| Author | Message |
Priest Comes out and says no on 8 10/5/2008 Fresno, CA, USA (KFSN) -- Father Geoffrey Farrow of the Saint Paul Newman Center in northeast Fresno shocked parishioners Sunday morning when he came out against Proposition 8, an initiative that would eliminate the right for same sex couples to marry in California.
| |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| Moderator |
OMG... this man has given up everything to follow his convictions. |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Same stand I had to take with my family.
Meanwhile, civic knowledge is enhanced by discussing public affairs, taking part in civic activities and reading about current events and history, the group said.
Which is why we have P & R! | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
June7 said: OMG... this man has given up everything to follow his convictions.
That doesn't happen often... God bless him. "I think one of the things that we're probably proudest of -- I certainly am -- is that the message was always love, in any form we portrayed it." - Paul McCartney | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said: Esmeralda Gonzalez, Parishioner, says "My reaction was extremely shocking I believe that as the body of Christ and as being Catholics we are made to follow by commandments. And God made it to be Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve." As for the comments of this parishoner? Nothing but the comments of someone who's failed to realize there is nothing in the Commandments that speaks of marriage or sexuality, and apparently not bright enough to avoid tired cliches. It's not that The Joker's gay. What he is, is Batsexual. He'd be whacking it to Batsy whether our hero had girl parts or boy parts underneath that rubber. | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
god, he's amazing. that takes unbelievable courage. All Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry - Mildred Loving | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said: 10/5/2008 Fresno, CA, USA (KFSN) -- Father Geoffrey Farrow of the Saint Paul Newman Center in northeast Fresno ...
Saint Paul Newman Center? | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Great act of humanity and bravery. It takes courage, intellect and great awareness to reject ingrained dogma and prejudice, and instead recognise reality. This man should run for office if the bigots sack him.. | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said: Joshua De La Cerda, Parishioner, says "This is something Jesus would have done, or Christ would have done, spoke out for the truth."
![]() | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
PANDURITO said: ehuffnsd said: Joshua De La Cerda, Parishioner, says "This is something Jesus would have done, or Christ would have done, spoke out for the truth."
![]() All Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry - Mildred Loving | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Welcome to the New World Odor and
the Myth Making Moonbattery of Obamanation. DISSENT FROM DAY ONE Pround member of the .org conservative union | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
"I think one of the things that we're probably proudest of -- I certainly am -- is that the message was always love, in any form we portrayed it." - Paul McCartney | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
PANDURITO said: ehuffnsd said: Joshua De La Cerda, Parishioner, says "This is something Jesus would have done, or Christ would have done, spoke out for the truth."
![]() You doubt Jesus would have stood up for what was right even in the face of religious dogma? If that's so, you may have been reading about a different man than I've been. It's not that The Joker's gay. What he is, is Batsexual. He'd be whacking it to Batsy whether our hero had girl parts or boy parts underneath that rubber. | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
meow85 said: PANDURITO said: ![]() You doubt Jesus would have stood up for what was right even in the face of religious dogma? If that's so, you may have been reading about a different man than I've been. re read the quote. it seems to read like the person is saying Jesus and Christ are two different people. | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said: meow85 said: You doubt Jesus would have stood up for what was right even in the face of religious dogma? If that's so, you may have been reading about a different man than I've been. re read the quote. it seems to read like the person is saying Jesus and Christ are two different people. Not really. It looks more like simple misspeaking. Anyways, Christ is a title, not his name. Anyone can be a Christ, so in that sense you could mention Jesus and Christ together and be speaking about two seperate people. It's not that The Joker's gay. What he is, is Batsexual. He'd be whacking it to Batsy whether our hero had girl parts or boy parts underneath that rubber. | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
meow85 said: ehuffnsd said: re read the quote. it seems to read like the person is saying Jesus and Christ are two different people. Not really. It looks more like simple misspeaking. Anyways, Christ is a title, not his name. Anyone can be a Christ, so in that sense you could mention Jesus and Christ together and be speaking about two seperate people. but to a Catholic Christ and Jesus are one in the same. it's a weird quote i had to read it a couple times myself. i think pandy was trying to be funny. [Edited 10/7/08 21:18pm] | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
HiinEnkelte said: | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I think I will be voting yes on Prop 8. I'm in the group that thinks that homosexuals should have all of the legal rights of a heterosexual couple, but I don't think it should be called "marriage"... am I an asshole because of that? I want visiting rights, etc (name whatever "right" you want - I don't think I would be against it) ... I think those things are important and necessary. I just don't think it should be called "marriage", because it isn't. Am I an asshole? How should I vote? If I vote "yes", are there opportunities to ensure that homosexual couples rights' are equal with heterosexual rights (which I consider equal) while still holding the belief that a "marriage" is between a man and a woman? Can I judge between the love between a man a woman and the love the between a man/woman and a man/woman? I don't think I can - not sure if "society" can think I either.
There is one orger who is a COMPLETE RACIST who should be banned from this board but will never be. http://uk.youtube.com/wat...jo85WhbYqM | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
CliffClaven said: I think I will be voting yes on Prop 8. I'm in the group that thinks that homosexuals should have all of the legal rights of a heterosexual couple, but I don't think it should be called "marriage"... am I an asshole because of that? I want visiting rights, etc (name whatever "right" you want - I don't think I would be against it) ... I think those things are important and necessary. I just don't think it should be called "marriage", because it isn't. Am I an asshole? How should I vote? If I vote "yes", are there opportunities to ensure that homosexual couples rights' are equal with heterosexual rights (which I consider equal) while still holding the belief that a "marriage" is between a man and a woman? Can I judge both the love between a man a woman and the love the between a man/woman and a man/woman? I think I can - not sure if "society" can think I can.
Drunk edit.... [Edited 10/7/08 21:51pm] and why don't you think it should be called marriage? All Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry - Mildred Loving | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
CliffClaven said: I think I will be voting yes on Prop 8. I'm in the group that thinks that homosexuals should have all of the legal rights of a heterosexual couple, but I don't think it should be called "marriage"... am I an asshole because of that? I want visiting rights, etc (name whatever "right" you want - I don't think I would be against it) ... I think those things are important and necessary. I just don't think it should be called "marriage", because it isn't. Am I an asshole? How should I vote? If I vote "yes", are there opportunities to ensure that homosexual couples rights' are equal with heterosexual rights (which I consider equal) while still holding the belief that a "marriage" is between a man and a woman? Can I judge between the love between a man a woman and the love the between a man/woman and a man/woman? I don't think I can - not sure if "society" can think I either.
I think gays should be able to call it whatever they want to. If I chose to marry a man, there can be zero religious connotations connected to it and it would still be a marriage.Drunk edit.... [Edited 10/7/08 21:54pm] | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
And God made it to be Adam and Eve not Adam and Steve.
I am sooooo sick of this quote. Those are made-up names anyway. Racism is like an insidious virus, that no one has a cure for and can't be seen.....it just keeps reinfecting the weakest minds...
http://www.watchtowercomments.com/ | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
evenstar3 said: CliffClaven said: I think I will be voting yes on Prop 8. I'm in the group that thinks that homosexuals should have all of the legal rights of a heterosexual couple, but I don't think it should be called "marriage"... am I an asshole because of that? I want visiting rights, etc (name whatever "right" you want - I don't think I would be against it) ... I think those things are important and necessary. I just don't think it should be called "marriage", because it isn't. Am I an asshole? How should I vote? If I vote "yes", are there opportunities to ensure that homosexual couples rights' are equal with heterosexual rights (which I consider equal) while still holding the belief that a "marriage" is between a man and a woman? Can I judge both the love between a man a woman and the love the between a man/woman and a man/woman? I think I can - not sure if "society" can think I can.
Drunk edit.... [Edited 10/7/08 21:51pm] and why don't you think it should be called marriage? Thanks for the eyeroll - I answered the question civially and without malice, and I get an eyeroll.... nice. My personal opinion is that marriage means the union between a man and a woman. I do, however, believe that homosexuals should have the same legal rights in a "civil union" (I am not an expert on what that means). But, I guarantee if you ask me "should a homosexual couple in a civil union have [insert whatever right you want] that married heterosexual couples have", I can't imagine that I would say no. It's just not "marriage" in the definition of the word. It should be more about the rights than the word anyways. There is one orger who is a COMPLETE RACIST who should be banned from this board but will never be. http://uk.youtube.com/wat...jo85WhbYqM | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
CliffClaven said: evenstar3 said: and why don't you think it should be called marriage? Thanks for the eyeroll - I answered the question civially and without malice, and I get an eyeroll.... nice. My personal opinion is that marriage means the union between a man and a woman. I do, however, believe that homosexuals should have the same legal rights in a "civil union" (I am not an expert on what that means). But, I guarantee if you ask me "should a homosexual couple in a civil union have [insert whatever right you want] that married heterosexual couples have", I can't imagine that I would say no. It's just not "marriage" in the definition of the word. It should be more about the rights than the word anyways. you're welcome. and what makes you believe it should only be between a man and a woman? All Americans, no matter their race, no matter their sex, no matter their sexual orientation, should have that same freedom to marry - Mildred Loving | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
evenstar3 said: CliffClaven said: Thanks for the eyeroll - I answered the question civially and without malice, and I get an eyeroll.... nice. My personal opinion is that marriage means the union between a man and a woman. I do, however, believe that homosexuals should have the same legal rights in a "civil union" (I am not an expert on what that means). But, I guarantee if you ask me "should a homosexual couple in a civil union have [insert whatever right you want] that married heterosexual couples have", I can't imagine that I would say no. It's just not "marriage" in the definition of the word. It should be more about the rights than the word anyways. you're welcome. and what makes you believe it should only be between a man and a woman? You're being sarcastic - I wish you weren't, even though we disagree. I think they should have the same rights, but it's not marriage. Isn't the fight for same rights anyway? I think they should have those. I don't understand where I'm off on this one. There is one orger who is a COMPLETE RACIST who should be banned from this board but will never be. http://uk.youtube.com/wat...jo85WhbYqM | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said: meow85 said: Not really. It looks more like simple misspeaking. Anyways, Christ is a title, not his name. Anyone can be a Christ, so in that sense you could mention Jesus and Christ together and be speaking about two seperate people. but to a Catholic Christ and Jesus are one in the same. it's a weird quote i had to read it a couple times myself. i think pandy was trying to be funny. [Edited 10/7/08 21:18pm] Christ is a title. As it's commonly used it does refer to Jesus. But the word itself simply means "healer", so it can potentially refer to anybody. There's Christ, and then there's Christ. It's not that The Joker's gay. What he is, is Batsexual. He'd be whacking it to Batsy whether our hero had girl parts or boy parts underneath that rubber. | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
CliffClaven said: I think I will be voting yes on Prop 8. I'm in the group that thinks that homosexuals should have all of the legal rights of a heterosexual couple, but I don't think it should be called "marriage"... am I an asshole because of that? I want visiting rights, etc (name whatever "right" you want - I don't think I would be against it) ... I think those things are important and necessary. I just don't think it should be called "marriage", because it isn't. Am I an asshole? How should I vote? If I vote "yes", are there opportunities to ensure that homosexual couples rights' are equal with heterosexual rights (which I consider equal) while still holding the belief that a "marriage" is between a man and a woman? Can I judge between the love between a man a woman and the love the between a man/woman and a man/woman? I don't think I can - not sure if "society" can think I either.
Drunk edit.... [Edited 10/7/08 21:54pm] Why shouldn't it be called marriage? Marriage historically is a legal agreement. Nothing more, nothing less. We've already changed the meaning innumerable times, including to the current one of a love-match between a man and a woman as approved by God and/or a judge. So if a heterosexual couple can call their bond a marriage even if it wasn't performed by a religious cleric, then why can't a same-sex couple do the same? Is there a valid reason to deny the title of marriage besides sentimentalizing a word that's meaning has already been altered and changed? It's not that The Joker's gay. What he is, is Batsexual. He'd be whacking it to Batsy whether our hero had girl parts or boy parts underneath that rubber. | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
CliffClaven said: evenstar3 said: you're welcome. and what makes you believe it should only be between a man and a woman? You're being sarcastic - I wish you weren't, even though we disagree. I think they should have the same rights, but it's not marriage. Isn't the fight for same rights anyway? I think they should have those. I don't understand where I'm off on this one. It is mainly about the fight for equal rights, but it doesn't stop there. Marriage is a signifier of status and social respectability. It really shouldn't be, but it is and that's the angle behind the fight for use of the word. What does it say when we essentially say same-sex couples can have the legal, on-paper rights of a marriage, but disallow them the honour of calling it one? It's not that The Joker's gay. What he is, is Batsexual. He'd be whacking it to Batsy whether our hero had girl parts or boy parts underneath that rubber. | |
Reply w/quote - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |