In reality, I believe there are much greater, more important issues, such as justice, equality
mf saying they want to focus on equality while at the same time saying gay couples blessings, something that would bring EQUALITY, isn’t a priority… make it make sense 🤡
They believe marriage is for the sole purpose of procreation, which is their little loophole. They’re so weird about it that I’m surprised they’ve never pushed fertility tests as a pre requisite before allowing a marriage ceremony.
They don’t believe that. They just say that. It’d be crazy if they actually believed it. Any reasonable person knows it’s just bad faith rhetoric, not a true belief.
Having been raised in the faith (I’ve walked away for a multitude of reasons) I assure you they do believe it. You’re not even allowed to take contraceptives or have a vasectomy
If that actually were the belief, sterile people would not be allowed to be married, and people’s marriages would be annualled when they become sterile, through age or otherwise. Unless they’re asking for these, they do not believe it. They may believe that they believe it, but they don’t.
Again, I’m reasonably certain they don’t actually believe a 90 year old woman is suddenly going to get pregnant, or a woman who doesn’t have a uterus anymore, or whatever else. These might be the words they’re told to repeat to justify things, but they don’t believe them. Not even the most devout would believe that.
They may believe God could technically do this, but then he could also technically do the same for same sex couples. He’s omnipotent, according to them, after all. His powers are not limited to only making miracles pregnancies to hetero couples. It’s no more outrageous than expecting people physically incapable of becoming pregnant becoming pregnant. If they justify this belief based on miricles, then same sex marriage is equally justified. (This is not their belief. They don’t believe the former premise, but this is the conclusion that it’d lead to.)
Then they should dissolve their marriages once their children move out, having fulfilled its only purpose. Staying married after you’re done having kids is lust, pride, and vanity.
If they truly believe that then why are they all celibate? They are chalk full of pedophiles too. Why I hate any post praising the pope. Fucker also lives like a king. Wonder how many of the popes are pedophiles themselves.
Eastern Catholic priests can marry, actually. There are married Catholic priests out there right now, and not because they converted in from Anglicanism after they married (though those exist, too), but fully cradle Catholics who were married before their vocation. Somehow this has not exploded the church or whatever. It is inconsistent and ridiculous.
This is one of those pieces of info I try to slip in whenever possible. I’m a firm believer that celibacy is bad for the mind, body, and soul when it’s forced on people. Priests may go into it willingly, but years and years of it with no reprieve does bad things to people’s minds. If the church could make one reform that I genuinely believe would be best, it is the celibacy of clergy. Tons of reforms needed, but that one is the one I think needs to happen soonest.
The actual reason is because the church was protecting its assets from the priests. Back then, priests were very powerful members of local government and controlled a large percentage of the wealth in an area. If they could get married and had kids, their kids would inherit the wealth they accumulated instead of that wealth going to the church.
Historically the priesthood/other holy orders was a place to toss the weird people or undesirable heirs. It was a convenient way for the gay uncle to have a respectable job and explain why they didn’t have a wife. It was also a way to keep pedo types isolated but productive, at least until resources led to many orders dissolving.
As for talking donkeys, you can’t bring obvious fiction or superstition into the real world by proclaiming “MIRACLE”. That’s now how reality works.
And “hey the slave didn’t die so by all means carry on owning another human being as property” is not the moral flex you think it is.
You haven’t proven the bible is accurate or moral. You’ve only proven that you are brainwashed by your religion into justifying atrocities and need to work on bettering yourself.
Finally, why are you explaining your holy book? A book that supposedly contains the infallible word of a god should not need mere mortals to explain it. God should have hired a holy ghost writer.
Since the “they” modifies the church, that means the church is sinful? Agreed. In that case, what…Christians support the paedophiles, not the paedophilia?
Apologies for playing grammar games, but I will absolutely condemn your bigoted ideas.
The church, as with most people, does not separate people from their sexuality. The phrase “love the sinner, hate the sin” is disingenuous at best, allowing hatred to continue, but with the thin veneer of civility that makes the bigots feel comfortable in their smug judgement. That is 100% garbage and you and I both know this.
Stop defending inhumane institutions and be a better person.
Repeating the lie does not make it true. I’ve seen Christian “love” in action. Much of the time it is two-faced, disingenuous, and conditional. Not all Christians are like this of course, but enough are that it’s become a standard.
Perhaps you are a good person who just happens to swallow the lies of religion. I know people like that as well - people who are good not because of their religious upbringing but in spite of it. I hope some day you realise you have it within you to be more moral, kind, and accepting than the religious organisation you follow. And to do it without them.
mf saying they want to focus on equality while at the same time saying gay couples blessings, something that would bring EQUALITY, isn’t a priority… make it make sense 🤡
Some animals are more equal than others.
Some people are more animals than others.
They believe marriage is for the sole purpose of procreation, which is their little loophole. They’re so weird about it that I’m surprised they’ve never pushed fertility tests as a pre requisite before allowing a marriage ceremony.
They don’t believe that. They just say that. It’d be crazy if they actually believed it. Any reasonable person knows it’s just bad faith rhetoric, not a true belief.
Having been raised in the faith (I’ve walked away for a multitude of reasons) I assure you they do believe it. You’re not even allowed to take contraceptives or have a vasectomy
If that actually were the belief, sterile people would not be allowed to be married, and people’s marriages would be annualled when they become sterile, through age or otherwise. Unless they’re asking for these, they do not believe it. They may believe that they believe it, but they don’t.
They say those things are god’s will and thus not an issue. They leave the door open for “miracles” to occur.
Then they should be happy with same sex marriages. A miracle might occur with them just as well.
Works for me
Again, I’m reasonably certain they don’t actually believe a 90 year old woman is suddenly going to get pregnant, or a woman who doesn’t have a uterus anymore, or whatever else. These might be the words they’re told to repeat to justify things, but they don’t believe them. Not even the most devout would believe that.
They may believe God could technically do this, but then he could also technically do the same for same sex couples. He’s omnipotent, according to them, after all. His powers are not limited to only making miracles pregnancies to hetero couples. It’s no more outrageous than expecting people physically incapable of becoming pregnant becoming pregnant. If they justify this belief based on miricles, then same sex marriage is equally justified. (This is not their belief. They don’t believe the former premise, but this is the conclusion that it’d lead to.)
Infertility is a cause for marriage annulation. So it’s controlled, but a posteriori.
Then they should dissolve their marriages once their children move out, having fulfilled its only purpose. Staying married after you’re done having kids is lust, pride, and vanity.
/s
If they truly believe that then why are they all celibate? They are chalk full of pedophiles too. Why I hate any post praising the pope. Fucker also lives like a king. Wonder how many of the popes are pedophiles themselves.
Priests cannot marry. Marriage and the Priesthood (Holy Orders) are the only sacraments that are mutually exclusive.
Eastern Catholic priests can marry, actually. There are married Catholic priests out there right now, and not because they converted in from Anglicanism after they married (though those exist, too), but fully cradle Catholics who were married before their vocation. Somehow this has not exploded the church or whatever. It is inconsistent and ridiculous.
Had never heard of that before, thanks for the info
This is one of those pieces of info I try to slip in whenever possible. I’m a firm believer that celibacy is bad for the mind, body, and soul when it’s forced on people. Priests may go into it willingly, but years and years of it with no reprieve does bad things to people’s minds. If the church could make one reform that I genuinely believe would be best, it is the celibacy of clergy. Tons of reforms needed, but that one is the one I think needs to happen soonest.
Still stupid it’s nowhere in the bible. Makes me believe the priest thing was made for repressed pedophiles.
The actual reason is because the church was protecting its assets from the priests. Back then, priests were very powerful members of local government and controlled a large percentage of the wealth in an area. If they could get married and had kids, their kids would inherit the wealth they accumulated instead of that wealth going to the church.
Historically the priesthood/other holy orders was a place to toss the weird people or undesirable heirs. It was a convenient way for the gay uncle to have a respectable job and explain why they didn’t have a wife. It was also a way to keep pedo types isolated but productive, at least until resources led to many orders dissolving.
marriage is a union between man and woman, as per the Bible
Bats are birds, as per the Bible. Donkeys talk, as per the Bible. Slave owning is cool as long as you don’t beat them to death, as per the Bible.
There’s plenty of stuff in the Bible that’s utter garbage.
verses please
In order: Leviticus 11:19
2 Peter 2:16 & Numbers 22:28
Exodus 21:20-21
Leviticus 11:19 the stork, any kind of heron, the hoopoe, and the bat.
2 Peter 2:16 but he was rebuked for his own disobedience. A speechless donkey spoke with a man’s voice and stopped the madness of the prophet.
This is a miracle, not a statement that donkeys speak (literally SPEECHLESS DONKEY)
Numbers 22:28 The LORD opened the mouth of the donkey, and she said to Balaam, “What have I done to you, that you have struck me these three times?”
Again, A MIRACLE
Exodus 20:20 Moses said to the people, “Don’t be afraid, for God has come to test you, and that his fear may be before you, that you won’t sin.”
OOPS
Exodus 21:20 “If a man strikes his servant or his maid with a rod, and he dies under his hand, the man shall surely be punished.
Exodus 21:21 Notwithstanding, if his servant gets up after a day or two, he shall not be punished, for the servant is his property.
if the servant is “beat to death”, the man will be punished
and as Jesus fulfilled the Old Testament, it mostly doesnt apply to us anymore
Bats don’t belong on that list.
As for talking donkeys, you can’t bring obvious fiction or superstition into the real world by proclaiming “MIRACLE”. That’s now how reality works.
And “hey the slave didn’t die so by all means carry on owning another human being as property” is not the moral flex you think it is.
You haven’t proven the bible is accurate or moral. You’ve only proven that you are brainwashed by your religion into justifying atrocities and need to work on bettering yourself.
Finally, why are you explaining your holy book? A book that supposedly contains the infallible word of a god should not need mere mortals to explain it. God should have hired a holy ghost writer.
Weak bait
not bait nor weak
He meant it in a Catholic sense; material equality.
Removed by mod
Since the “they” modifies the church, that means the church is sinful? Agreed. In that case, what…Christians support the paedophiles, not the paedophilia?
“they” refers to the act of homosexuality im european (not british nor american) so forgive my grammar
Apologies for playing grammar games, but I will absolutely condemn your bigoted ideas.
The church, as with most people, does not separate people from their sexuality. The phrase “love the sinner, hate the sin” is disingenuous at best, allowing hatred to continue, but with the thin veneer of civility that makes the bigots feel comfortable in their smug judgement. That is 100% garbage and you and I both know this.
Stop defending inhumane institutions and be a better person.
and in the 1700s “an good person” meant someone who didnt beat their slave
And it was still wrong. You’d think your all knowing god would know that if he’s such a moral peraon.
We love the sinners Hate the sin we love the people we love ALL people we hate NO people
Repeating the lie does not make it true. I’ve seen Christian “love” in action. Much of the time it is two-faced, disingenuous, and conditional. Not all Christians are like this of course, but enough are that it’s become a standard.
Perhaps you are a good person who just happens to swallow the lies of religion. I know people like that as well - people who are good not because of their religious upbringing but in spite of it. I hope some day you realise you have it within you to be more moral, kind, and accepting than the religious organisation you follow. And to do it without them.
we are all sinners
and the Church supports EVERYBODY not their sins
If Adolf Hitler walked into the Church, he would be allowed to confess his sins and become a Catchumen