The Pope has again launched into what is becoming a disturbing mantra: gay marriage is threatening the future of mankind. Now that the Mayan apocalypse has passed, it appears the Pope is ready with a substituted menace of loving gay couples marrying. Pope Benedict XVI insisted that gender theories supporting homosexuality are false and that the world must confront “the question of what it means to be a man, and what it is necessary to do to be true men.”
The Pope criticized theories suggesting that homosexuality is natural and insists that “[t]he profound falsehood of this theory and of the anthropological revolution contained within it is obvious . . . it becomes clear that when God is denied, human dignity also disappears.”
The statement again relies on this false assumption that gay marriage is a threat to family and procreation. The opposite is clearly true. Many such couples want to have children either by artificial insemination or adoption. Same-sex marriage expands the number of families, not reduce that number.
Source: Telegraph
Because a thing is traditional doesn’t make it either the best way or the only way a thing can be. It simply means it’s the way the thing has been. Slavery was a tradition for millenia, we changed that in the US because it wasn’t the better way to treat Americans. Prohibitting divorce was a tradition and the law in many societies and many counties for a very long time. It was a tradition that held women hostage to their husband and was a tradition also endorsed by the Catholic Church. We, at least in the US, have thrown out that historic repressive tradition as well. The tradition of forcing people to hide who they are and who they love is not a value and to force them to live as second class citizens with a different set of rights may offend the guy in the gold brocade dress, but in the US it is contrary to our laws which demand equality (a foreign concept in the RCC and some other religious cults) to all citizens regardless of their religious zealotry.
evan, I will not excoriate you (if I were gay, I would try to), but I will strongly disagree with you and call you out, not on your beliefs, but on what I believe to be the shaky ground (or no ground at all) those beliefs are based on.
First off, you state “I do believe that any homosexual (not sure if that’s what is preferred terminology there), deserves equal love and respect as any other person of any other orientation. However, I do believe that, as cruel and insensitive it sounds, an increase in homosexuality, or the enabling of it will be tough on the family as we know it and change a lot in this world.”
I am not sure you can have both – in believing the first you cannot also believe the second.
Second, you state “I feel that the family, as it traditionally has always been, a man and woman with children is foundational to the fabric of society.”
You are implying that altering this would somehow undo this magical fabric, although you do not elaborate, you imply this would have negative consequences in some form or another.
It is fine and dandy to feel a certain way and all, but evidence from other countries already recognizing gay marriage say otherwise. There is no evidence that anything drastic happened in those societies and the sky did not fall.
Please elaborate on what you think would “change a lot in the world” and we can go from there.
How about everyone assume the highest gesture of devotion to God and become nuns and priests.
Wouldn’t mankind be even more doomed due to celibacy lack of procreation?
Ratfink (aka pope Vindictive) is the threat to mankind, especially his anti-condom idiocy.
Overpopulation leads to more environmental damage and more starving children. And no condoms will lead to a wider spread of HIV/AIDS.
I don’t think condoms are necessarily the answer…though I also don’t think condoms should be outright eliminated. I think the change in culture has made HIV/AIDS more transmittable in that we are more likely to put off marriage, have multiple partners, etc. I would reckon holding off sex until marriage would significantly reduce HIV/AIDS. However, husband and wife I think should be able to share their affection for one another without making a baby every time, therefore prevention like condoms makes sense to me for that.
I may be excoriated for this, but I’m going to mostly side with the Pope on this. I am not Catholic, and I do believe that any homosexual (not sure if that’s what is preferred terminology there), deserves equal love and respect as any other person of any other orientation. However, I do believe that, as cruel and insensitive it sounds, an increase in homosexuality, or the enabling of it will be tough on the family as we know it and change a lot in this world. I don’t agree with the Pope in that child population decrease or increase is the problem. I also understand that a couple of the same gender could likely raise a child well. However, I feel that the family, as it traditionally has always been, a man and woman with children is foundational to the fabric of society. Men and women are different on a multitude of levels and the saying “he/she is my other half” I find to be more literal than figurative. I believe what prophets of priesthood authority (which I don’t think the Pope has I believe), have given good reason to believe that the man is not “a real man” as the pope describes without a woman, and visa versa. I think a lot of the other struggles of the world as some previous commenters have said need more focus than this…can be alleviated with a stronger focus on our traditional families, to help them realize how a man and woman can raise a child in such a world as this to be of good character, tolerant, charitable, etc. So, basically, I think it comes down to the nature of traditional family being a real source of societal strength.
Is there a race between the Catholics and the GOP to see who can alienate their base the fastest?
Stop believing in popes. It’s such bullshit. Religion is the real threat to our futures.
Is there a reason why we should listen to anything this Pope says since he and his Church are still breaking the law in our country and many other countries by hiding known pedophiles from the authorities? How many of his own priests are gay? Disgusting. WWJD?
Pope Benedict XVI insisted that gender theories supporting homosexuality are false and that the world must confront “the question of what it means to be a man, and what it is necessary to do to be true men.”
The Pope is PROJECTING. HE needs to confront this question for himself. A real man would not be obsessing over the issue of gay marriage at all. A REAL man in his position would be tackling REAL threats to humanity such as poverty, war, climate change, and institutionalized bigotry perpetuated under the auspices of religion.
The pope’s definition of what it is to be a true man scares me. It is not defined by any good qualities like loyalty, integrity or truthfulness it is all about sex. He sees no problem with pedophilia but gay married sex is a problem. Of course under the circumstances the Pope hardly has much legitimacy but this statement does explain why he gave a special blessing to the President of Uganda who wants to give her people a law for Christmas that will require the execution of gays. Of course, that is just what Christ would do at Christmas. Lovely.
blah blah blah Pope blah blah sex blah blah blah penises blah blah consent?
that the world must confront “the question of what it means to be a man, and what it is necessary to do to be true men.”
It’s a good question but the Pope’s answer to it is chilling. The Catholic Church is the world’s most dangerous patriarchy and is a danger to us all.
.
I guess this Pope had NO problem with slave labor and shooting them if they did not work fast enough for him when he was in the Nazi Army during WWII. THAT is what REAL men did according to him. I don’t see any reason for the state to promote gay marriage and can see no benefit for the state for such a thing. If and when gay sex results in children, THEN I will be first in line to promote gay marriage. Absent that, I can see no benefit for it.
Plus the fact that millions of gays get married every year to others of the opposite sex, so they are not discriminated against. There are lots of kids running around now who would not have been born if gay marriage had been available for their homosexual parents. They would have had gay marriage instead of the standard one.
Yes. The Church must change because we tell them they must…not because they want…because they must.
Presumbly, if gay people are allowed to marry they will damage procreation for others, but if they are not allowed to marry they’ll say, “Oh shucks” and become straight so they can marry and procreate?
Is it this kind of logic that led to the conclusion that God had his only begotten son crucified so that people could be saved from sin?
Oh, now I get it. Pass the collection plate.
Steve:
“This morbid preoccupation with other people’s bedroom preferences does the church no good.”
*********************
The RC Church used to be about saving souls from the devil. Today its about saving people from themselves. Maybe they wanted easier competition.
Steve, The Jesuits are superb teachers. They teach how to really think and are very demanding. They’re about the only aspect of Catholicism w/ any value now.
This morbid preoccupation with other people’s bedroom preferences does the church no good.
The church demonstrated its inability to motivate Catholics during the contraceptive debate.
All-in-all, we are looking at a toothless organization that is running on fumes.
I studied under Jesuits and have the greatest respect for them and the church, but its time to change.
““the question of what it means to be a man, and what it is necessary to do to be true men.”
Become celibate.
Spurn the penis that God gave you.
Pedophile priest are the threat.