http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4473001.stm
Mmmm… sounds a bit dodgy to me…
Slan,
D.
That’s nothing, just wait till people start wanting to legally marry their pets. 
Forward, into the past!
"Interviewed in the Italian newspaper, Corriere de la Serra, Cardinal Lopez Trujillo said the Church was making an urgent call for freedom of conscience for Roman Catholics and appealing to them to resist the law. "
Lopez Trujillo.
“To live outside the Law,you must be honest”
Bob Dylan.
“I’m off to bed”
Dubhlinn.
Note the difference–Spain is instituting gay marriage legislatively;
here, to the extent that it’s happened, it has been imposed by
courts on people who hadn’t had time to wrap their minds
around the idea. I think that has a lot to do with the extraordinary
level of backlash here; I believe 18 states have in the last year
amended their constitutions to prohibit same-sex
marriage so as to protect against such court rulings.
A lot of people are voting for amendments as much
out of fear of perceived judicial tyranny as out of
opposition to gay marriage, I beleive.
Massachusetts may well amend its constitution by
referendum next year, to reverse the Court decision
there. I expect we have set back the cause
of gay marriage by a generation or two.
Note too that when this is done legislatively,
and the courts stay removed, the fear that
it will lead to legal polygamy or heaven knows what
is much relieved, because such decisions remain
in the hands of the people, that is, legislative.
The problem I have with this is that the new Pope is kicking off his Papacy in a most disturbing fashion.He is asking people to break the law - and if necessary - lose their jobs in the process.Will the Vatican pay the mortage and feed the kids?
Where is the Charity and compassion in denying people the full protection of the Law.
The introduction of Gay Marraige brings with it all of the laws which protect people whose relationships take a wrong turn and end in divorce and all of the mess that goes with it.To deny these basic rights to a percentage of the population is wrong no matter which way you weigh it up.
The Pope is fully within his rights to tell Catholics how they should behave but inciting them to break the laws of their country is another matter entirely,unless you believe that the Church is above the Law.
I, has it happens, don’t.
Slan,
D.
He’s not asking people to break the law, he’s asking Spanish Roman Catholics to oppose it, and if necessary, quit their jobs or lose their jobs as a matter of conscience. Opposing a law and breaking it are two entirely different things. “Just because something is made a law doesn’t make it right.”
I don’t know if you’ve heard of the fugitive slave law,
which required people in non-slave states to report
to police fugitive slaves, and required police to
return the slave to his rightful owner. I don’t know what
the Church said about it, but if Iwere Pope (what a thought)
I would urge people to break the law. Then your questions
would apply: will the Vatican pay the rent and feed the
kids of the police whose jobs will be lost if they
break the law? Where is the charity in denying
people the full protection of the law in recovering
their rightful property? It is a Constitutional right to
own a slave, according to the Supreme Court itself, many of
these people aren’t wealthy, they will go down the
tubes financially if they can’t recover their property.
To deny them the protection of the law is wrong–if
you don’t like the law change it, but as long as it is
the law of the land, democratically legislated,
vetted by the courts, you can’t ignore
that it is the law.
My telling people how to behave is one thing, but inciting
them to break the law is another, unless the Church is
above the law.
I don’t know what it means to say the church is above the
law, but sometimes it is right for the church to urge
people to break the law, I submit–it depends on the law.
Jim,
That’s all very interesting…
But we are not talking about slaves..
Who happen to live in places where the slave can be returned to his rightful owner.. :roll:
Spare me the history…find a Calender.
Slan,
D.
Well, my hat’s off to Spain…but I wouldn’t have expected less from the new Pope. This would be one of many ideology conflicts I’d have to sift through if I were Catholic. I have enough as a liberal Protestant.
‘The Pope is fully within his rights to tell Catholics how they should behave but inciting them to break the laws of their country is another matter entirely,unless you believe that the Church is above the Law.
I, has it happens, don’t.’
D. I think you missed my point. It depends upon the law.
You appear to be saying that the Pope should never
‘incite’ people to break their country’s laws. I think
that’s too strong. Jim
Well now Jim.
'Tis my belief that the Church should not really be involving themselves in matters of state…
Democracy…
Church…
Christ…
Casear…
And all that…
Slan,
D.
I was arrested three times during the civil rights movement.
went to jail for a month once. We were led by clergy,
especially the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr. The Southern
Christian Leadership Conference. I’m willing
to break the law non-violently under some circumstances,
and I’m for religion being involved in matters of state.
Slavery was largely opposed politically by
Quakers and Evangelicals for religious reasons–
the slaves were God’s children too. I wouldn’t want
to live in an America in which people did not act
politically from deep religious convictions, and in
which clergy felt it was their duty never to
urge us to oppose laws and practices that
they believe are fundamentally wrong in
God’s eyes.
He’s not asking them to break the law, but not to cooperate with it, so to speak.
As an example, let’s say you are a civil official who grants marriage licenses or marries people in civil services . . . you’d have to quit your job to avoid giving a gay couple a license or marrying them, regardless of what faith they were.
I’m still pondering the whole concept behind this, though. Seems a little extreme to me. It’s one thing to say that Catholic homosexuals shouldn’t get married, but something else again to apply this universally.
Ratzinger has always been rather grimly and unpleasantly rigid in his conservatism. I wonder what’s next on his agenda. Probably nothing pleasant.
To apply it in terms borrowing from jim stone’s slavery-era metaphor, it would be a bit like saying, “It’s one thing to say that Catholic plantation owners shouldn’t own slaves, but something else again to apply this universally.”
No, you wouldn’t have to quit your job;
could refuse to give them a license and be fired.
I suppose that would be breaking the law.
Here it is extremely likely that Ratzinger is
doing what John Paul II would have done.
I don’t think it’s him personally, or,
really anybody personally–but a deeply
held religious and social belief, one
they feel is even warranted on
entirely secular grounds.
Also one they’ve thought through.
I don’t agree with them, but I don’t
think it’s a matter of rigidity.
One of the grounds for their opposition
to the law, by the way, is that it violates the UN
charter concerning the rights of
children.
If one really considers the gay marriage
issue in depth, and investigates the
arguments against it…especially
in Europe, where it’s already in place,
and there seems to be a good deal of
sociological research about
gay marriages (but I haven’t followed it into
the journals; only seen synopses and
citations), well, it gets pretty interesting.
Gee, imagine that - the Pope telling Catholics to adhere to Church teachings.
:roll:
What was he telling Catholics here</a](http://observer.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,6903,1469055,00.html">here</a)> ? Claiming the church’s jurisdiction over state law to keep the dirty laundry in. Nothing new indeed.
He was telling them they are above the law.
No no, the Church should change all its teachings according to what people want. I mean, it’s not like the 10 Commandments were written in stone or anything.