the rule that married couples bear children, and so you can reasonably treat all couples the same knowing that the exceptions won’t outweigh the effects of those who conform to the rule.

If you insist on a legalist test for marriage eligibility, however, a more practical approach would be to require married couples to commit to attempt acts that may result in the conception of children.

Silly….just because we recognize the procreative aspects of marriage and give them their proper weight, does not mean that the converse is automatically true-that procreation is “obligatory” because this is ‘beyond our pay grades’ shall we say, and out our hands.  That would be dumb and is a bad argument. Because we know that we are only participates in creation and are open to that and welcome the possibility.
As to same-sex unions, they are automatically, by their very nature, closed to this possibility, and therefore are inherently disordered and intrinsically evil. 
As to the very old, tired and poorly researched insults against the Catholic faith: the Galileo thing, the supposed anti-science thing, the supposed Nazi thing.  Those of us who are in the Church know the real history on all of this and I propose that you read a little deeper on that.  It was the Catholic Church that invented the entire idea of ‘school’, coddled the sciences and invented the University system as we know it and kept these things alive through the ages. The CAtholic Church and the Pope stood against the Nazi regime and assisted the Jews.  Nice try, though. As to Catholic politicians, there have been good examples through the ages of good Catholic leaders who put their faith first and thus empowered their leadership with justice and Truth. St. King Louis IX comes to mind. Think Louisville and St Louis, Missouri.  Of course, they don’t teach about this man in modern school anymore ‘cause of the PC editing that goes on.  But any modern politician can chose the same-to put his faith and moral beliefs first.  In fact, if they did, we would have a much better world.  I would wish that they would.  But I won’t hold my breath because i understand that we have the weeds among the wheat and politicians go into politics for reasons that are generally not because they spend time studying their Catechism and praying.  But, they should pay the price for aligning with evil and turning their back on the Church, if that is their choice.

btw, there is no proof that Alexander the Great, or Michelangelo was homosexual, that is a convenient re-writing of history. They have a word for that: propaganda.  Even IF these men were struggling with the issue of same-sex attraction, SO WHAT-the Church welcomes those who are in the midst of this struggle. The Church always welcomes the sinner so that the person can move toward grace, Truth and the only source of conversion and true happiness-Jesus..  What the Church condemns is the ACT of homosexuality as intrinsically disordered and intrinsically evil, what is condemned is the sin.  The sin does not define the person, who is deserving of the dignity and mercy that is entitled to a precious child of God.

“there is no proof that Alexander the Great, or Michelangelo was homosexual, that is a convenient re-writing of history”

Well, none other than the extensive historical documentation of their same-sex relationships.

“the Church welcomes those who are in the midst of this struggle”

*That* made me laugh out loud.  Who knew would-be theocrats could be so funny?

“just because we recognize the procreative aspects of marriage and give them their proper weight, does not mean that the converse is automatically true-that procreation is “obligatory” because this is ‘beyond our pay grades’ shall we say, and out our hands”

EXCEPT when it comes to same-sex couples, eh?

So you believe that a “miracle” could make a post-menopausal woman with no uterus pregnant, but not a man?

Let’s be real—this isn’t about “principles.”  You simply despise gay people, and wrap your hatred in a layer of gauzy religious ideology to disguise it.

“Aside from the practical impossibility of doing so, that is obviously not necessary in order to ensure that ‘married couples as a group procreate enough to maintain at least a stable population.’”

Now that’s a curious assertion.  One cannot claim that marriage must be “regulated to exclude infertile homosexual couples to ensure procreation” yet then insist that regulations that would exclude other infertile couplings is “practically impossible.”

A simple fertility test added to the pre-marriage STD tests required in most states would easily determine who is “marrying material” and who isn’t.

The reality of the situation is that the “procreation” argument is a tortured fallacy employed by some to disguise their true motivation—a deep and unabiding hatred for gay people.  Which isn’t very Christian.

Brian Miller said, ‘A simple fertility test added to the pre-marriage STD tests required in most states would easily determine who is “marrying material” and who isn’t.’
Again, you haven’t shown that this is necessary, not to mention actually substantiated that a “simple fertility test” is available, feasible, or even possible without requiring behavior that is itself immoral.  Moreover, like so many involved in this debate, you fail to grasp the concept of the rule and the exception.

‘the “procreation” argument is a tortured fallacy employed by some to disguise their true motivation—a deep and unabiding hatred for gay people.  Which isn’t very Christian.”
What is Christian is treating people with dignity and respect, which your draconian suggestion of pre-marriage fertility testing is not.  Nor is it treating someone with dignity and respect to affirm acts to which they’re inclined that are themselves undignified and disrespectful.

Huh…what history?  Or maybe, I should say, whose history?
And where did I say that I hated anybody? 
No, i welcome and love everybody, as everyone is worthy of the dignity of human beings made in the image
and likeness sof God.
And my word are spoken out of love for children, for society, and for you, who will suffer because of
a same-sex lifestyle if you chose to follow this self-destructive path. 
But, I guess, not everyone thinks as I do, nor has the standards that I have and soon resort to personal attacks.
But, I do despise sin. I despise a lie. I despise the re-working of language to change the meaning of the words.
I love the Truth. 
On the contrary, YOU are the one who chose to put that word into the conversation-hate.
That is called bullying. That is the real hate here.  You hate the nuclear family, you hate children, you hate society and ultimately you must hate whomever you partner with because you obviously
do not want what is good for them and expose them to all kinds of danger. 
That is the modus operandi of the gay agenda.  Call your opponent a ‘hater’ if they happen to
disagree with you and they have a good reason for disagreeing with you. 
But, ultimately, you must hate yourself.  I will pray for you.

Just for further laughs.  I know the readers of this mag read their catechism. But I just thought I would
put a reference to the Catechism in here for clarity. You see, mainline Catholics know that Jesus left an infallible teaching authority here on earth, the magisterium and the Catechism reflects this Truth, never changing, never wavering, never hateful, always loving.  Truth and love are one in the same, they are a person=Jesus Christ (john 14:6) they are absolutes, not ideas to change to suit your whims or desires. 1.17 billion Catholics agree. Good Luck with your propaganda campaign. 
CCC #2357 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. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents homosexual acts as acts of grave depravity, tradition has always declared that “homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.” They are contrary to the natural law. They 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

Caligula would be enthralled with the amount of liberal responses to this issue.