Is analysis on Ireland Same gender Marriage Voting by Cardinal Burke Judgemental or Not?

The peace of God to all that belong to the Light,
Dear Readers,

We all know from the news that Ireland is right now the first country in the world that for popular vote, in free elections, has decided to declare not only legal but constitutional the same gender Marriage.

Pls read

Thirty-fourth_Amendment_of_the_Constitutio n Ireland 2015

en.wikipedia.org...

Well, the reactions didn't wait along the world, especially concerning the Catholicism, but let me point that in contrast with the extremely cautious and diplomatic way the High Hierarchy of the Catholic Church in Ireland, for instance the Dublin Archbishop Diarmuid Martin, that has neither condemned or approved the political move of the country, there are others around the world that have disapproved or even attacking it.

We have for instance the reaction of Cardinal Pietro Parolin, State Secretary of the Vatican, who expressed sorrow for the decision, that he believe is against the law of God, but was extremely prudential in to don't condemn Ireland as a nation for it.

www.nytimes.com...

Now, we have the Champion of the conservatism in the American Catholic Hierarchy, the Cardinal deacon of Sant'Agata dei Goti, His eminence Raymond Leo Burke, that has show no doubt in his mind to condemn with the strongest statements the Irish decision.

Cardinal Raymond Burke has called the Irish people pagans, people against God, and even he has qualified the same gender marriage as Homicide, spiritual one of course.

www.irishcentral.com...

www.lifesitenews.com...

Gays and remarried Catholics are Murderers - Cardinal Burke

This attitude is contrasting, as I have already mentioned with the attitude of for example the Synod of Bishops on the family, the presidents of the bishops' conferences of Germany, Switzerland and France that have decided to dedicate their work of the incoming fall to analyze the statements of Dublin Archbishop Diarmuid Martin, who said that overwhelming support for marriage equality in Ireland a "reality check" for the church and a kind of social revolution around the world.

ncronline.org...

Now, His Holiness the Pope Francis I has been extremely cautious to express an open condemn of homosexuals in his few public declarations about the topic.

ncronline.org...

Of course the thread is open to the free open discussion of the topic, with the obvious limitations of the decorum and mutual respect on the posts.

Now, before to start it let me formulate some key questions that I found interesting to evaluate concerning the topic of the Same gender union:

1) What it was approved in Ireland and it is in process of approval on other countries is Same gender Marriage or is it Gay, Bisexual or Lesbian marriage ?

2) Is the law talking about sexual duties in this kind of union? or it is extremely vague in its definition and even open the space for asexual cohabitation in between Partners? Is the law in general just talking about free will or love in between partners?

3) Is the prohibition of Leviticus, traditionally used by conservatives to condemn Homosexuality, against exclusively to sodomy , against ritual prostitution ? or against any kind of affection or love that can emerge in between people of the same gender? what is sexuality? it is just coital acts, intercourse in between two people, or any kind of physical expressions of love, like kissing or touching others body?

www.gaychristian101.com...

Pls read: www.mountainviewchapel.com...

4) Is all the people really called by God to enter in the traditional definition of marriage or not? if it is not the case what rights have the people that can't go in to that kind of Marriage? their only right is to live the rest of their lives in solitude or enter in a monastic order?

5) are the homosexuals already condemned to hell even if there is scientific evidence that they have a natural attraction for the same gender? what is the meaning of the following words of Jesus:

St Matthey 19, 10 The disciples said to Him, "If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry." 11But He said to them, "Not all men can accept this statement, but only those to whom it has been given. 12"For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother's womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are also eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept this, let him accept it."

6) What happened with a minority in the diversity spectrum that usually few people talk about, the so called asexuals , people that is not naturally sexually attracted by anybody? what happened if some of them accept the same gender marriage as a way to look of companion of somebody, in terms that are strictly of affection?

Pls read: www.wikihow.com...

7) what is Adelphopoiesis? A kind of brotherhood or same gender union sealed by a blessing that was practiced by the Catholic church until the XIV century and also by the Eastern Orthodox church until the XVIII century. Is this the answer of religion to the people that are in search of same gender socially and religiously accepted bond?

en.wikipedia.org...

8) What if the wave of same gender unions is a natural response in sexual or affective behavior to the human overpopulation of the planet? can the earth continue supporting a population growing at the rates of the XX century? what could happen if we continue the trend of 1 billion at 1800, 2 Billion at 1920s, 3 billion at 1960, 4 billion at middle 1970s, 5 billion at end of 1980s, 6 billion at the change of millennium and more than 7 billon right now? is the demographic growing correlated with increase in frequency of broken marriages and families, abandoned children, grave recessions, violence, criminality and wars everywhere?

Pls read en.wikipedia.org...

As a initiator of this thread I call for moderation in the replies and try to find the truth in this subject more than to start personal attacks or arguing, This is a thread for serious or scholar discussion on the topic more than to assume judgmental positions that in my opinion correspond only to God decide to assume or not. I am going to remain neutral among the different thesis in debate and with a lot of open mind.

Thanks for your attention,

The Angel of Ligthness

I did not bother to read everything you wrote because the beginning is quite simply false.

"Gays and remarried Catholics are Murderers - Cardinal Burke"

I read the source, he never said that. So hard to want to keep reading when the first source I read was a complete lie.

To add, I deeply dislike Catholicism, so this is not a defense of Catholicism, it's an attack on poor sources and lies.

I will gladly take this back if you can show me that quote. I failed to find it when I looked.

I can't speak for the biblical/church questions, but I can address the ones that are outside those realms.

originally posted by: The angel of light
1) What it was approved in Ireland and it is in process of approval on other countries is Same gender Marriage or is it Gay, Bisexual or Lesbian marriage ?

Same Sex marriage is the topic on trial. To be a lesbian is to be Gay (just the female form of it), and Bisexuals can go either way - as the terminology implies. So the basic issue is if one gender can legally marry another person of the same gender (Same Sex Marriage). The whole sexual orientation matter is of no concern.

originally posted by: The angel of light
2) Is the law talking about sexual duties in this kind of union? or it is extremely vague in its definition and even open the space for asexual cohabitation in between Partners? Is the law in general just talking about free will or love in between partners?

The law specifically states "marriage may be contracted in accordance with law by two persons without distinction as to their sex". (Source). Thus, the law deals solely with the given right to legally marry another person, regardless of their gender.

Being Asexuality simply means that there is a lack of sexual attraction. Again, this is basically a sexual orientation (or lack-there-of). So considering the referendum deals with gender, not sexual orientation, the sexual orientation of one person to the next is not the focus of the referendum.

originally posted by: The angel of light
5) are the homosexuals already condemned to hell even if there is scientific evidence that they have a natural attraction for the same gender?

Scientific evidence does not determine weather or not biblical scripture is valid in accordance to gods plan, as Science and religion deal with very different things. However, if you take biblical scripture from a non-literal standpoint, it may suggest that scientific evidence could sway that notion.

Nevertheless, religious texts are generally taking from a personalized, individualistic view. Which is why there are so many denominations within the same religion. If you were to directly ask that to any given amount of people who follow Christ, for example, you would find just as many different views and answers.

originally posted by: The angel of light
6) What happened with a minority in the diversity spectrum that usually few people talk about, the so called asexuals , people that is not naturally sexually attracted by anybody? what happened if some of them accept the same gender marriage as a way to look of companion of somebody, in terms that are strictly of affection?

Again, the referendum doesn't imply that specific sexual orientations are allowed to marry, just that marriage is allowed for all genders. If an Asexual individual were to marry another person of the same, opposite, or other gender, then they would legally be allowed to according to the new law.

originally posted by: The angel of light
8) What if the wave of same gender unions is a natural response in sexual or affective behavior to the human overpopulation of the planet?

It's unlikely that we are seeing more homosexuals due to overpopulation. It is more probable that as modern society begins to accept more and more sexual orientations and same-sex marriage, that they are just more comfortable and self accepting, thus they do not fear societal points of view of their sexual orientation.

Take ancient Rome and Greece for example. Homosexuality and same-sex marriage was widely accepted. Even Alexander The Great had a male partner.

originally posted by: The angel of light
can the earth continue supporting a population growing at the rates of the XX century? what could happen if we continue the trend of 1 billion at 1800, 2 Billion at 1920s, 3 billion at 1960, 4 billion at middle 1970s, 5 billion at end of 1980s, 6 billion at the change of millennium and more than 7 billon right now? is the demographic growing correlated with increase in frequency of broken marriages and families, abandoned children, grave recessions, violence, criminality and wars everywhere?

According to some scientists we are already far too overpopulated. David Suzuki does a great job explaining:



I hope I've helped

Im sorry if this upsets your sensibilities but this vote was equally a referendum on the blessed church as well as gay marriage,I don't think the average Irishman gives a damn about what some Cardinal or Archbishop who is probably more conversant with real estate investment and financial management than the word of God says when they are digging up dead babies in convent gardens.

a reply to: The angel of light

That was a wonderfully thought out and very intelligent look at the whole issue of "same sex marriage". I hope you get applause!

In answer to your question "Is same sex marriage "gay" marriage"....Sometimes.

Looking forward to more replies.

Starred and flagged.

a reply to: OccamsRazor04

Dear OccamsRazor04,

Of course I respect your comment, even if I don't agree with it since it seems to me that the link you are questioning comes from a source that appears to be genuine.

Now suppose it is wrong, anyway it comes to my attention that there were three links before that one reporting reactions of the Catholic Church , so the beginning of the post, even following your so exigent standards is not the one you are pointing with our post.

Why you decided to ignore those 3 other links plus the two that are before them that show the results of the referendum?

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

a reply to: Ghost147

Dear Ghost14,

I appreciate your deep analysis of the posting initial questions on this so difficult topic, at least you have showed the courage to talk on it that many I think are still trying to find.

Nevertheless, it comes to my attention that you ignore one numeral, one question among the list, the one of adelphopoieisis, a kind of accepted bond that the Catholic and Orthodox churches originally offered for people of the same gender that wanted to join in some way, a kind of affective link, their lives.

Why to ignore that question? do you any comment on it? to facilitate the finding of that question please look for the number 7)

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

a reply to: The angel of light

I wasn't ignoring it. I stated in the beginning of my post that I could not answer biblical and church questions as I am not as well versed in them as I am in other fields. I do not know the answer to the question you proposed. Sorry!

However, I am interested to find out what you've concluded to the answers I did provide.

a reply to: windword

Hi Dear windword,

I appreciate your warm welcome to the thread, to be sincere I was doubtful to enter or not in a discussion of a topic that is so controversial, I am perfectly aware that I am putting my hands close to the fire. However, this topic is a signal of our times, it is something that define the stage of our civilization and how the people of XXI century feel about others, so for somebody like me that is interesting in humanity can't pass ignored.

I hope everybody else accepts it like you , that the intention of the thread is to discuss it in an intelligent way, more with the brain than with other part of the body, although this topic has a lot to do with the heart of the people.

The thread is not to opened to support or to condemn, not to demonize anybody, it is not to exclude anybody, it is also not against anybody..

Also it tries to show that sometimes the great differences as well as the great disagreements start in problems of semantics, sometimes we react in a so much impulsive way against something when perhaps it is not precisely what we think it was said or intended to say or claim by somebody else.

I am an optimistic person, I think in the middle of the chaos there is still order and even when the people disagree there is some agreement in universal values or principles.

For instance, I think we all agree in what is clean or dirty, we all agree in what is love and what is hatred, what is to act with commitment and what is to live in an irresponsible way, we all agree in what is to honor somebody we love or respect, we all not believe in God but we all at least believe that life is precious and deserve respect, we also in spite of our culture, beliefs , preferences think that Love is the most powerful positive emotion persons can experience, in the same way that all religions or ethics teach us the Golden rule : never do against others what we don't want somebody do against us, etc.

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

a reply to: The angel of light

You've opened the discussion up to a number of different aspects of "same sex marriage." Sticking with the question Is same sex marriage "gay" marriage; I think a lot of people are concerned about seeing people getting married to work the system.

Adam Sandler and Kevin James did a goofy movie that approached that subject, with pension and insurance benefits being the reason for them to "pretend" to be gay married.



I don't know how it works in the UK or Ireland, but here in the US, hetero seniors marry all the time to get Social Security "spousal benefits". It's quite a racket. Now add a couple of old friends hooking up for spousal benefits, to the mix. Same sex marriage gets expensive.

The Republic of Ireland is just growing up and moving from a state where religion was a predominant facet in people's lives, to a more secular approach.

The established Catholic Church may well be a tad peeved, but they need to learn to accept a less intrusive approach in Irish society. The referendum does not mean that the Irish are "less" Catholic, but it does mean that they want the Church to be in a different place. That's my reading anyway.

It will be interesting to see the impact of thee failing grip of the Catholic establishment on the Northern Irish, but that's another thread!

God loves the sinner and hates the sin. The sin is the act. So it's when you act on your urges that you sin. Someone who has the urge to have sex out of wedlock is being tempted to sin same as someone who has the urge to have sex with someone of the same gender or someone who has the urge to cheat on his or her spouse. If you follow through on the temptation, then you have sinned. It is the act God cannot abide, not you.

You wrote out a long post about whether or not God hates them for being tempted, not about whether or not God has very real problems with the sin itself.

As for marriage, I still maintain that God ordained that as between man and woman and Christ followed that teaching. Marriage in God's eyes cannot be between two people of the same gender.

As per the norm, society has moved on and 'teh church' is lagging behind in its conservative mire...

It's not really that surprising tbh, and the day will come when it's accepted across the board and then they'll act like it has always been the case.

a reply to: Prezbo369

Well,

As a matter of fact the Christian world provided until well passed the middle age a kind of association in between people of the same gender, that also was sacramental and so blessed by the Church, it was called Adelphopoiesis. This existed either in the Roman Catholic and in the Orthodox Easter Churches.

So , if we have today this kind of confrontation in between liberals and conservatives , as we understand those terms today, is because it seems that the Church leaders at some point became openly discriminatory of same gender unions or started to suffer Alzheimer.

Probably the positions of authority in the Church at some point were in heterosexual, homophobic and asexual hands and that explains the abolition of this possibility, that was open since ancient times to people that don't opt for marriage with opposite gender people.

The interesting point is that the ones that Now claim to be Conservatives, as Cardinal Burke, would be labeled in XIV as liberals, in that context, when a change in the church ended these kind of traditionally accepted unions.

Of course there is the criticism that this same gender union was not based in sexual aspects, but in a kind of special mutual love, however, that is also valid for the traditional marriage, where it is Love above anything else what seals the union, sexual aspect must subject to what is lovable to do in a couple.

This is the same line that separates what is affection of what is perversion, that also can exist in between partners of opposite gender, even sodomy could occur in between a man and a woman, and it is not less sinful from the religious point of view.

Another interesting point here is to Notice that the Criticism of Cardinal Burke is not exclusively against the civil same gender Marriage, but also against Divorce, that is not accepted by the church. But again we arrive to a crucial point in his argument, that his concept of Marriage is the sacramental one, he ,as almost any other teologian, does not accept any civil union as marriage, even the ones that are in between opposite gender people.

Similar discussion can be done around the problem of Celibacy in the Priesthood, it started to be used in the west or Latin rite of the Catholic church, as a norm just only after the Protestant reform, appointed as a discipline in the monastic orders by the Trent Council. ( In the eastern and Byzantine rites of the Catholic church celibacy in the Priests is not mandatory.)

So at that time to be liberal was to support mandatory celibacy and to be conservative was to let the priests decide if they wanted to marry or not.

The same can be say of other things, for instance the use of long hair and beard or clean cut style and shaved skin. In times of the Independence of America and the French Revolution the long haired people were all the conservative ones, since that was a style supported in tradition, but to be clean cut was to be a liberal. As you can see this is in complete opposition of what those terms meant since the 1960s to now.

So Liberal and Conservative terms are adjectives or categories of people classification that are of relative use, their meaning depend on the context they are used.

Adelphopoiesis was a sacrament and even had their own Saint Patrons, St Sergius and St Bacchus, who were two Roman soldiers and became martyrs of the Christianism, so Saints of the Church, and also mates , or partners if you want to use that word.

Pls read. en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

Thanks,

The Angel of Lightness

If people respect Freedom of Religion, then those who believe gay marriage is ok with God should be able to have a gay marriage. It is not judgmental to say that gay couples with their own religious beliefs are now allowed to be married.

a reply to: arpgme

The Peace of God to all that belong to the LIght,
Dear Readers,

Seven Years ago I posted in the forum of Dreams & predictions of ATS a prediction, about a drastic incoming change in the world about the concept,the common practices and in the legal status that Sexuality and affection would have in this XXI Century to determine new ways of associations in between individuals.

Please check the original prediction at:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I not only predicted this was going to occur , but even I pointed it was going to happen in the following decade, and well now this started to be a reality, no longer just a personal dream or premonition.

I am under the impression that few understood really the message, but today when the Supreme Court of the US has extended the legalization of the same gender unions to all the country, I feel this prediction has reached the point of its full accomplishment.

This is a Historic Day, the Supreme court has decided that the States do not have right to outlaw the same gender unions. It is significant that Judge Kennedy , a traditionally conservative one in all previous decisions found that this is what is fair

"They ask for equal dignity in the eyes of the law," Justice Anthony Kennedy said in his 28-page ruling. "The Constitution grants them that right."

www.sltrib.com...

www.cbsnews.com...

www.usmagazine.com...

www.usatoday.com...

I think there are many ways to assume situations , there are negative and positive ones, I hope the most conservative sectors of the society will have a lot of time to reflect of what was wrong in their position with respect of the human diversity and in that moment will realize that this decision is not necessarily menacing the traditionally accepted ways of love , like family and couples of different genders.

As a matter of fact what was Legalized today by the Supreme court was not exclusively Homosexual or Lesbian marriage, but Same gender secular Legal marriage, that can be used not only by people with those preferences but by any same gender partners, even asexuals, to protect their rights of benefits under the law.

Now, for the liberal ones I also hope that they can understand that the approval of the same gender unions, either if we decide to call them marriage or not, means commitment, means cease of the promiscuity that unfortunately has characterized the LGBT communities of the big metropolis of America along many decades.

Thanks for your attention,

The Angel of Lightness

a reply to: The angel of light

Yeah because straight people arnt and have never been promiscuous.......

You're on the wrong side of history on this, and you'll be looked back on in shame like those that refused civil rights to people in the 60s.