"Nothing is more dreaded than the national government meddling with religion." John Adams

Featured Posts


Creative Minority Reader

Marriage Is Dead And The Church Is Next

DOMA is dead.

And, technicalities aside, Prop 8. in California is dead paving the way for same-sex marriage there.

While many people will try to dissect these opinions and look for legal silver linings based on the narrowness of this or that part of rulings, make no mistake, as a practical matter marriage as we knew it is over. The dam has burst even if all the water has not yet traversed the breach.

But Marriage has never been the real target.  Read my post at the NC Register to understand why the real target is the Church.

Your Ad Here

29 comments:

Donna M said...

If you can believe (yes), THIS IS NOT OVER!
Even though fascism is the law of the land now, some of us will still model our lives after the saints and heroic virtue! "Dear Lord, I hear your voice and your servant is listening"! I have set my face as flint, armed with the Eternal Word, the rosary and scapular in the service of the BVM!
Buckle up buttercup, this is going to be bumpy ride!

Nathan said...

I hate to rain on your parade, but marriage has been dead in these US of A since no fault divorce and contraception. We are simply seeing the inner logic of the sexual revolution play out. Up next, polygamy, beastality, and paedophilia. At least we know gay 'marriage' will come to an end, as either we will return to the lifelong union of man & woman view of marriage or we will slide into oblivion like Babylon. In the end, Christ and the Church win.

Sarah said...

I agree with Nathan. Depressing but predictable. The U.S.A. is built on Protestant principles, and Protestants don't have a good track record for holding onto the truth (BSA, anyone?)
God help America.

ProudHillbilly said...

"polygamy" - I actually will be very entertained, in a twisted way, when this goes before a court, particularly since there's more than a multiple wife possibility now. If Joe and Joe can get married, why not Joe and Joe and Sally?

Donna M said...

Haven't forgotten anything.
Heaven "always" has the last word!
And when it comes some disobedient humans aren't going to like it.

Dymphna said...

Gotta agree with Nathan. Which shoe will drop next, I wonder? Polygamy, beastiality or incest?

Mary De Voe said...

Every civil rights case and this is a civil rights case is paid for by the taxpayers. The more litigation the more tax money down the tubes and gays are promising an eternal assault on the truth. This is an atheism issue.

akg41470 said...

Can someone give me one good social-related reason why polygamy is bad? Leave religion out of it and give me some good reasons. Very curious...

akg41470 said...

"Fascism is the law of the land"? Do you know what fascism is? Look that up in the dictionary and get back to me.

Mary De Voe said...

@akg : because the human being is composed of body and a rational immortal soul, who will live in eternity. Any infringement on truth damages the immortal soul. The visitation of vice to eradicate virtue, innocence and virginity eradicates the virtue of Justice leaving man is a morass of falsehoods and a miscarriage of imperfect Justice. When you are on the hotseat, everybody wants and needs Justice.

Hieronymus Monk said...

The church is my country. Period.

Mary De Voe said...

I know that every human being, homosexual and straight, came into existence through the operation of one female mother and one male father. I know that your father had a female bride and that your mother had a male groom. I know that since you had a beginning, that you are finite, and that you will die. I know that your will to live is a gift from God which was respected by your parents and the state. I know much more…. What kind of a human being denies this and sues in the Supreme Court to change the meaning of one female bride and one male groom?
Every civil rights case and this is a civil rights case is paid for by the taxpayers. The more litigation the more tax money down the tubes and gays are promising an eternal assault on the truth. This is an atheism issue.

akg41470 said...

@Mary De Voe: what the heck word salad is this? Please answer my question, perhaps a bit more directly.

NickMcC said...

@akg,

I'm afraid that taking religion out of the reason for "why polygamy is bad" doesn't help answer your question. Religion, the means by which morality is developed for theistic and atheistic beliefs, is what determines the morality of the conclusions of reason. Reason thus has no purpose if we do not use religion to judge the moral status of reason's conclusions. Otherwise, all things are acceptable if we do not use religion to determine what is right and wrong.

Just curious, what is your belief on the matter of polygamy? Is it right? Is it wrong? I believe that it is not the model of marriage by which God wishes for us to live. Christ and St. Paul make it very clear that marriage between one man and one woman is the holy model, making all previous models of marriage in the Bible (save the first marriage) inferior in holiness in their design. However, just because other models of marriage are inferior in holiness does not mean God will stop loving and blessing those in these models of marriage so long as they devote themselves and their marriage the best that they can to Him, but even this will lead to true marriage. God gave us Christ to show true marriage restored, so naturally we will want to stop practices other than true marriage if we wish to devote ourselves completely to God.

Unknown said...

Can someone give me one good social-related reason why polygamy is bad?

Are we talking classical polygamy, in which a man is married to several women, but the women are not married to each other? Or are we talking polyamory, which would be nothing more than a state-sanctioned orgy?

In fact, why does the state need to validate any sort of sexual relationship at all? Why not civil partnerships open to any two consenting adults, including siblings, a parent and child, business partners, and even...horrors!...platonic friends?

Dave

NickMcC said...

I think we need to clarify something: CIVIL marriage has always been under redefinition, only recently has it become so stark in its redefinition in allowing contraception and abortion to be a part of marriage and SSA persons to marry. Civil marriage doesn't pose a threat to the Catholic Church because she only recognizes HOLY marriage.

It is a purely Protestant idea that civil marriage needs to be between man and woman, whereas that is totally not always the case. By what merit does civil marriage have to be between man and woman? Civil marriage is exactly what it is: defined by civil society. It is not defined as a sacrament to God, whereas the Catholic Church does define marriage as a sacrament. Civil marriage is secular in the sense that it can be redefined however people wish, sacramental marriage is holy in the sense that it is established by God.

What we Catholics need to be upset about is the distortion of marriage within the Catholic Church. The Church laity have been influenced by Protestantism's compliance with contraception, abortion, pornography, and allowing SSA persons to marry, and have done a poor job educating themselves, their children, their family, and their friends about what sacramental marriage is all about. And what do we have as consequence? Failed marriages, a decline in church attendance, and poorly formed children in the Catholic faith. Marriage in the Church is what is really at stake, and we need to work our best to help those within our flock to be reconciled with God.

Civil marriage is not dead. It is redefined... again. So what? Sacramental marriage within the Catholic Church needs to be upheld. Let us tend to our flock when tending to matters such as this, my brothers and sisters.

God Bless!!

NickMcC said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
NickMcC said...

Also, one last thing. SSA unions... Isn't the moral issue about sexual relationships? What is so wrong about people of the same sex living with another who aren't having a sexual relationship and receiving SOME federal benefits because they are civilly married?

Unknown said...

Nick McC:

Also, what is wrong with two close siblings receiving the equivalent of marriage benefits? I've known a few who could have used them...

NickMcC said...

I realized something... I suppose that by "SSA unions" I meant "SSA relationships" since union implies a sexual relationship and relationship is simply friendly intimacy that is not sexual, or so I thought. The thing is, SSA persons who live with those they are attracted to ARE experiencing a sexual relationship by the nature of being with someone whom they are sexually attracted... This is such a horribly difficult subject that is well beyond me, but for now I stick to the Catholic Church's present stance on SSA relationships/unions, namely, they are not permitted in the Church and should be discouraged in civil society.

Unknown, the problem with allowing siblings to receive marriage benefits is that the benefits are meant for those who are married. The benefits encourage people to marry, but then we have to ask ourselves if these laws are actually encouraging people to marry and remain married... Current divorce rates suggest that the benefits mean very little in the long run. The problem is then how to CHANGE the laws so that what was once a benefit only for marriage may now include more people when the laws are so interwoven into the fabric of modern day society. Rewriting today's marriage benefits is like untying the world's largest twisted ball of yarn - possible, but not likely to be done in our lifetime.

akg41470 said...

Fail. I said take religion OUT of the explanation. You used it as your premise. Try again, please.

victorfeltes said...

Secular reasons why polygamy is bad where it is the prevailing norm in a society or a sub-culture: http://tinyurl.com/7q37oct

Secular reasons why polygamous marriage is bad in and of itself: http://tinyurl.com/qbcsrx8

Also, if you will allow something of a religious argument, the real-world examples of polygamy in the Old Testament generated family problems: Sarai & Hagar, Rachel & Leah, Penninah & Hannah, the Davidic kings, etc.

akg41470 said...

Thanks for the links. The Slate article I disagree with because it assumes closed societies, and the other article focused a bit too much on sexual relatio

Good arguments, but not strong enough to sway me yet.

Mary De Voe said...

NickMcC: "Rewriting today's marriage benefits is like untying the world's largest twisted ball of yarn - possible, but not likely to be done in our lifetime." Pray to Our Lady, Untier of Knots

Mary De Voe said...

akg41470: Religion is man's response to the gift of Faith from God. akg41470, you have rejected your gift of Faith from God and ridicule us like Goliath ridiculed David before he was slain with his own sword. I have been told that the people in heaven do not remember those who chose to go to hell. So, you want to climb on my back to get over the brimstone and fire? One of man's responses to the gift of Faith from God is marriage. Cannot take religion or God out of marriage. Cannot take God out of the secular. Even the devil is created by God.

Mary De Voe said...

The vocation to the office of husband for a man and the vocation to the office of wife for a woman is a call from God Himself. A claim to vocation from God, without God, is a lie. Only man is called to serve God through vocation. Without a vocation, man comes to nought. This is posted at "Sullivan"

akg41470 said...

@Mary De Voe: zzzzzz.....

Susan L said...

akg: The tradition of marriage has been mostly about the children. The best family to raise children has been shown to be 1 father and 1 mother raising them together. This has proven itself to be very good for the children and for society.

Of course, families now have become very messed up which shows itself in the number of unwanted pregnancies, abortions, drugs, promiscuity, crime both violent and non-violent, etc etc etc.

Personally, I think there is plenty of blame to go around but I certainly would include contraception (where people start looking at each other as objects instead of soul mates) and stepping away from God.

akg, if no children were involved...I would be personally against it but I will have to think on it to give you a secular reason.

Susan L said...

akg: The tradition of marriage has been mostly about the children. The best family to raise children has been shown to be 1 father and 1 mother raising them together. This has proven itself to be very good for the children and for society.

Of course, families now have become very messed up which shows itself in the number of unwanted pregnancies, abortions, drugs, promiscuity, crime both violent and non-violent, etc etc etc.

Personally, I think there is plenty of blame to go around but I certainly would include contraception (where people start looking at each other as objects instead of soul mates) and stepping away from God.

akg, if no children were involved...I would be personally against it but I will have to think on it to give you a secular reason.

Post a Comment