The following comes from an Apr. 17 posting on Buzzfeed.
Few moments in the marriage equality movement have provoked more controversy than the 2009 decision of Chad Griffin to fight California’s Proposition 8 in federal court — and to enlist Ted Olson, a key official of the George W. Bush administration, to do so.
Now that the legal bill behind that legal effort has been revealed to be more than $6 million, some are asking questions about the steep fee for the lawyers in the Prop 8 case — especially as a slate of new marriage cases advance through the courts and lawyers jockey for position to argue the one that they expect will ultimately deliver marriage equality to all 50 states.
The debate over the Prop 8 price tag is just one part of a much larger battle within the legal world of LGBT rights: the fight for credit.
Since Griffin, now the head of the Human Rights Campaign, made the decision to go up against Prop 8 five years ago, the landscape for marriage equality has changed dramatically. Griffin, the campaign he put together — the American Foundation for Equal Rights — and the lawyers he recruited — Olson and David Boies — are in the midst of a public relations campaign to claim a big slice of the credit for that change. While the fight for credit continues, especially with the forthcoming publication of Jo Becker’s book looking at the past five years of the marriage fight, the questions about the costs of the case have percolated under the surface.
The Prop 8 case was an unprecedented moment in LGBT rights history. Boies, Al Gore’s former lawyer, and Olson brought a federal case claiming federal constitutional rights — the very case that established LGBT rights groups had been avoiding.
The day the lawsuit, orchestrated by Griffin and AFER, was announced, the leading LGBT legal and political groups issued a rare all-hands-on-deck warning that “the ballot box and not the courts should be the next step on marriage in California” because “the U.S. Supreme Court likely is not yet ready to rule that same-sex couples cannot be barred from marriage.”
Griffin, AFER, Olson, and Boies went forward, undeterred, and in so doing, helped change the conversation for marriage equality. Griffin ran the effort like a well-funded candidate runs a campaign — enlisting high-priced lawyers, creating carefully planned media opportunities, and beginning a national fundraising effort to back their case.
For his part, Olson strenuously defends the way AFER and his firm handled the case, noting that Boies and his firm did work pro bono and that his own firm “at the end of the day, because we did so much of it pro bono, was the largest contributor, financially, from that standpoint.”
“We didn’t want it just to be the venture of a couple of lawyers. But because we got contributors, from liberals and conservatives, it became a substantial endeavor,” he said in Austin, Texas, last week before taking the stage at a summit at the LBJ Library celebrating the 50th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act. “Lots of people had skin in the game, so that they could care about it, so that they could spread the word, so they could be evangelicals for the cause and so forth.”
Boies agreed, adding, “One of the reasons, in a political campaign, and this was in a sense a political campaign — that you try to get people to contribute is not just for the money, it’s because once they contribute they become part of what you’re doing.”
“Even in retrospect, we think it was a very strong and important move to involve people and involve them financially,” Olson said.
But that opinion isn’t universally held. Kate Kendell, the head of the National Center for Lesbian Rights — one of the groups that had passed on bringing a federal marriage challenge — pushed back a bit against it.
“Our movement would never have reached this catalytic moment without the scaffolding of decades of victories in key legal cases — and those cases could not have been brought without the free legal help from small and large private law firms,” Kendell told BuzzFeed.
Ultimately, Olson’s and Boies’ efforts won back the right to marry that Proposition 8 took away.
But the duo was denied the nationwide victory it had sought when the Supreme Court dismissed the case on technical grounds because the party bringing the appeal — the supporters of Prop 8 — had no authority, or standing, to do so. And AFER’s endeavor had a price tag of nearly $13 million, per AFER’s executive director, Adam Umhoefer — more than half of which went to Olson’s and Boies’ firms, as the Washington Blade recently reported.
To read the entire story, click here.
Since when is SODOMY Marriage a public Civil Right to be sanctioned, promoted and performed by State authorities ?
Is having sex with animals or multiple partners a Civil Right to be sanctioned and promoted by State authorities as well?
Adults have had the authority to do what they want consensually within the privacy of their own homes, and could/can live with whomever they choose.
Adults could/can always make any person they choose – their power of attorney, purchase property jointly with, name as beneficiary on insurance policies, etc., etc,
This is really all about taking the children of heterosexuals, and giving them to homosexuals through adoption – to raise in an environment with warped immoral values.
Regarding Olson and Boies – follow the money, and the pride of continually making a name for themselves. No principles and immoral.
Civil Rights – my foot.
Well, there is so much not true in your post Edward that it is hard to know where to begin.
1) There is no such thing as sodomy marriage. It is marriage. Period. Dozens of times, the Supreme Court has said that the right to marry is a fundamental right for every individual. That 2-4% of people are gay, doesn’t mean they give up their fundamental rights.
2) We are not talking about multiple partners or sex with animals. Apples and oranges.
3) Marriage gives rights and priveleges, and MEANS SOMETHING that no amount of powers of attorney can bring. When a person is married, it controls how OTHER people interact with the married person, and that couple has no way to create a power of attorney situation to accomplish the same thing.
4) Gay people are not taking children away from straight people. This is just a silly notion, with no basis in fact. As a matter of fact, “taking” a child would constitute a criminal act known as kidnapping, which is illegal for you, me, and everyone in our country.
5) I’m pretty sure Olson and Boies didn’t do this for the money. Boies in particular donated all his time.
6) It’s not about your foot. It’s not about you at all, and giving folks their just civil rights doesn’t take anything away from you, and doesn’t take any moral choices away from the couple engaged in the marriage. In fact, it gives them more responsibility for their actions.
Thanks for listening.
Do I hear the distant plaintive sound of violins? “I’m pretty sure Olson and Boies didn’t do this for the money. ” They’re all heart. sigh…clasps hands, eyes filled with tears, looks to the heavens. I’ll agree with you about one thing you said in your speaking point #6…”It’s not about you at all” Look in the mirror, yfc, and say to yourself “It’s all about ME”!
Pretty sure Boies is doing this for his legacy, the prestige, and probably because he enjoys it. Lawyers don’t take on landmark civil rights cases for the money.
He most likely has plenty of money. He’s chairman and founding partner at one of the top grossing firms in the country. But he’s also a brilliant litigator. The opportunity to argue a case before the Supreme Court (his second) and forever be cited in case law… It’s a kind of immortality.
Even if you are right that they did it for the money, they are also are doing it for the right thing. Sorry you can’t have it any which way!
Sodomy Marriage – is Homosexual marriage.
What do you think happens in marriage, do you think there is no sexual relationship ?
Tell the truth. Homosexual marriage is the legalization of Sodomy.
Maria, since 2003, people have been recognized to have the right to private sexual practices throughout the US. Much longer in states like California. Marriage doesn’t give them any more right to sex than they had before. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_v._Texas
Marriage is a covenant or partnership of life between a man and a woman which is ordered to the well-being of the spouses and to the procreation and upbringing of children.
Doesn’t it remind you of Planet of the Apes, Edward? The humans are kept as breeders/slaves for the apes. Charlton Heston was often a prophet in his films…remember his trying to warn everyone about Soylent Green? It’s always about power and money. Civil rights, indeed. The moon is made out of green cheese, too. What a con job these hucksters, bloated blood suckers and bullies are foisting on an ignorant and gullible American public. What I pray for all these amoral and misguided thugs is a tender conscience. I pray that Jesus will speak to their hearts , that they become acutely aware of all their sins and crimes against children and are utterly overwhelmed with grief and contrition, that they are totally and utterly cognizant of just what it is they have done and will have the rest of their lives to deal with the consequences.
Saint John Chrysostom denounces homosexual acts as being contrary to nature. Commenting on the Epistle to the Romans (1:26-27), he says that the pleasures of sodomy are an unpardonable offense to nature and are doubly destructive, since they threaten the species by deviating the sexual organs away from their primary procreative end and they sow disharmony between men and women, who no longer are inclined by physical desire to live together in peace.
Saint Chrysostom is one of my favorites, but he is commenting here on those who are straight but who pursue homoerotic acts. Gay people don’t sow disharmony among straight people. Disharmony arises when the straight people being to have sex with other guys. If we all desire to live together in peace, then there is no discord or disharmony.
YFC – ” Gay people don’t sow disharmony among straight people. ” – is this a joke ?
Then they should have kept their relationships in their own homes, rather than try to adopt the children of heterosexuals.
As consenting adults they have the right to choose Hell, but not set a bad example for children.
Sodomy is a MORTAL Sin.
Dean, I am not joking at all. Gay people adopting “the children of heterosexuals” is certainly preferable to leaving those same children without a home, in orphanages, which is where they would languish if it weren’t for the loving couple who adopts them. But adoption is not the question here, it is what was meant by St. John, who could certainly not have entertained the modern notions of sexuality and sexual orientation.
Gay people are not going to keep their relationship in their closets, anymore than any couple can do so. So you might as well look to what the Church teaches about gay people and how straight people ought to treat them, because there are very many MORTAL sins committed by straight people in this regard.
The Church teaches that those with same sex attraction be treated with compassion, YFC, it is true. But children deserve compassion too, and therefore should be reared in those family situations that will not confuse them with inappropriate patterning.
If you weren’t a believing Catholic man, I might understand your pursuit of this issue, but being ‘YFC’ I cannot comprehend your reconciling situations that inherently include homosexual sex. Sorry.
You also state that, “Gay people are not going to keep their relationship in their closets, anymore than any couple can do so.” Sorry, but keeping private things private IS possible. It’s not a matter of can or can’t like a Broadway musical where we all burst out into song and shout our ‘love’ to the sky no matter what.
All people can control themselves. Not all the time. But puttin’ a lid on it is a good thing.
Ann Malley, you can’t both ask people to keep their relationships in the closet and be honest people at the same time. They are simply mutually exclusive, as we eventually found out with Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. All it takes is the inevitable question Monday morning, “So what did you do this weekend?”, a simple which becomes a trap. “Oh, I took a trip to Yosemite”. “Oh that’s great, did you go with your parents.” “No.” “Who did you go with?” “With Bob.” Repeat this scenario every Monday morning for years, and pretty much everyone in the office knows you are not telling the truth if you pretend that “Bob” isn’t “my husband Bob”.
So AM and Dean, it is not possible to “put a lid on it”. Lives lived with integrity and honesty don’t have room for these charades. When you ask people to stay in the closet, you are asking them to lie. Lieing, and asking someone to lie, are both sins.
Besides which, you are trying to put a genie back in a bottle. Folks aren’t going back in the closet, so why don’t you just “put a lid on it” yourself. The very notion doesn’t come from any possible interpretation of Catholic moral teaching anyhow, especially when the notion of honesty, integrity, and authenticity is brought into the picture.
Then have the integrity required, YFC, to admit that your promotion of same sex unions is in reality a promotion of same sex sexual activity. So saying if the God of the Old Testament was against homosexual sex (and He was) – the God of the New Testament is also against homosexual sex (and He is). God does not change.
As for putting a ‘genie’ back in a bottle, the homosexual spirit has been around and out for ages. Nothing new or modern about it. The new twist is the push to uncork a bottle at the heart of the Church by trying to convince the common folks that sodomy is okay now (because we’re so ‘enlightened’) whereas it wasn’t before. Wherefore does this sudden knowledge that goes against revealed truth spring?
The ‘genie’ perhaps? Is he begging to be let out? Or are those rubbing the lamp so vigorously seeking to change those who oppose their desire. Those mythical lovelies you reference were spirits and/or demons, YFC, who would grant an individual their heart’s desire. Not God’s will, YFC.
And Catholic Moral Teaching precludes scandalizing the faithful, YFC. So you are correct in that there is no possible ‘interpretation’ of Catholic moral teaching anyhow, especially when the notion of honesty, integrity, and authenticity is brought into the picture.
There is no interpretation because your assertion that homosexual couples coming out as couples is very clearly against Catholic moral teaching.
Abeca Christian, Get off the against the nature thing, Just say you are a creationist, which means you believe the universe along with the Earth is about 6,000 years old. Being gay is not an offense to nature, because it is natural due to the human being involved does not have a choice in being gay or straight That all means you are just a religious bigot.
You seem to be a secular bigot, Rob, as you are inflexible in your evolutionary thinking. Whether you’e a creationist or an evolutionist, however, there is a Creator as one never gets something out of nothing.
You may believe that you owe said Creator nothing by way of acknowledgement of His existence or your obligation to be true to your human nature, but I would imagine you believe in being true to yourself. So please, don’t convince yourself that ‘you can’t help yourself’ about anything. You’re selling yourself – and the species – short.
Rob, is Abeca Christian a religious bigot because she doesn’t condone sodomy?
Rob’s thinking reminds me of the old tune “Little boxes, little boxes, and they’re all made out of ticky tacky….” because he thinks in neat little squares that contain trite little ideas, eg: if one believes that God made the earth then if must have been done literally in seven days, etc.
One thing is imperative for ALL believers, however and that is that God made the earth and all things in it. If one isn’t a believer then naturally he doesn’t believe God made it. You can’t be one and the other. All believers don’t necessarily believe that it was all done six thousand years ago…only a certain group of protestants do that. But ALL non-believers are willing to believe it ‘just happened’ by accident. haha As G.K.Chesterton said (and I paraphrase here) ‘if people don’t believe in something, they’ll believe anything.”
Kudos on the Chersterton quote, Dana. How true it is.
Olson and Boies have turned Marriage – a COVENANT between GOD and a Man and a Woman for the procreation of the human race (since Genesis) – into a joke.
Families – a mother, a father and children are no longer of any significance in the USA.
Saint Albert the Great gives four reasons why he considers homosexual acts as the most detestable ones: They are born from an ardent frenzy; they are disgustingly foul; those who become addicted to them are seldom freed from that vice.
Albeca, Saint Albert speaks without the authority of the universal Magisterium: I want to point out that he is wrong that it is born out of “ardent frenzy” whatever that might mean. It is born out of our inner being, and alifetime living with this orientation. Disgustingly foul? Well, honestly, don’t all of us view any sexual act as ardently foul if we are forced to watch it? But to those who are engaged in it, it is a different matter if it pursued for reasons of genuine love and affection. Addicted? Well, no not addicted, simply created that way.
YFC – This is from the Universal Magisterium –
CCC: ” 2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents HOMOSEXUAL ACTS as acts of GRAVE DEPRAVITY, tradition has always declared that “HOMOSEXUAL ACTS are INTRINSICALLY DISORDERED”.
They are CONTRARY to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do NOT proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity.
Under NO circumstances can they be approved. ”
CCC: ” 2396 Among the sins GRAVELY contrary to chastity are masturbation, fornication, pornography, and HOMOSEXUAL PRACTICES.”
Admit the truth for once in your posting that these are the true and accurate teachings of the Church – from the Magisterium, and must be adhered to by ALL Catholics.
(Caps in quoted paragraphs are mine because YFC purposely ignores important words.)
In addition see HOLY SCRIPTURE: Gen 19:1-29; Rom 1: 24-27;
1 Cor 6:9-10; 1 Tim 1:10.
YFC, God gave humans a free will. You can choose to go to Hell, but don’t try to take others with you.
YFC – This is from the Universal Magisterium –
CCC: ” 2357 Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex. It has taken a great variety of forms through the centuries and in different cultures. Its psychological genesis remains largely unexplained. Basing itself on Sacred Scripture, which presents HOMOSEXUAL ACTS as acts of GRAVE DEPRAVITY, tradition has always declared that “HOMOSEXUAL ACTS are INTRINSICALLY DISORDERED”.
They are CONTRARY to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do NOT proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity.
Under NO circumstances can they be approved. ”
CCC: ” 2396 Among the sins GRAVELY contrary to chastity are masturbation, fornication, pornography, and HOMOSEXUAL PRACTICES.”
Admit the truth for once in your posting that these are the true and accurate teachings of the Church – from the Magisterium, and must be adhered to by ALL Catholics.
(Caps in quoted paragraphs are mine because YFC purposely ignores important words.)
In addition see HOLY SCRIPTURE: Gen 19:1-29; Rom 1: 24-27;
1 Cor 6:9-10; 1 Tim 1:10.
YFC, God gave humans a free will. You can choose to go to Hell, but don’t try to take others with you.
Do you understand what “UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES” means ?
Daniel, please stop spitting. It is unbecoming.
Don’t belittle me as though I can’t read English.
You do a great job spitting out CCC but fail to say why my post is wrong. In large measure, I say exactly what the catechism says. “Homosexuality refers to relations between men or between women who experience an exclusive or predominant sexual attraction toward persons of the same sex” could well be a restatement of my own post.
The only place where my post differs from CCC is this statement, “They do NOT proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity.” No one who has actually studied gay couples professionally believes this to be true. You can read many pieces written by professional psychologists about whether there is genuine affective and sexual complementarity, and I think you will find that the CCC is just plain wrong on that statement. And since that statement is neither a statement of faith nor of morals, the Church can claim no competency to declare its truth or falsity.
I can only speak for myself, but I’m well aware of the official Church position articulated here, and it’s a load of rubbish. It has a long tradition, so it’s magisterial rubbish, but it’s a regrettable, slightly embarrassing cultural relic. But one facet to a broad, complex, and otherwise mostly wonderful religious tradition.
It’s also, apparently, become the central article of faith to a lot of people… which is kind of sad. The Church position is cobbled together from footnotes; selective orthodox adherence to the ancient tribal law of Deuteronomy and Leviticus (much of which is otherwise regarded as absurd and irrelevant at this point), then skipping ahead (completely over Jesus) to a few passages of Paul, some of which are vaguely translated, some of which are really his personal opinions (he’s all first-person narrative), and none of which are really central to his message if you read it all. I think you’ve covered all biblical references there.
The Church really has no moral authority on the matter of homosexuality, anyway. There is so much hypocrisy there. Priestly celibacy has functioned as a kind of occupational closet for centuries… maybe always. … an undeniably abject failure. The official position is so parsed and contrary to reason that it merely functions to marry an obvious flaw with a necessary observance of tradition. But the tradition has no value, and the reasoning no weight.
Sexual complementarity means how babies are made.
anonymous writes: “Sexual complementarity means how babies are made.”
Sorry, I don’t get that from any church documents. If I missed one, please inform me.
YFC, So now sodomy is not a sin?
Sodomy certainly can be a sin, but only in certain circumstances which take into account the individual undertaking the act. This is just the same as any other act, as culpability cannot be determined by an outside observer.
Thank you for being forthcoming, YFC, and speaking your opinion clearly. Again, you’ve given me all the example I could ever hope for, and all without me having to ask.
John Feeney sodomy is a serious sin!
From: Athenagoras of Athens (2nd Century)
Athenagoras of Athens was a philosopher who converted to Christianity in the second century. He shows that the pagans, who were totally immoral, did not even refrain from sins against nature:
“But though such is our character (Oh! why should I speak of things unfit to be uttered?), the things said of us are an example of the proverb, ‘The harlot reproves the chaste.’ For those who have set up a market for fornication and established infamous resorts for the young for every kind of vile pleasure – who do not abstain even from males, males with males committing shocking abominations, outraging all the noblest and comeliest bodies in all sorts of ways, so dishonoring the fair workmanship of God.”1
The act of sodomy is always sinful if committed deliberately. (So a victim of forcible sodomy is not committing a sin.) It is gravely immoral so if it is committed with full knowledge and full consent it is a mortal sin. Otherwise it is a venial sin. There are situations which can lessen the culpability of the one who commits a sin. But it still remains a sin.
The word situations is not correct. Conditions or factors is better.
YFC glad I grabbed your attention, here is some more important truths that you lack to acknowledge and still apply today:
From: Eusebius of Caesarea (260-341)
Eusebius Pamphili, Bishop of Cæsarea in Palestine and the “Father of Church History,” writes in his book, Demonstratio Evangelica:
“[God in the Law given to Moses] having forbidden all unlawful marriage, and all unseemly practice, and the union of women with women and men with men.”3
That’s capitalism for you, God bless America!
GREED is just as bad if not worse for those in power under Communism.
Facts about Saint Jerome (340-420)
Saint Jerome is both Father and Doctor of the Church. He was also a notable exegete and great polemicist. In his book Against Jovinianus, he explains how a sodomite needs repentance and penance to be saved:
“And Sodom and Gomorrah might have appeased it [God’s wrath], had they been willing to repent, and through the aid of fasting gain for themselves tears of repentance.”4
Christian rights and gay “rights” cannot coexist. There are only two choices, are you going to serve God or satan?
Ron – Are you saying that I can’t have legal rights not to be fired from a job for being Catholic and also have legal rights not to be fired from a job as a lesbian?
Olson and Boies will find out the real price of their evil victories in equally evil courts in the next life. May God have mercy on their poor souls.
May God have mercy on an amoral Amerikca!
Viva Cristo Rey!
Yours in Their Hearts,
Kenneth M. Fisher
These people have all not been brought up right, have no moral nor religious background and training, nor do they have a daily practice and understanding, of Christian morality! Their so-called “practice of law,” is MALPRACTICE– a complete LIE!! We are a decent country founded on excellent Judaeo-Christian beliefs– not a trashy hippie gutter! There is, even in secular society– no such thing, as pretending “gay marriage” is the same thing as proper marriage of a man and woman, and having children come forth, naturally, from their union, which is of God! Traditionally, in almost all civilizations– proper Marriage and Family life was always well- established as the cornerstone of society! Anything else was usually not morally or legally allowed! Prostitution, mistresses for extra-marital sex, gay or bisexual lovers– all of these things existed in the gutters, where they belong! You do not LEGALIZE such immoral trash, in a good country! And pretend it is “normal,” and “acceptable!” That is CRAZY!! Even if you do not believe in God, you want a good, decent country– NOT a trashy gutter, with deviant sex, dope, and a horrible, degraded way of life, falsely to be called “acceptable” and “normal!” There will always be people who suffer from the “LGBT” problems– which are an illness, really, a sad disability, or deformity of Mother Nature. Can’t the medical world properly term this as a medical issue, and also advise against deviant sex acts, which are wrong, unnatural, and cause lethal illnesses?? And all religions should also warn against deviant sex acts, because this is a sin!! The governments of all countries should have nothing to do with deviant sex acts, except to make such things illegal. And especially to protect the young, from such evils! Then, perhaps, the “LGBT” disability, or illness, could be classified in medical terms, and suffering people could also receive certain government benefits, in some cases, as needed, for help with their disability. Legal protections must also be provided, against abuses from ignorant people. And all Americans, in this country– must be CHASTE and CELIBATE, if unmarried! Sex outside marriage (pre-marital and extra-marital sex) should also be against the law, as well as deviant sex acts of all kinds!
Truth be told, most reasonably conservative people, the business community , and a fair number of Catholics think the gay rights fight isn’t worth the trouble it’s causing, and have moved on to other more serious matters, like the economy, educating their children in college, saving for retirement, and the future of the a world without war.
I picture ‘goodcause’ tapping away on his computer keys on his back porch of his hippie commune getaway, smoking a joint, eyes glazed, longing for 1968 to carry him away again. Peace bro…so interesting to hear an authentic cliché speak! The reality of dealing with retirement and education woes much stretch your intellect to the limit. Not only is homosexual so-called marriage not a ‘done deal’, it is going to be deal breaker for alot of clueless, morally corrupt democrats who are riding the downward crest of the bell curve to oblivion. Because of birth control gigantic problems, like monolithic gargoyles are hovering over your mellow, happy hippie heaven…no young people to pay into the retirement funds…no young people to clog the mediocre educational feeder lines…no middle class to rob or lie to…The whole homosexual thing IS your problem too, and all your other woes are going suck you into the cesspool whether you like it or not. You can ‘move on’ all you want. haha
Good cause you are wrong. Never, never should you give up an issue of morality for material matters. It’s God or mammon. And as long as there are humans, with their fallen nature will there be an end to war. Not in this life. All good liberals look for Utopia here but they will never find it. Heaven is to be found in the next life for those with faith to get there.
Truth be told, GC, some of us will keep up the fight against “gay rights” just like we kept up the fight against abortion. By the way, we’re getting traction on that last one, because (as Archbishop Cordileone put it): truth lives. Same-sex marriage is a falsehood.
“Your Fellow Catholic” and “good cause”: There is not enough space to adequately respond to your blog posts. Yes, fighting sodomy “rights” generally is worth the time and money involved; the problem is that a homosexualized clergy lacks the conviction to do so. More importantly, the fight to stop society from recognizing homosexual “marriage” is absolutely worth much time and treasure to defeat; and that fight is not over (no, the US Supreme Court did not say that homosexual marriage was an absolute “right”). One key reason that this is necessary, as virtually all know, is that the real battle by homosexual sexual persons is to eliminate the voice, and standing, of the Roman Catholic Church. Marriage alone is not the key. American society now is clearly in its twilight, for a number of reasons. Too bad, YFC, there are clearly parallels with homosexual sexual marriage and bestiality (and many other terrible and immoral things). Please read the dissent of Justice Scalia, in Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) (striking down the TX law against consensual homosexual sex), where he observed that by striking down laws based on moral choices, the following types of state laws were not sustainable: “State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality and obscenity [.]” Nice legacy to perpetuate, eh?
Saint Thomas Aquinas, writing about sins against nature, explains: “However, they are called passions of ignominy because they are not worthy of being named, according to that passage in Ephesians (5:12): ‘For the things that are done by them in secret, it is a shame even to speak of.’ For if the sins of the flesh are commonly censurable because they lead man to that which is bestial in him, much more so is the sin against nature, by which man debases himself lower than even his animal nature.”
Abeca Christian, this is one of those passages sited that discourage gay people from being true to themselves, and coming out as gay people. I just want to let you know that we are ignominious no more! We are out, and we claim ourselves without fear, because we know our internal worth that God and God alone has instilled in us!
Yes, all human beings have internal worth, YFC. But disordered inclinations which He allows are not there for us to embrace and proclaim with pride as good in themselves. Rather they are the means for us to overcome that which is evil by not yielding, for love of Him, to that which is against the true nature of man.
To say that God endorses homosexual sex because He supposedly instilled it in a person is to say that God contradicts Himself. The God of the Old Testament and the New is still God. No change.
That’s not what I said AM. So try contradicting what I actually say instead of what you imagine I say.
Then please explain what exactly you mean, YFC.
Thanks for explaining yourself more pointedly above, YFC. You do believe sodomy is okay. Gotcha.
Guy as long as we walk this earth, Abeca has the right to quote any truth from our Doctors of the church! Your ideals are your own man made ones but the truth comes from God!
YFC the devil is true to himself, why would you want to help others follow Satan and not Jesus!
For those of you who still think gay male couples are wanting respect just like every other family, take your family to Disneyland during Gay Days Anaheim Oct. 4-5. Or Gay Days Orlando https://www.gaydays.com/Orlando/Featured/ .
Not sure what a private event at an amusement park has to do with gay couples wanting to get married. It’s kind of like thinking that spring break means that college kids will never want to get married. We may all have our problems with what goes on at spring break, but there is no logic linking it to what people ultimately want in their lives, or the thinking that spring break reflects the values of every person in a college class.
Private functions have nothing to do with public sodomy marriages.
What is a “sodomy marriage”? Can you please explain that term to me?
YFC stop acting innocent! You know what it means. You just want to desensitize those sins because it is your own.
Continued facts on Saint John Chrysostom (347-407)
Saint John Chrysostom is considered the greatest of the Greek Fathers and was proclaimed Doctor of the Church. He was Archbishop and Patriarch of Constantinople, and his revision of the Greek liturgy is used until today. In his sermons about Saint Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, he dwells on the gravity of the sin of homosexuality:
“But if thou scoffest at hearing of hell and believest not that fire, remember Sodom. For we have seen, surely we have seen, even in this present life, a semblance of hell. For since many would utterly disbelieve the things to come after the resurrection, hearing now of an unquenchable fire, God brings them to a right mind by things present. For such is the burning of Sodom, and that conflagration!…
“Consider how great is that sin, to have forced hell to appear even before its time!… For that rain was unwonted, for the intercourse was contrary to nature, and it deluged the land, since lust had done so with their souls. Wherefore also the rain was the opposite of the customary rain. Now not only did it fail to stir up the womb of the earth to the production of fruits, but made it even useless for the reception of seed. For such was also the intercourse of the men, making a body of this sort more worthless than the very land of Sodom. And what is there more detestable than a man who hath pandered himself, or what more execrable?5
YFC is correct. Sodomy marriage makes no sense. Neither does gay marriage. Marriage is a lifetime covenant (not a civil contract) between a man and a woman who must intend to remain faithful to each other and be open to having children.
Regardless of who gets the credit, the anti-Prop 8 people hired the best lawyers money could buy. The pro-Prop 8 side on the other hand…not so much; Alliance Defending Freedom bungled the case from beginning to end and didn’t want to spend any money because their attorneys thought their case was weak. In fact, the LEAD counsel defending Prop 8, Charles J. Cooper, just this month came out in favor of same-sex marriage and is helping his daughter plan her same-sex wedding. Their hearts were never in defending Prop 8; they lost. In two or three years this will all be over.
That’s what Hitler thought when he entered Poland…in a few years it will all be over and everyone would be Gebrauch der deutschen Sprache. The best laid schemes o’ mice an ‘men gang aft agley…
Also .. Eddie Windsor was a very sympathetic plaintiff. She was everyone’s elderly Auntie Mame and all she wanted was her $300,000 back from the IRS. I agree that this will soon be over. Maybe it is now. It’s a dead horse and I wish the Bishops would stop beating it and move on with Pope Francis’ agenda.
Pope Francis AGENDA –
” ….. let us ask ourselves if we have actually taken a few steps to get to know Christ and the truths of faith more, by reading and meditating on the Scriptures, studying the Catechism, steadily approaching the Sacraments.” – Pope Francis, May 15, 2013.”
This includes that marriage is only between one man and one woman, and that homosexual acts as well as fornication and adultery are MORTAL Sins.
Please stop with the notion that a certain activity is a MORTAL sin! An activity is only a sin, and then only a mortal sin, only under certain specific circumstances. Any act, regardless of its nature, is only mortally sinful if all of those circumstances are present. Please, if you are going to continue to lecture us on mortal sins, please tell the whole truth about the nature of mortal sin, what is required for a mortal sin, and the entire role of things like conscience in calling an act a mortal sin.
Conscience plays an important role in what makes a mortal sin, YFC, it is true. And so does understanding and accepting what constitutes mortal sin and grave matter.
That is why it is imperative that we pray for faithful, holy priests. Those who are faithful to the fullness of Truth so they can aid in the proper formation of consciences instead of lulling folks into the notion that they can commit sodomy and then proceed to be Eucharistic ministers, believing their sins – if any – are only venial. Or perhaps they are being taught that sodomy is no sin at all?
Prayers for your priest, YFC.
YFC, I think you are splitting hairs.
YFC isn’t splitting hairs, John Feeney, he’s shaving them off and attempting to paint a mural on a bald head that says ‘hair.’
Fallacious reasoning is the artists signature.
I think it’s clear that Francis isn’t going to change Church doctrine on sexual morality, but he has also been clear that, at this time in The history of the Church other things, like corpral works of mercy need to be proritized.
Does anyone know why all of the blog posts are anonymous? It makes me think there may be an evil purpose behind this.
Saint Augustine (354-430)
The greatest of the Fathers of the West and one of the great Doctors of the Church, Saint Augustine laid the foundations of Catholic theology. In his celebrated Confessions, he thus condemns homosexuality:
“Those offences which be contrary to nature are everywhere and at all times to be held in detestation and punished; such were those of the Sodomites, which should all nations commit, they should all be held guilty of the same crime by the divine law, which hath not so made men that they should in that way abuse one another. For even that fellowship which should be between God and us is violated, when that same nature of which He is author is polluted by the perversity of lust.”6
In an excellent article in Crisis magazine today by Tom Piatak, there was an incredibly pertinant quote from Evelyn Waugh’s “Brideshead Revisited” (which if you’ve not read it, you really must!) which concerns the heroine, Mary, a lifelong Catholic, and her lover Charles, considering marrying one another after they’ve divorced their current spouses. Mary decides against it and tells Charles…”Just go on—alone. How can I tell what I shall do? You know the whole of me. You know I’m not one for a life of mourning. I’ve always been bad. Probably I shall be bad again, punished again. But the worse I am, the more I need God. I can’t shut myself off from his mercy. That is what it would mean; starting a life with you, without him. One can only hope to see one step ahead. But I saw today that there was one thing unforgivable—like things in the schoolroom, so bad they were unpunishable, that only mummy could deal with—the bad thing I was on the point of doing, that I’m not quite bad enough to do; to set up a rival good to God’s. Why should I be allowed to understand that, and not you, Charles? It may be because of mummy, nanny, Cordelia, Sebastian—perhaps Bridey and Mrs. Muspratt—keeping my name in their prayers; or it may be a private bargain between me and God, that if I give up this one thing I want so much, however bad I am, he won’t quite despair of me in the end. ” https://www.crisismagazine.com/2014/a-rival-good-to-gods-cardinal-kaspers-divorce-proposal?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+CrisisMagazine+%28Crisis+Magazine%29
That’s what struck me about homosexual unions…A RIVAL GOOD TO GOD”S. They’re creating their own ethics, as in a rival universe and because they’ve consciously or unconsciously chosen to completely negate the authority of God and His loving and perfect way found in the Bible, and are patching together what they feel is a harmonious whole. They’re creating a Tower of Babel all their own, with their own language, meanings and values…determining that sex does not mean procreation, that love does not mean two opposites, male and female, to become one flesh. The article is relevant on so many levels. I hope you find time to read it. God is so good, and knows to the last little jot what is good for us and what will lead us to Him. Why would we want to offend Him and cause scandal to the innocent? Why would we put anything before our love of Him?
Thank you for the link to the article, Dana. The push to make everything easy denies too many of the incredible graces produced by carrying on stoically, but faithfully in the aftermath of failed marriage. Suffering attended by grace and purpose lends itself to learning the depth of the Faith, not only by reading and hearing, but by living. And not only for the divorced party, but for those faithful who witness their testimony of life.
God give us more like Cardinal Caffara who understand that undermining the Faith will help no one in the long term.
In the USA those who freely commit SODOMY, FORNICATION, and ADULTARY know they are committing evil – mortal sins.
They just don’t care.
CCC: ” 1868 Sin is a personal act. Moreover, we have a responsibility for the sins committed by others when we cooperate in them:
– by participating directly and voluntarily in them;
– by ordering, advising, praising, or approving them;
– by not disclosing or not hindering them when we have an obligation to do so;
– by protecting evil-doers. ”
CCC: ” 1791 This ignorance can often be imputed to personal responsibility.
This is the case when a man takes little trouble to find out what is true and good, or when conscience is by degrees almost blinded through the habit of committing sin. In such cases, the person is culpable for the evil he commits.”
SAINT John Paul II Approved this Teaching:
LETTER TO THE BISHOPS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH
ON THE PASTORAL CARE OF HOMOSEXUAL PERSONS
Explicit treatment of the problem was given in this Congregation’s “Declaration on Certain Questions Concerning Sexual Ethics” of December 29, 1975… At the same time the Congregation took note of the distinction commonly drawn between the homosexual condition or tendency and individual homosexual actions. These were described as deprived of their essential and indispensable finality, as being “intrinsically disordered”, and able in no case to be approved of…
In the discussion which followed the publication of the Declaration, however, an overly benign interpretation was given to the homosexual condition itself, some going so far as to call it neutral, or even good. Although the particular inclination of the homosexual person is not a sin, it is a more or less strong tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evil; and thus the inclination itself must be seen as an objective disorder.
Therefore special concern and pastoral attention should be directed toward those who have this condition, lest they be led to believe that the living out of this orientation in homosexual activity is a morally acceptable option. It is not…
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19861001_homosexual-persons_en.html