Total Posts:22|Showing Posts:1-22
Jump to topic:

Has one of the great topics been resolved?

dtaylor971
Posts: 1,907
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 3:08:07 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Pope Francis has said that Catholics should accept gays, and that gays have culture that can be shared.

"The synod said that gay people have 'gifts and talents to offer the Christian community.' This is something that even a few years ago would have been unthinkable," Martin added.

So, basically, this means gays should be treated as equals in society. Even the pope believes it, so why should you not? The gay marriage debate still has arguments for the con side, but it is very close to being resolved. However, the pro side is now stronger than ever, with Alaska overturning ban on gay marriage and other states accepting it.

The U.S is going in the right direction towards peace, even if it is a small step. What do you think? Was the pope right to say this?

My stance: Of course. Open to debating it!

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com...
"I don't know why gays want to marry, I have spent the last 25 years wishing I wasn't allowed to." -Sadolite
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 3:14:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 3:08:07 PM, dtaylor971 wrote:
Pope Francis has said that Catholics should accept gays, and that gays have culture that can be shared.

There is a difference between the Catholic church saying gays are not bad people and they should be tolerant, and saying the church should marry them.

This sounds like the former.
My work here is, finally, done.
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 5:47:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
It's progress, but not, unfortunately, a resolution. Until the RCC approves gay marriage, there will be no resolution. And, the synod is not going to go so far as to recommend that.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
YYW
Posts: 36,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 5:49:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 5:47:52 PM, bsh1 wrote:
It's progress, but not, unfortunately, a resolution. Until the RCC approves gay marriage, there will be no resolution. And, the synod is not going to go so far as to recommend that.

Yet. I didn't think even this would happen for more than a decade. The church is moving faster than it has, though there is still much more progress to be made.
Tsar of DDO
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 5:51:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 5:49:49 PM, YYW wrote:
At 10/13/2014 5:47:52 PM, bsh1 wrote:
It's progress, but not, unfortunately, a resolution. Until the RCC approves gay marriage, there will be no resolution. And, the synod is not going to go so far as to recommend that.

Yet. I didn't think even this would happen for more than a decade. The church is moving faster than it has, though there is still much more progress to be made.

Society is moving faster on this issue that it has for many others. I think, proportional to the swift reversal of public opinion, the church is moving fairly slowly still.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
YYW
Posts: 36,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 5:53:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 5:51:27 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 10/13/2014 5:49:49 PM, YYW wrote:
At 10/13/2014 5:47:52 PM, bsh1 wrote:
It's progress, but not, unfortunately, a resolution. Until the RCC approves gay marriage, there will be no resolution. And, the synod is not going to go so far as to recommend that.

Yet. I didn't think even this would happen for more than a decade. The church is moving faster than it has, though there is still much more progress to be made.

Society is moving faster on this issue that it has for many others. I think, proportional to the swift reversal of public opinion, the church is moving fairly slowly still.

You're right, and historically that's been the case.
Tsar of DDO
vwv
Posts: 666
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 5:56:20 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 5:55:22 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Sorry but as an atheist, the pope's word means nothing to me. I still profess that homosexuality is a sin.

Sin cannot exist to an atheist.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 6:04:36 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 5:56:20 PM, vwv wrote:
At 10/13/2014 5:55:22 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Sorry but as an atheist, the pope's word means nothing to me. I still profess that homosexuality is a sin.

Sin cannot exist to an atheist.

http://dictionary.reference.com...

"any reprehensible or regrettable action, behavior, lapse, etc.; great fault or offense:"

You can't tell me an atheist can't believe in this.

And I was half trolling anyways.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
YYW
Posts: 36,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 6:04:52 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 5:56:20 PM, vwv wrote:
At 10/13/2014 5:55:22 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Sorry but as an atheist, the pope's word means nothing to me. I still profess that homosexuality is a sin.

Sin cannot exist to an atheist.

Please close your account and get a new username that doesn't look so much like mine. I know you're STALIN, and this nonsense of having a username that looks like mine must end.
Tsar of DDO
vwv
Posts: 666
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 6:18:25 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 6:04:52 PM, YYW wrote:
At 10/13/2014 5:56:20 PM, vwv wrote:
At 10/13/2014 5:55:22 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Sorry but as an atheist, the pope's word means nothing to me. I still profess that homosexuality is a sin.

Sin cannot exist to an atheist.

Please close your account and get a new username that doesn't look so much like mine. I know you're STALIN, and this nonsense of having a username that looks like mine must end.

or what?
vwv
Posts: 666
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 6:19:02 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 6:04:36 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 10/13/2014 5:56:20 PM, vwv wrote:
At 10/13/2014 5:55:22 PM, darkkermit wrote:
Sorry but as an atheist, the pope's word means nothing to me. I still profess that homosexuality is a sin.

Sin cannot exist to an atheist.

http://dictionary.reference.com...

"any reprehensible or regrettable action, behavior, lapse, etc.; great fault or offense:"

You can't tell me an atheist can't believe in this.

And I was half trolling anyways.

that is not the real kind of sin and you know it.
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 6:21:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 5:47:52 PM, bsh1 wrote:
It's progress, but not, unfortunately, a resolution. Until the RCC approves gay marriage, there will be no resolution. And, the synod is not going to go so far as to recommend that.

The RCC can never marry gays because there is strict religious cannon against it. They can accept gays as everyone should because while they believe it to be a sin they accept all other walks of sinners. Why descriminate? The church however, cannot marry two people of the same gender. That, in my opinion, will never happen.

The "marriages" being approved now via the government are just that, government marriages. Very few religious people hold them to be true spiritual marriages.
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 6:26:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 6:21:41 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 10/13/2014 5:47:52 PM, bsh1 wrote:
It's progress, but not, unfortunately, a resolution. Until the RCC approves gay marriage, there will be no resolution. And, the synod is not going to go so far as to recommend that.

The RCC can never marry gays because there is strict religious cannon against it. They can accept gays as everyone should because while they believe it to be a sin they accept all other walks of sinners. Why descriminate? The church however, cannot marry two people of the same gender. That, in my opinion, will never happen.

I think that's too absolutist a stance, and I doubt it will play out that way, but will have to agree to disagree there. Predicting the future is a notoriously difficult pastime.

The "marriages" being approved now via the government are just that, government marriages. Very few religious people hold them to be true spiritual marriages.

The fact that they're not recognized as spiritual doesn't make them any less so. Love is, by it's very nature, spiritual--any marriage founded in love is, IMO, a spiritual one.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 6:28:39 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 6:26:35 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 10/13/2014 6:21:41 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 10/13/2014 5:47:52 PM, bsh1 wrote:
It's progress, but not, unfortunately, a resolution. Until the RCC approves gay marriage, there will be no resolution. And, the synod is not going to go so far as to recommend that.

The RCC can never marry gays because there is strict religious cannon against it. They can accept gays as everyone should because while they believe it to be a sin they accept all other walks of sinners. Why descriminate? The church however, cannot marry two people of the same gender. That, in my opinion, will never happen.

I think that's too absolutist a stance, and I doubt it will play out that way, but will have to agree to disagree there. Predicting the future is a notoriously difficult pastime.

The "marriages" being approved now via the government are just that, government marriages. Very few religious people hold them to be true spiritual marriages.

The fact that they're not recognized as spiritual doesn't make them any less so. Love is, by it's very nature, spiritual--any marriage founded in love is, IMO, a spiritual one.

But according to church doctrine only a man and a woman can spiritually become one. I'm saying the church's stance on these marriages will be that they are not truly spiritual. I'm talking about church doctrine here. The government can tell you your marriage is spiritual all they want but the true authority on spiritual matters is the church when it comes to these things.
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 6:32:29 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 6:28:39 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 10/13/2014 6:26:35 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 10/13/2014 6:21:41 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 10/13/2014 5:47:52 PM, bsh1 wrote:
It's progress, but not, unfortunately, a resolution. Until the RCC approves gay marriage, there will be no resolution. And, the synod is not going to go so far as to recommend that.

The RCC can never marry gays because there is strict religious cannon against it. They can accept gays as everyone should because while they believe it to be a sin they accept all other walks of sinners. Why descriminate? The church however, cannot marry two people of the same gender. That, in my opinion, will never happen.

I think that's too absolutist a stance, and I doubt it will play out that way, but will have to agree to disagree there. Predicting the future is a notoriously difficult pastime.

The "marriages" being approved now via the government are just that, government marriages. Very few religious people hold them to be true spiritual marriages.

The fact that they're not recognized as spiritual doesn't make them any less so. Love is, by it's very nature, spiritual--any marriage founded in love is, IMO, a spiritual one.

But according to church doctrine only a man and a woman can spiritually become one. I'm saying the church's stance on these marriages will be that they are not truly spiritual.

Sure, the Church will say that because they're covering their a$$, not because it's actually true.

I'm talking about church doctrine here.

No, you were talking about "religious people," which includes people outside of the RCC, but that's not really important.

The government can tell you your marriage is spiritual all they want but the true authority on spiritual matters is the church when it comes to these things.

The Church is, in some people's opinion, an authority on spiritual matters. I don't think one could say it is the "true authority;" as different faiths have different opinions on spiritual matters, we can't just assume that the RCC's POV is somehow the best or most accurate.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
Raisor
Posts: 4,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 6:34:35 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
The gay marriage debate is politically settled in the US.

The Catholic Church will never recognize gay marriage. They still do not condone contraception and many other socially conservative positions. Their base is globally very diverse such that the progressive tendencies of many western countries are not as strongly felt. Heck they only shifted away from Latin masses 50 years ago- that's a pretty strong indication of the church's commitment to retaining its traditions and its lack of reactionary tendency. Basically none of the pressures moving us politics move Vatican politics
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 6:34:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 6:32:29 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 10/13/2014 6:28:39 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 10/13/2014 6:26:35 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 10/13/2014 6:21:41 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 10/13/2014 5:47:52 PM, bsh1 wrote:
It's progress, but not, unfortunately, a resolution. Until the RCC approves gay marriage, there will be no resolution. And, the synod is not going to go so far as to recommend that.

The RCC can never marry gays because there is strict religious cannon against it. They can accept gays as everyone should because while they believe it to be a sin they accept all other walks of sinners. Why descriminate? The church however, cannot marry two people of the same gender. That, in my opinion, will never happen.

I think that's too absolutist a stance, and I doubt it will play out that way, but will have to agree to disagree there. Predicting the future is a notoriously difficult pastime.

The "marriages" being approved now via the government are just that, government marriages. Very few religious people hold them to be true spiritual marriages.

The fact that they're not recognized as spiritual doesn't make them any less so. Love is, by it's very nature, spiritual--any marriage founded in love is, IMO, a spiritual one.

But according to church doctrine only a man and a woman can spiritually become one. I'm saying the church's stance on these marriages will be that they are not truly spiritual.

Sure, the Church will say that because they're covering their a$$, not because it's actually true.

I'm talking about church doctrine here.

No, you were talking about "religious people," which includes people outside of the RCC, but that's not really important.

The government can tell you your marriage is spiritual all they want but the true authority on spiritual matters is the church when it comes to these things.

The Church is, in some people's opinion, an authority on spiritual matters. I don't think one could say it is the "true authority;" as different faiths have different opinions on spiritual matters, we can't just assume that the RCC's POV is somehow the best or most accurate.

I'm using the RCC as a benchmark because they have been historically the source of Christian doctrine worldwide. Whether you believe in the church's authority or not is one thing. The point I'm trying to make is that the RCC (and presumably other Christian churches) cannot in good faith marry gay people because it is against their religious texts. Those marriages cannot be sanctioned by the church and the church still keep its authority on spiritual matters.
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 6:50:12 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 6:34:40 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:

I'm using the RCC as a benchmark because they have been historically the source of Christian doctrine worldwide. Whether you believe in the church's authority or not is one thing. The point I'm trying to make is that the RCC (and presumably other Christian churches) cannot in good faith marry gay people because it is against their religious texts. Those marriages cannot be sanctioned by the church and the church still keep its authority on spiritual matters.

Maybe, if we go by a literal interpretation. But that approach is flawed, IMO, so I disagree with the point you're making.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
YYW
Posts: 36,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 6:53:26 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 6:34:35 PM, Raisor wrote:
The gay marriage debate is politically settled in the US.

The Catholic Church will never recognize gay marriage.

Oh ye of little faith.

They still do not condone contraception and many other socially conservative positions. Their base is globally very diverse such that the progressive tendencies of many western countries are not as strongly felt. Heck they only shifted away from Latin masses 50 years ago- that's a pretty strong indication of the church's commitment to retaining its traditions and its lack of reactionary tendency. Basically none of the pressures moving us politics move Vatican politics
Tsar of DDO
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 6:54:58 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 6:50:12 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 10/13/2014 6:34:40 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:

I'm using the RCC as a benchmark because they have been historically the source of Christian doctrine worldwide. Whether you believe in the church's authority or not is one thing. The point I'm trying to make is that the RCC (and presumably other Christian churches) cannot in good faith marry gay people because it is against their religious texts. Those marriages cannot be sanctioned by the church and the church still keep its authority on spiritual matters.

Maybe, if we go by a literal interpretation. But that approach is flawed, IMO, so I disagree with the point you're making.

Well of course you disagree.
You're also a little bias. Not that I'm saying your bias is the source of your disagreement but you're also looking to disagree.
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2014 6:57:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 10/13/2014 6:54:58 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:
At 10/13/2014 6:50:12 PM, bsh1 wrote:
At 10/13/2014 6:34:40 PM, ConservativePolitico wrote:

I'm using the RCC as a benchmark because they have been historically the source of Christian doctrine worldwide. Whether you believe in the church's authority or not is one thing. The point I'm trying to make is that the RCC (and presumably other Christian churches) cannot in good faith marry gay people because it is against their religious texts. Those marriages cannot be sanctioned by the church and the church still keep its authority on spiritual matters.

Maybe, if we go by a literal interpretation. But that approach is flawed, IMO, so I disagree with the point you're making.

Well of course you disagree.
You're also a little bias. Not that I'm saying your bias is the source of your disagreement but you're also looking to disagree.

True. It doesn't mean that I'm incorrect, though.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...