Catholic church urges schoolchildren to back anti gay marriage petition

26-04-2012 05:22PM

Snowie wrote: »

what I want to know is wy would any one want to be involved with the catholic church, I reocn its about time schools were de-relgionefied, and if you want to send your kid to a biased racist religion well you can pay for it..

other wise send them to none religious schools..

Its disgraceful that in this country you have to make a decision for your own child in what religion you are.. Ie catholic you must be baptized in order to attend school.

makes me want to puke

This is in the UK, people jump through unbelievable hoops to get their children into Catholic schools as they are far superior to other schools. There is zero chance of a child who is not part of a fully practicing catholic family getting into a catholic school, even then the more involved you are in the church the better schools you can attend. I have seen it with my cousin how much had to be done for him to get in so your post is irrelevant in this case as people in catholic schools in the UK are there 100% by choice.

efb · 26-04-2012 05:26PM

Min wrote: »

Catholic church outlines the Catholic position in regards to same sex marriage to people who attend Catholic schools.
It is upto the individuals if they want to sign a petition or not.

I don't support same sex marriage which is only a recent concept, I will not be told by the media or liberals on how I should view marriage. I believe in traditional marriage, not because it is only between a man and a woman, because I don't believe marriage should be redefined to mean something totally different.

Anyway you still hear with heterosexual couples...it was a registry office job, which for some is not a real marriage in the sense it is not marriage in the eyes of God.

Women voting would be considered a 'recent concept' in some counties- does that make it less valid?

Civil Marraige has nothing to do with the church so it why should it matter what they say- Christians didn't invent marraige contrary to the beliefs of some.

I can't wait until the UK includes Gay Couples in Civil Marraige- hopefully it will put pressure on Ireland to follow suit.

KeithAFC · 26-04-2012 05:28PM

People only seem to be catching on to the Roman Catholic Church now and its child abuse and the mental torture they put children through. It has taken a while but finally people are seeing them for what they are.

mongdesade · 26-04-2012 05:33PM

KeithAFC wrote: »

People only seem to be catching on to the Roman Catholic Church now and its child abuse and the mental torture they put children through. It has taken a while but finally people are seeing them for what they are.

God help us & save us Keith...finally something we agree on

efb · 26-04-2012 05:35PM

Keith's not a bad old skin!
Neither is Lord Bannside tbf

Old Tom · 26-04-2012 05:40PM

krudler wrote: »

wahey, its the weekly AH church thread, but they give such good ammo against themselves its hard to ignore.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/apr/25/catholic-church-schools-gay-marriage

tldr version: organisation of celibate men hellbent on telling others how to live.

Fantastic, but would you have balls (also would it be allowed and politically correct on boards.ie) to share and comment in the way you did opinion the Muslims have on gay marriages?

Easy to bash Catholic Church, I know.

Seachmall · 26-04-2012 05:43PM

Old Tom wrote: »

Fantastic, but would you have balls (also would it be allowed and politically correct on boards.ie) to share and comment in the way you did opinion the Muslims have on gay marriages?

Easy to bash Catholic Church, I know.

The Islamic Religion has a ****ing disgusting attitude towards gay marriage, women's rights and a whole host of topics which are archaic and expose the stringent fundamental followers for the scum they are.*

PC enough for you?

I can do Jews as well if you'd like.

efb · 26-04-2012 05:44PM

Old Tom wrote: »

Fantastic, but would you have balls (also would it be allowed and politically correct on boards.ie) to share and comment in the way you did opinion the Muslims have on gay marriages?

Easy to bash Catholic Church, I know.

I don't hear the head of Muslim faith in the UK actively campaigning against Civil Marraige for Gay People

DEFTLEFTHAND · 26-04-2012 05:45PM

Seachmall wrote: »

The Islamic Religion has a ****ing disgusting attitude towards gay marriage, women's rights and a whole host of topics which are archaic and expose the stringent fundamental followers for the scum they are.

PC enough for you?

I can do Jews as well if you'd like.

Yes do the Jews as well please.

Seachmall · 26-04-2012 05:47PM

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Yes do the Jews as well please.

The Jewish people make terrible food.

And I don't like the Palestine thing either.

efb · 26-04-2012 05:49PM

Why do some Christians- Catholics in particular have no issue rejecting the church's teaching on Pre-Marital Sex, or Adultry but seem to to be very attached to their teaching on Homosexuals marrying?

krudler · 26-04-2012 05:51PM

Old Tom wrote: »

Fantastic, but would you have balls (also would it be allowed and politically correct on boards.ie) to share and comment in the way you did opinion the Muslims have on gay marriages?

Easy to bash Catholic Church, I know.

Yes, the muslim faith has an appalling record of homophobia, misogny, intolerance, extremism and downright nasty sh1t as well, but this story isnt about muslims.

fran17 · 26-04-2012 05:55PM

the uk guardian bashing the catholic church,surprise surprise....

Old Tom · 26-04-2012 06:03PM

krudler wrote: »

Yes, the muslim faith has an appalling record of homophobia, misogny, intolerance, extremism and downright nasty sh1t as well, but this story isnt about muslims.

I know man, it's nothing personal, but in fact there are very few stories about Muslims. I'm not associated with any religion and I'm not a religious person myself, but I'm also not a huge fan of picking on Catholics just because they won't stab you, burn your house or successfully accuse of antisemitism before high court making a show on international scale. You've probably heard of what happened to some of the people slagging Islam or making uncomfortable (but true) comments about Jews.

I guess that in this case the safest option is to shit on your own doorstep, right?

I know my view isn't very popular on this young and enlightened forum, but I simply don't care

krudler · 26-04-2012 06:04PM

fran17 wrote: »

the uk guardian bashing the catholic church,surprise surprise....

Hows it bashing? all it did was report that the church is telling kids to sign an anti gay petition, which it is.

Corkfeen · 26-04-2012 06:08PM

Min wrote: »

They have a right to air their opuinion, you can't say they can read and develop their own opinion while wanting one side of the argument silenced.

They do however teach their stance as absolute fact (Homosexual behaviour is a sin blahblahblah) and to hand students a petition to sign on a matter which most probably didn't have an opinion on is entirely wrong. Sort of like handing a twelve year old a petition to sign on Intelligent Design, it doesn't mean that they have developed opinion on how ID makes sense (which it of course doesn't). They were merely manipulating children for their own political purposes in this situation.

fran17 · 26-04-2012 06:17PM

krudler wrote: »

Hows it bashing? all it did was report that the church is telling kids to sign an anti gay petition, which it is.

correct me if im wrong but is'nt good journalism about interviewing both sides of the arguement and allowing the reader to make up his or her own minds? whole article seems just a small bit one sided to me

Corkfeen · 26-04-2012 06:22PM

fran17 wrote: »

correct me if im wrong but is'nt good journalism about interviewing both sides of the arguement and allowing the reader to make up his or her own minds? whole article seems just a small bit one sided to me

So if your child was handed a petition in school on legalising abortion you'd have no issue? I'm not saying there's anything wrong with this view, in fact I myself am in favour of legalisation. But why exactly should a child or teenager be used to fulfil agendas of organisations on subjects that they don't have a fully developed opinion on. Why does every bloody thing get labelled as anti-Catholic, purely because its an example of the Catholic Church doing something idiotic.

token101 · 26-04-2012 06:29PM

fran17 wrote: »

the uk guardian bashing the catholic church,surprise surprise talking sense and noting how the catholic church continue to preach intolerance and indoctrinate children....

token101 · 26-04-2012 06:30PM

fran17 wrote: »

correct me if im wrong but is'nt good journalism about interviewing both sides of the arguement and allowing the reader to make up his or her own minds? whole article seems just a small bit one sided to me

So is it false? What would they say in their defence?

Sonics2k · 26-04-2012 06:33PM

fran17 wrote: »

correct me if im wrong but is'nt good journalism about interviewing both sides of the arguement and allowing the reader to make up his or her own minds? whole article seems just a small bit one sided to me

It's not bashing at all. It's reporting on something that is actually happening in schools.

It's a simple case of the CC pushing a religious and political agenda though children.

fran17 · 26-04-2012 06:42PM

Corkfeen wrote: »

So if your child was handed a petition in school on legalising abortion you'd have no issue? I'm not saying there's anything wrong with this view, in fact I myself am in favour of legalisation. But why exactly should a child or teenager be used to fulfil agendas of organisations on subjects that they don't have a fully developed opinion on. Why does every bloody thing get labelled as anti-Catholic, purely because its an example of the Catholic Church doing something idiotic.

legalising abortion!am i still in the same thread? of course i would take issue with any minor being used to further any organisations agenda.is it right then for the uk guardian to get teenagers underdeveloped opinions to further its one sided article with?

fran17 · 26-04-2012 06:49PM

token101 wrote: »

So is it false? What would they say in their defence?

every newspaper has an agenda.all im saying is the other side of the story and why there petitioning it would be nice

Old Tom · 26-04-2012 06:49PM

Anyway, it's actually good that they are educating people.

Marriage is a privilege and married people get privileges (tax accounts, joint mortgages, inheritance laws, etc). In my old and backwards understanding it is because they can and (mostly) do produce children, to sustain the society and humanity. Long story short they create a family.

Of course, some of them don't - some of them because they can't (health issue, illness) some of them don't want to. Technically however, all of them should be capable of reproduction.

Homosexuals are NATURALLY incapable of reproduction and I can't see any reason why they should have the same privileges as people who produce new members of society. Gay people are not ill, they are not designed to have them.

I'm not saying about whether it's natural (doubt it's normal, norm=majority) or not here. I am simply saying that heterosexuals produce children (even if it would be only SOME of them) while homosexuals didn't, don't and never will.

Why should they be treated equally?

Sometimes this forum reminds me of:

Corkfeen · 26-04-2012 06:51PM

fran17 wrote: »

legalising abortion!am i still in the same thread? of course i would take issue with any minor being used to further any organisations agenda.is it right then for the uk guardian to get teenagers underdeveloped opinions to further its one sided article with?

I'm merely pointing out how it is incorrect to petition Teenagers/Children on political matters to fulfill agendas of organisations. Be it on gay marriage, abortion or any such matter. I'm not seeing any issue with what's written in the Guardian. The student they were quoting was in sixth form so they'd be around the age of eighteen and it was merely to illustrate what occurred.

Old Tom wrote: »

Homosexuals are NATURALLY incapable of reproduction and I can't see any reason why they should have the same privileges as people who produce new members of society. Gay people are not ill, they are not designed to have them.

I'm not saying about whether it's natural (doubt it's normal, norm=majority) or not here. I am simply saying that heterosexuals produce children (even if it would be only SOME of them) while homosexuals didn't, don't and never will.

Why should they be treated equally?

Wtf... Lesbians could technically be artificially inseminated and adoption should also be an option alongside surrogacy etc, so tons of options in that sense. Marriage is not merely for procreating, it comes with additional legal benefits for both parties. In essence its a legal partnership. So erm , yes gay people should be treated equally.

Logical Fallacy · 26-04-2012 06:53PM

Old Tom wrote: »

Homosexuals are NATURALLY incapable of reproduction and I can't see any reason why they should have the same privileges as people who produce new members of society. Gay people are not ill, they are not designed to have them.

Why, are they all sterile?

All they need to do is have straight sex and they can make a baby.

I think what you mean to say is...."Homosexuals orientation means that physical congress between them and a same sex partner can not result in a baby".

Finally, people who produce "new members of society" need to stop doing that anyway. We are dominant and numerous, time to change the game.

token101 · 26-04-2012 06:53PM

fran17 wrote: »

every newspaper has an agenda.all im saying is the other side of the story and why there petitioning it would be nice

Well maybe you'd like to offer their defence in lieu then?

token101 · 26-04-2012 06:55PM

Old Tom wrote: »

Anyway, it's actually good that they are educating people.

Marriage is a privilege and married people get privileges (tax accounts, joint mortgages, inheritance laws, etc). In my old and backwards understanding it is because they can and (mostly) do produce children, to sustain the society and humanity. Long story short they create a family.

Of course, some of them don't - some of them because they can't (health issue, illness) some of them don't want to. Technically however, all of them should be capable of reproduction.

Homosexuals are NATURALLY incapable of reproduction and I can't see any reason why they should have the same privileges as people who produce new members of society. Gay people are not ill, they are not designed to have them.

I'm not saying about whether it's natural (doubt it's normal, norm=majority) or not here. I am simply saying that heterosexuals produce children (even if it would be only SOME of them) while homosexuals didn't, don't and never will.

Why should they be treated equally?

There's your answer.

Sonics2k · 26-04-2012 06:55PM

Old Tom wrote: »

Homosexuals are NATURALLY incapable of reproduction and I can't see any reason why they should have the same privileges as people who produce new members of society. Gay people are not ill, they are not designed to have them.

What?

Old Tom · 26-04-2012 06:57PM

Corkfeen wrote: »

Wtf... Lesbians could technically be artificially inseminated and adoption should also be an option alongside surrogacy etc.

Key word highligted.

Any good (apart from a good movie) would come out of rubbing 2 vaginas against each other?

Corkfeen wrote: »

Marriage is not merely for procreating, it comes with additional legal benefits for both parties. In essence its a legal partnership. So erm , yes gay people should be treated equally.

Again - key words highlighted.

Don't believe you can't see it in your own words.

Catholic church urges schoolchildren to back anti gay marriage petition

Comments