What about in Frances Esenbock's living room? That's where I got married. Frances is a JOP in Lexington who works out of her house.

 

BTW - not everyone is Catholic.

 

As the last line of my post said, yes I do consider them married.

 

And yes, not everyone is Catholic. Post 28 was more of a mind-ramble than my actual opinion, and my apologies.

 

It just is a gray area for me since Marriage is a Catholic institution.

Marriage was created through the Church, so I think it is only appropriate that marriage remains an institution of the church.

 

 

Well that's a bit far. Even the debauched ancient Romans and Greeks had their marriages. It's an institution seemingly as old as civilization.

Well that's a bit far. Even the debauched ancient Romans and Greeks had their marriages. It's an institution seemingly as old as civilization.

 

I've always been taught that marriage was created by God and passed down through the early Church. It is possible that I'm wrong.

Fair enough. I've never met anyone who has said it is okay to marry one's sister and produce children with them.

 

It's my belief that who another person wants to marry or be with is no one's business but those consenting to the relationship. While I may not agree with it, doesn't mean they shouldn't have the right.

I've always been taught that marriage was created by God and passed down through the early Church. It is possible that I'm wrong.

 

Certainly it was important from the very beginning. But the institution itself predates the Church.

 

Jesus didn't explicitly discuss specific moral teachings on many occasions, but the Church's subsequent teachings on the importance of marriage and it's status as an indissoluble union comes straight from the words of Christ when He said "I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery."

 

St. Paul similarly just a few years later compared the relationship of husband and wife to that of Christ and the Church.

 

The early Church stressed the importance of the institution if one makes the choice to enter into it.

 

The institution is ancient; the early Church stressed the important sacred bond involved in that union in a way that had rarely happened before in Western civilization.

If they are very different, why use the same word? [Married]

 

I have no problem with civil unions; but that is what they are: Civil Unions.

 

Marriage was created through the Church, so I think it is only appropriate that marriage remains an institution of the church.

 

Again, I have no problem with secular civil unions.

 

 

 

So, just to be clear, I could marry my father or my aunt or my sister if we are both adults then, right?

 

Personally, I like the concept of civil union regarding a gay couple, but you bring up a good question...where is the line drawn? Can I have a civil union with a relative now? That would be a way to extend benefits to an otherwise overage child. Also, could it be a way to avoid inheritance taxes in some states?

It's my belief that who another person wants to marry or be with is no one's business but those consenting to the relationship. While I may not agree with it, doesn't mean they shouldn't have the right.

 

Politically I think I am on the same page. But my moral/religious beliefs tell me otherwise. And it's not that I think Christians are called to go up to people and directly say "What you are doing is wrong!"

 

But I cannot imagine standing before God at the end of my life and Him saying to me "How could you not do anything to prevent this from happening?..." JMO.

Certainly it was important from the very beginning. But the institution itself predates the Church.

 

Jesus doesn't explicitly discuss specific moral teachings on many occasions, but the Church's subsequent teachings on the importance of marriage and it's status as an indissoluble union comes straight from the words of Christ when He said "I say to you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and he that shall marry her that is put away, committeth adultery."

 

St. Paul similarly just a few years later compared the relationship of husband and wife to that of Christ and the Church.

 

The early Church stressed the importance of the institution if one makes the choice to enter into it.

 

The institution is ancient; the early Church stressed the important sacred bond involved in that union in a way that had rarely happened before in Western civilization.

 

For some reason the 'like' button is not showing up for me, so instead I give you this:

 

:thumb:

Politically I think I am on the same page. But my moral/religious beliefs tell me otherwise. And it's not that I think Christians are called to go up to people and directly say "What you are doing is wrong!"

 

But I cannot imagine standing before God at the end of my life and Him saying to me "How could you not do anything to prevent this from happening?..." JMO.

 

I don't think Christians are called to judge others either....:idunno:

Personally, I like the concept of civil union regarding a gay couple, but you bring up a good question...where is the line drawn? Can I have a civil union with a relative now? That would be a way to extend benefits to an otherwise overage child. Also, could it be a way to avoid inheritance taxes in some states?

 

Exactly. And why not marriage between three people? Or marriage between me and my sick dog? He needs health benefits too.

 

These are the questions I fear that will arise in the future assuming gay 'marriage' is made legal. Which at this point, it is difficult for me to envision a future where it is not legal and considered normal.

I don't think Christians are called to judge others either....:idunno:

 

Right. But there are ways to stand up for what's right without judging.

 

"Preach the Gospel at all times. Use words when necessary." -St. Francis of Assisi

Right. But there are ways to stand up for what's right without judging.

 

"Preach the Gospel at all times. Use words when necessary." -St. Francis of Assisi

 

I see nothing "right" with telling an adult that they aren't allowed to have a consenting relationship with another adult. Seems incredibly self-serving to me.

Exactly. And why not marriage between three people? Or marriage between me and my sick dog? He needs health benefits too.

 

These are the questions I fear that will arise in the future assuming gay 'marriage' is made legal. Which at this point, it is difficult for me to envision a future where it is not legal and considered normal.

 

So now we're comparing gay marriage to marriage between a human and a dog? Really?

Two adults should be allowed to marry whomever they want if they're both consenting adults.

 

I guess marrying one's sister is OK if you want your children to sit on the porch and play the banjo.

Exactly. And why not marriage between three people? Or marriage between me and my sick dog? He needs health benefits too.

 

These are the questions I fear that will arise in the future assuming gay 'marriage' is made legal. Which at this point, it is difficult for me to envision a future where it is not legal and considered normal.

 

 

Are you really equating gay marriage to bestiality? :popcorn: