Papa Francis - Same Sex Marriage

Daith · 17-01-2015 02:44PM

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Appreciate the fact that you live in a country where all voices can be heard.

Unless someone is blasphemous

padd b1975 · 17-01-2015 02:47PM

K4t wrote: »

Nobody wants them stopped from voting or campaigning.

It will make it all the sweeter when it passes knowing the blood sweat and tears the god botherers will have put into lobbying and campaigning for a no vote in vain. Though they'll see it as having been a just and worthy cause of course.

I expect the referendum to pass, the end result may well be a little closer than the polls are telling us right now.

I predict I will lose no blood, sweat, tears etc etc over this.

You might want to ease back on the childish name calling there, it does nothing for yourself or your side of the argument.

RobertKK · 17-01-2015 02:47PM

Daith wrote: »

Unless someone is blasphemous

How often has that law being used in the last 20 years?

Annasopra · 17-01-2015 02:47PM

padd b1975 wrote: »

You do know lot's of gay people will be voting no?

Kinda blows your theory out of the water doesn't it..

Lots?

Daith · 17-01-2015 02:48PM

padd b1975 wrote: »

You might want to ease back on the childish name calling there, it does nothing for yourself or your side of the argument.

Likewise calling someone a liberal does nothing for your argument.

Timberrrrrrrr · 17-01-2015 02:50PM

Manach wrote: »

Shock, Horror, Unbelievable. The Pope upholds Catholic doctrine and traditional communal values. I can seen mass dosages of smelling salts being applied to the PC brigade.

Do these include the systematic rape and abuse of children or are they optional extras? Given the choice of a priest or a gay couple i know who i would prefer as a neighbour.

Timberrrrrrrr · 17-01-2015 02:51PM

padd b1975 wrote: »

You do know lot's of gay people will be voting no?

Kinda blows your theory out of the water doesn't it..

You have evidence for this claim of course?

padd b1975 · 17-01-2015 02:58PM

Daith wrote: »

Likewise calling someone a liberal does nothing for your argument.

You're not??

Daith · 17-01-2015 03:00PM

padd b1975 wrote: »

You're not??

Grouping people to dismiss points isn't my thing tbh. Whether that is calling someone a liberal or homophobic.

padd b1975 · 17-01-2015 03:05PM

Daith wrote: »

Grouping people to dismiss points isn't my thing tbh. Whether that is calling someone a liberal or homophobic.

Fair enough.

padd b1975 · 17-01-2015 03:07PM

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Given the choice of a priest or a gay couple i know who i would prefer as a neighbour.

Me too!!

K4t · 17-01-2015 03:12PM

padd b1975 wrote: »

You might want to ease back on the childish name calling there, it does nothing for yourself or your side of the argument.

You're confused. I'm not on any side. I believe in equal rights. Simple really.

The only side I am on is good v bad. And religion is bad. Does it have redeeming characteristics? Yes. But that is not a good argument for anything. Do not mistake this with me being intolerant of anything. They can say what they like bar nothing and do as they please (within legality).

macyard · 17-01-2015 03:12PM

padd b1975 wrote: »

Me too!!

http://www.smh.com.au/national/named-the-australian-paedophile-jailed-for-40-years-20130630-2p5da.html

I am guessing the priest, at least if he turns out to be paedophile he will be quite if the walls are thin, gay couple might be blasting pop music if they are paedophiles so you won't get as much sleep

ScumLord · 17-01-2015 03:19PM

K4t wrote: »

The only side I am on is good v bad.

The classic religious view of the world, good Vs evil. Both of which are completely subjective depending on your point of view.

padd b1975 · 17-01-2015 03:21PM

macyard wrote: »

http://www.smh.com.au/national/named-the-australian-paedophile-jailed-for-40-years-20130630-2p5da.html

I am guessing the priest, at least if he turns out to be paedophile he will be quite if the walls are thin, gay couple might be blasting pop music if they are paedophiles so you won't get as much sleep

Always with the paedophilia!

macyard · 17-01-2015 03:22PM

padd b1975 wrote: »

Always with the paedophilia!

I know right, why do people tarnish all priests as kiddy fiddlers.

Son Of A Vidic · 17-01-2015 04:00PM

K4t wrote: »

I hope you won't object to me refusing to take marriage advice from an old virgin in charge of an organization that raped thousands of children for decades.

Dude Pope a virgin? Not a chance. The man worked as a bouncer in a Buenos Aires nightclub before he became a Priest. I'm sure his oats were well sown before he put on the collar.

mrsbyrne · 17-01-2015 04:14PM

Daith wrote: »

Sure, everyone can and should vote and everyone is allowed to express an opinion and everyone is allowed to express opinions on other people's opinions.

Never said otherwise

Is it not kinda pointless though comfplaining about something and then saying that you think it should nonetheless be allowed to continue.
It's a bit like looking at Sth Africa 30 years ago and saying "Well obviously apartheid is fundamentally evil , but hey , nothing can be done.
I thino people who complain about the power and influence.of the RCC especially those that constantly simultaneously declare the RCC to have no power and influence in 2015 should come clean and start a campaign to have membership of the RCC included in the list of banned organizations.

mrsbyrne · 17-01-2015 04:24PM

macyard wrote: »

I know right, why do people tarnish all priests as kiddy fiddlers.

Because it's very easy. There'll be no repercussions. And some people still think they're being outrageous and sticking it to the man.
All swimming coaches are paedophiles too.
Paedophiles are never ever regular family men fathers brothers uncles etc.
In fact all priests are paedophiles and all paedophiles are priests.

ScumLord · 17-01-2015 04:27PM

Corvus Maximus wrote: »

Dude Pope a virgin? Not a chance. The man worked as a bouncer in a Buenos Aires nightclub before he became a Priest. I'm sure his oats were well sown before he put on the collar.

As a good Catholic he wouldn't be able to do that without being married.

Eramen · 17-01-2015 04:35PM

Dog of Tears wrote: »

Anyone who votes against extending the same rights to gay people as heterosexual people enjoy, is by definition, a homophobe.

That is an unarguable fact.

The word 'homophobe' is an invented political smear term. It's used by people who don't want to debate, but rather silence and label.

This issue has nothing to do with rights and everything to do with values we embody i.e. what we stand for as a people and society (it's non-political, unlike what you're saying).

Both the masculine and feminine forces of the two sexes are needed to bring out the best latent attributes, personality and talents in the child. This is the most crucial criterion of family life (as is marriage). We have a world-majority that agree with this reality.

White 'progressive' supremacists will cry. And so they seek to smear others for it.

Well said Pope.

Lyaiera · 17-01-2015 04:42PM

Eramen wrote: »

The word 'homophobe' is an invented political smear term. It's used by people who don't want to debate, but rather silence and label.

This issue has nothing to do with rights and everything to do with values we embody i.e. what we stand for as a people and society (it's non-political, unlike what you're saying).

Both the masculine and feminine forces of the two sexes are needed to bring out the best latent attributes, personality and talents in the child. This is the most crucial criterion of family life (as is marriage). We have a world-majority that agree with this reality.

White 'progressive' supremacists will cry. And so they seek to smear others for it.

Well said Pope.

Boo hoo hoo.

:(:(

ScumLord · 17-01-2015 04:51PM

Eramen wrote: »

This issue has nothing to do with rights and everything to do with values we embody i.e. what we stand for as a people and society (it's non-political, unlike what you're saying).

Society is vast and varied, most Catholic don't even prescribe to the Catholic way of life anymore. Catholic values are not the values of the Irish state.

Both the masculine and feminine forces of the two sexes are needed to bring out the best latent attributes, personality and talents in the child. This is the most crucial criterion of family life (as is marriage). We have a world-majority that agree with this reality.

It's not true though. The saying goes "It takes a village to raise a child". Of all the higher primates humans actually spend the least amount of time directly caring for their offspring, we regularly hand off the responsibility to other members of our community. So a good network of friends and family is at least as important if not more important to the upbringing of children than a child having male and female parents..

El_Duderino 09 · 17-01-2015 05:41PM

mrsbyrne wrote: »

Is it not kinda pointless though comfplaining about something and then saying that you think it should nonetheless be allowed to continue.
It's a bit like looking at Sth Africa 30 years ago and saying "Well obviously apartheid is fundamentally evil , but hey , nothing can be done.
I thino people who complain about the power and influence.of the RCC especially those that constantly simultaneously declare the RCC to have no power and influence in 2015 should come clean and start a campaign to have membership of the RCC included in the list of banned organizations.

It's easy to disagree with something but accept it's right to exist. It's called ambivalence. It means having both positive and negative attitudes towards something.

I don't accept the catholic's reasons for their position on gay marriage and I disagree with their position. I do however respect their right to express their views. I expect them to respect my right to ridicule their position and demonstrate their position to be disproportionately weighted against the gays as a group.

If they want to tell their own flock how to behave then I don't object.

They want to legislate their religious rules on people who are not part of their group then I object.

I do respect their right to air their views and advertise their religion, tell their own flock how to behave but they can't tell anyone outside their group how to behave.

Grow up and don't expect people outside your religion to behave in accordance with your club's code of conduct.

Annasopra · 17-01-2015 05:51PM

ScumLord wrote: »

It's not true though. The saying goes "It takes a village to raise a child". Of all the higher primates humans actually spend the least amount of time directly caring for their offspring, we regularly hand off the responsibility to other members of our community. So a good network of friends and family is at least as important if not more important to the upbringing of children than a child having male and female parents..

Plus it has been proved untrue by extensive research over 30 years

Pwindedd · 17-01-2015 06:35PM

Eramen wrote: »

Both the masculine and feminine forces of the two sexes are needed to bring out the best latent attributes, personality and talents in the child. This is the most crucial criterion of family life (as is marriage). We have a world-majority that agree with this reality.

How many times does it have to be pointed out that we're not voting on wether we think gay people should be parents. We're voting on the right to get married. If gay people are denied this right I'm sure they'll still go on to become parents if that's what they both want.

I'm still waiting, as are many others, for someone to come up with a reason worth considering as to why gays should be prevented from marrying the person they love... LOVE - the desire to publicly and legally declare your love and intention to spend the rest of your life with someone you love should be promoted by everyone IMO.

macker33 · 18-01-2015 05:35AM

I wonder can gays tell the difference between rights and privileges?

Gay "rights" isnt a "triumph of love", I love my brotherman but i dont want to try and hump him.
Tell it like it is and stop trying to have the tail wag the dog.

macker33 · 18-01-2015 05:41AM

K4t wrote: »

You're confused. I'm not on any side. I believe in equal rights. Simple really.

The only side I am on is good v bad. And religion is bad. Does it have redeeming characteristics? .

Sex is a privilage, not a right.
does gay have any redeeming qualities? think about it,

indy_man · 22-01-2015 10:26PM

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/terence-p-jeffrey/obama-state-union-same-sex-marriage-america-its-best

Warren asked Obama: “Define marriage.”

“I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman,” Obama said. “Now, for me as a Christian--for me--for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God's in the mix.”

“Would you support a Constitutional Amendment with that definition?” Warren asked.

“No, I would not,” said Obama.

“Why not?” asked Warren.

“Because historically, we have not defined marriage in our Constitution,” said Obama. “It's been a matter of state law. That has been our tradition. I mean, let's break it down. The reason that people think there needs to be a constitutional amendment, some people believe, is because of the concern that--about same-sex marriage. I am not somebody who promotes same-sex marriage, but I do believe in civil unions. I do believe that we should not--that for gay partners to want to visit each other in the hospital for the state to say, you know what, that's all right, I don't think in any way inhibits my core beliefs about what marriage are. I think my faith is strong enough and my marriage is strong enough that I can afford those civil rights to others, even if I have a different perspective or different view.”

On Nov. 1, 2008, just three days before the 2008 election, Obama again stated that he did not believe in same-sex mar

indy_man · 22-01-2015 10:27PM

Here is the other side of the argument.

http://www.catholicbishops.ie/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/Meaning-of-Marriage-Web-English.pdf

Papa Francis - Same Sex Marriage

Comments