Posted on 08/19/2012 3:21:21 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
***Those who oppose the proposed constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage are organizing, putting them at odds with bishops.***
[BIG SNIP]
......Groups of lay Catholics and former priests have spoken out against the bishops' campaign. Some parents and students also have criticized the church's move to talk about marriage in [archdiocesan] high schools. Active Catholics have met in Protestant churches to talk about how to defeat the amendment.
Catholics and other faith groups have held meetings in their homes, like the one at Burg's house, where representatives for the anti-amendment Minnesotans United for All Families encourage them to hold conversations with friends and family.
Kate Brickman, a spokeswoman for the group, said anti-amendment Catholics feel like they have to meet in their homes and other non-Catholic spaces because bishops aren't tolerant of their views.
While Catholic leadership has supported similar marriage amendments in other states, it's been particularly "ardent" in Minnesota, according to Laura Olson, a political science professor at Clemson University, who's written about marriage amendments.
Olson said bishops may believe the amendment has a good chance of failing and are putting a lot of energy into trying to get it passed, although such actions could have the opposite effect with some, who'd rather see church money used for "social justice issues."
"Among Catholics, and this would be true in Minnesota and nationwide, you've got about a third who are pretty ... traditional in their interpretation and adhere to what the bishops say. What the remaining two-thirds do is really the issue."
(Excerpt) Read more at startribune.com ...
“So far this year, Catholic leadership has been one of the biggest financial backers of pro-amendment forces, directing close to $500,000 in support of it. Minnesota voters will decide Nov. 6 whether the state’s Constitution will define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.” Per the linked article.
It appears the homosexualists within the Catholic layity are following Satan. I, for one, hope the amendment passes.
I am not a Catholic—but I am a Christian -and a Patriot. and near as I can figure “marriage” under American Law from the time when James Wilson taught American Law at the College of Philadelphia and said one consequence of “marriage” under our law is the two become one. ...until Mass. violated Law and Reason to allow same sex marriage— I don’t know of any State that recognized the fraud of same sex marriage. The State will do what it will but it seems to me as well having studied to become a Pastor —the Holy Bible is very clear “marriage” as defined by Moses in Genesis 1:27/2:24 ;Jesus of Nazareth Mark 10:6-8/Matthew 19:4-9; and the apostle Paul 1 Cor.6;8-11, 15-20 How is it they three all used the same definition of “marriage” and if ours differs from theirs by what authority do we change scripture?—or turn from it?
“It appears the homosexualists within the Catholic layity are following Satan”
I guess they are not really Catholics. In that event, why not simply leave the church and head for one that embraces this travesty of natural and God given laws?
This one will pass. But Maine, Maryland, and Washington are another story. I think there is a good chance the gay agenda will score its first referendum victory this November.
But the real battle is not in the realm of politics, it is in Christian witness to the sinners. If every Christian brought even one homosexual to Christ, the problem would solve itself. Share the good news with a homosexual, it will have a bigger result than any vote.
This November the silent majority will be rising up to address a lot of issues.
>>>”There are many faithful Catholics who deeply believe gay couples and gay parents pose absolutely no threats to heterosexual families.”>>>
Then those faithful Catholics are totally unaware that gay couples adopt (or go the meat baster route) to have children. It is totally possible for gay couples to raise such children to believe that being gay is fine. And the numbers of gays increases incrementally. Of course the gays and the unaware Catholics will be against this amendment. WAKE UP, CATHOLICS.
No surprise that the Red Star Tribune would write an article trying to create a divide between Catholics and the Roman Catholic Church.
The quote from the Church spokesman says it all: Catholics who actually attend mass regularly support traditional marriage (and, I would add, the right to life), while “Catholics” who aren’t truly part of the Church (and only attend mass maybe twice a year, on Easter Sunday and Christmas Day) may take socially liberal positions and will skew polling.
The Red Star Tribune wants (i) the marriage amendment to be defeated and (ii) to create a greater rift between “cafeteria Catholics” and the Church. Their concern-trolling articles, much like their ridiculous polls that—year in and year out—oversample Democrats and end up being proved terribly incorrect, should be ignored.
The marriage amendment will be approved in Minnesota, and it could have the secondary effect of defeating Obama in the state.
More psyops. Divide Catholics? If you’re familiar with excommunication no formal act is needed on the part of the Church. Your behavior, beliefs and activities are the driver. You excommunicate yourself.
The only state I’m really worried about is MD, although the marriage anendment just might get defeated thanks to the votes of black Democrats. As when California approved traditional marriage in 2008, Obama’s presence on the ballot and the corresponding increase in black voter turnout could save marriage in MD.
MA is a state with a long history of thought policing, force and witchcraft. They’re diabolical in their belief in the rightness of their cause. They believe it unto death...yours that is.
MD has huge black pop, it relatively safe. Washington is probably the most vulnerable state, Seattle will approve for sure and the rest of the state may be too small to outweigh it. Maine is also vulnerable.
Lefties first, Catholics second.
Exactly.
Doesn’t matter what any single state does with its own constitution on this issue...it’s only a matter of time...if Obama is reelected... that the SCOTUS will grant this a 14th Amendment “right” 5-4.
Wish it were not so.
“Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division”
Can you imagine MD, the original Catholic state, going pro-homosexual marriage?
?
Lots of wonderful Catholics out there that are working hard against gay marriages, HHS mandate, etc.
Thought you should know.
Blessings to you.
StonyBurk: your comments touch upon something I noticed quite a while ago - there is really nothing in the U.S.Constitution regarding marriage. Religion has the authority to decide what is marriage in this country, not government. The deciding factor in Federal government interference was polygamy practiced by the LDS.
Now the state governments, that is another story. The Federalists meant for the individual states to be “laboratories” for social, cultural, and governmental change.
If a person or group didn’t like what was happening in one state, they could always move to another.
So, in effect, the decisions over homosexual marriage should be decided in the several states.
(I suspect that after a few years, any such amendments approved will be rescinded. Just a hunch.)
freeangel: you’re correct about pro-homosexualists no longer being Catholic. In truth, they are no longer Christian, either.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.