Catholic teachings do not forbid gay marriage
Debate Rounds (3)
A little known and lesser cared about fact concerning the Catholic Church is that they do not recognize legal marriages as valid. Official Catholic teachings say that a couple must be married in the eyes of God in the sacrament of Matrimony in order to be "married". This is so strongly reinforced, that if an individual is married by a justice of the peace and subsequently have intimate relations, this is considered pre or extra marital sex., and is in fact considered a sin. Furthermore, If you are married legally but not within the church, you could technically get married to another person IN the Church. This leads us to a solid conclusion that the church does NOT recognize LEGAL marriages as VALID. For the sake of clarification, I will refer to legal marriage as "social contract". Moving on. If two individuals desire to enter into a social contract, this is entirely permissible within the Catholic Church according to the above reasoning. It is simply a different tax status (In America at least). The Church does NOT recognize this as a marriage, which they have defined as being between a man and a woman. To summarize: The Church forbids homosexuality, but NOT the official engagement into a social contract and subsequent change of tax and eligibility status. Members of the Church have CONDEMNED said social contract, however there is no TEACHING forbidding it. I rest my case for round 2 on these premise.
According to a Catholic website, "Amendment to Protect Marriage: The Catholic Church opposes gay marriage and the social acceptance of homosexuality and same-sex relationships, but teaches that homosexual persons deserve respect, justice and pastoral care. The Vatican and Pope John Paul II are speaking out against the growing number of places that recognize same-sex marriages.
Bishops Urge Constitutional Amendment to Protect Marriage
WASHINGTON (CNS) -- The Administrative Committee of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops has called for a constitutional amendment to protect the unique social and legal status of marriage.
In Catholic belief, "marriage is a faithful, exclusive and lifelong union between one man and one woman, joined as husband and wife in an intimate partnership of life and love," the 47-bishop committee said in a statement released Sept. 10.
"What are called 'homosexual unions,' because they do not express full human complementarity and because they are inherently nonprocreative, cannot be given the status of marriage," the committee said.
It warned that "the importance of marriage for children and for society" is under attack in U.S. courts and legislatures and in popular culture and entertainment media, which "often undermine or ignore the essential role of marriage and promote equivalence between marriage and homosexual relationships."
The Administrative Committee -- composed of the USCCB's executive officers, elected committee chairmen and elected regional representatives -- is the highest policy and decision-making body of the bishops apart from the entire body when it meets twice a year in general assembly.
The committee, which met in Washington, did not specify language for a federal marriage amendment.
Rather, it committed the bishops to promoting the "essential role of marriage ... in our teaching and preaching, but also in our public policy advocacy at the state and national levels and in the important dialogue about how best to protect marriage and the common good in the U.S. Constitution and in our society as a whole."
"We offer general support for a federal marriage amendment to the U.S. Constitution as we continue to work to protect marriage in state legislatures, the courts, the Congress and other appropriate forums," it said.
In May, a proposal to amend the U.S. Constitution to define marriage as "the union of a man and a woman" was introduced in Congress.
The bishops cited a recent Vatican document that called legal recognition of same-sex unions "gravely unjust."
Citing marriage's unique societal role in the procreation and raising of children, the Vatican said, "The denial of the social and legal status of marriage to forms of cohabitation that are not and cannot be marital is not opposed to justice; on the contrary, justice requires it."
The Administrative Committee said the church clearly teaches the dignity of homosexual persons and condemns "all forms of unjust discrimination, harassment or abuse."
The bishops said their defense of marriage focuses "on the importance of marriage, not on homosexuality or other matters."
The growing U.S. debate over granting marriage rights or equivalent legal status to same-sex unions is part of a contemporary cultural phenomenon across the Western world.
In the United States there have been a number of court and legislative battles over the question of legal benefits for same-sex unions since 1993, when the Hawaii Supreme Court ruled that the state could not exclude same-sex couples from marriage unless it could show compelling state interests and prove that its marriage laws were narrowly tailored to those interests.
That led to legislation in Hawaii granting domestic partnership benefits to same-sex couples.
Vermont adopted similar legislation in 2000 following a similar court ruling there, and a case currently before the Massachusetts Supreme Court challenges that state's marriage laws.
In the wake of the Hawaii court decision a number of other states amended their marriage laws to ban or strengthen existing bans on same-sex "marriage," but provision of equivalent benefits and protections to same-sex partnerships has increased on a number of fronts, including companies and some local governments deciding to provide spousal benefits to same-sex partners of employees.
Canada's federal government has been struggling since July to create new laws implementing a Canadian Supreme Court decision that the traditional definition of marriage violates the equality provision of that nation's constitution.
Responding to a legislative proposal to redefine marriage as "the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others," the bishops of Canada Sept. 10 urged people to oppose "a redefinition of marriage that includes same-sex partners."
When the Dutch Parliament voted to recognize same-sex unions as marriages in 2000, Pope John Paul II denounced the decision.
Calling marriage between a man and a woman a fundamental part of human reality and the basic unit of society, the pope said, "No other form of relationship between persons can be considered as an equivalent to this natural relationship between a man and a woman out of whose love children are born."
In 1996 the heads of two bishops' committees -- domestic policy and marriage and family -- issued a joint statement firmly opposing any "attempts to grant the legal status of marriage to a relationship between persons of the same sex."
The following year the bishops' conference sent all bishops a 77-page resource paper addressing the pastoral, legal, social and theological issues posed in the debate over treating same-sex unions the same as marriages."
Your argument in round two was entirely based off of the press release of several Vatican officials. Anyone that knows anything about the Catholic Church knows that EVERYTHING is a long, carefully considered, drawn out process. This is partially why the Priest abuse scandal was so shocking. That said, everything in that article was a PRESS RELEASE, which is a far cry from an official teachings. The Catholic Church relies on the leadership from the Pope who reserves the right to make what is called an "Ex Cathedra" teaching, or "From the chair". This is the belief in Papal infallibility. ONLY the teachings made Ex Cathedra are considered infallible and therefore fundamental. There are only TWO of these teachings, and neither of them concern gay marriage. Pope John PaulII had expressed his desire to make Male only Ordination an Ex Cathedra statement, however Cardinal Ratzinger (who later became Poe Emeritus Benedict XVI) convinced hi not to do so. Hundreds of Catholics have SPOKEN OUT about the injustice of same sex marriage (legal same sex marriage), however in reference to the title of this debate, there is NO ACTUAL TEACHING CONCERNING ANYTHING OTHER THAN HOMOSEXUALITY. The Catechism of the Catholic Church simply condemns coitus between two individuals of the same gender. They have no teachings concerning who may or may not enter into a social contract. Some may suggest that their definition of marriage is a blanket that covers all definitions, but as we established in my Round 2 argument, the Church has said that this is not the case! I rest my final argument on these premises.
Be it Catholicism, Protestantism, or any branch of Christianity, they all have one thing in common. That thing is the doctrines of Jesus Christ and the law of the Old Testament. Those who truly follow Jesus will reject their sinful desires, and repent theory sins to God. A true Christian, Catholic or Protestant, will reject their sins and rely on Jesus. This would include the rejection of homosexuality. So I don't know where you come from, because all original true teachings of Christ teach that sin is sin, and needs to be condemned.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Weiler 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||2|
Reasons for voting decision: Both horrible arguments. Both atrocious grammar. Sources to con since he is the only one that used any.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.