equality blooms with spring - Page 54 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 11-12-2009, 02:00 PM   #796
Self-righteous bullshitter
 
BoMac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Soviet Canuckistan — Socialist paradise
Posts: 16,664
Local Time: 09:51 AM
.

Quote:
Gay Catholic priest getting married

By BRYN WEESE, SUN MEDIA

TORONTO -- Canada's first openly gay Catholic priest is to mark another milestone.

Father Karl Clemens is getting married Saturday to his partner Nick.

He says he'll be the first man of the Catholic cloth to enter into a same-sex marriage in Canada, and maybe even in North America.

"I'm not doing it to start a revolution, but if people want to exercise their right, and so forth, that's terrific," Clemens told Sun Media yesterday.

"I feel very strongly about it.

"I'm leading the way, or pioneering, as it were, in something that I think is very important," Clemens said. "It's a human right."

Clemens, who is approaching 70 and who retired from the Kingston, Ont. diocese after serving there for 33 years, moved to Toronto more than a decade ago to work in, and advocate for, the city's gay village.

Regarding his same-sex marriage, he's prepared for a backlash from the church and some of its followers, as he was when he came out of the closet in 2005.

"There will be Catholics who feel, because of their lack of understanding, that this is a very wrong thing and therefore will not be pleased," Clemens said.

"But those are consequences we have to be willing to deal with because we feel strongly about the issue at hand, which is the right to be able to enter into same-sex marriages."

Clemens and his partner will be married Saturday afternoon in the couple's home.
__________________

__________________

BoMac is offline  
Old 11-12-2009, 06:51 PM   #797
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 06:51 AM
I think this means he will soon be an ex-Catholic priest.
__________________

__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 11-12-2009, 09:34 PM   #798
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,671
Local Time: 07:51 AM
From another thread:

Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
In another thread - I would like to understand 1) where this standard comes from (why 2? Why not 9 or zero?) - and how you define "adult" (18 years old, 30, maturity test, SAT, as soon as reproduction is possible...)
I've spoke quite a bit about my ideas on polygamy, and I'm pretty sure I spoke about it with you in fact. I have a hard time believing that a consentual marriage can be made between multiple partners. When you consent are you consenting to just the man, or the man and the woman he's married to, how do you prove consent to the future women? Can the woman divorce one of the other women out of the marriage if her children's lives are in danger? How do you deal with divorce rights?

I think just from a legal standpoint, it's almost impossible. So the moral objections don't even really matter in a discussion like this.

Well I'm not sure why age is a question, we already have definitions throughout this country as to what a consenting adult is...



Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
It "seems" the freedom you speak of does have some limits and I would like to know what they are and why....in another thread....
How do you define freedom? Does freedom mean life without law?

If you're saying the freedom I speak of has limits because I don't want to allow polygamy then I say IF there is a possible way to truly make a consenting relationship, and find a legal way to create an equal relationship then it should be allowed. I just don't see how that's possible.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 11-12-2009, 10:17 PM   #799
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
From another thread:

Well I'm not sure why age is a question, we already have definitions throughout this country as to what a consenting adult is...
I guess you are saying this should be left to the states, to determine at what age the "human right" of marriage can be granted. Is that correct?



Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
...IF there is a possible way to truly make a consenting relationship, and find a legal way to create an equal relationship then it should be allowed...
Okay - that answers my question.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 11-12-2009, 10:28 PM   #800
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,671
Local Time: 07:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
I guess you are saying this should be left to the states, to determine at what age the "human right" of marriage can be granted. Is that correct?
Well to be honest, I haven't ever given the age of consent too much thought as far as state vs federal...

It is arbritrary, but it is needed.

I think currently it ranges from 16 to 18, correct? PERSONALLY I think 16 is young

But I think if there are 16 year olds who can actually prove financial independence then they should have that right.

I also believe if you can serve your country, vote, or get married at 18 then you should be able to drink. For we all know those things can be stressful

But that's another thread. AEON between you and I we could do spin off threads all night long
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 11-12-2009, 11:01 PM   #801
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Pearl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: NYC
Posts: 5,653
Local Time: 09:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by KhanadaRhodes View Post

i just don't see why tolerance is so difficult. it's not like they're saying not only do you have to employ and give benefits to homosexuals, but you also have to allow them to have sex by the holy water. i'm a christian, but when i read things like this, it makes me sad to see such intolerance. whatever happened to love thy neighbour as thyself? i mean, if you think homosexuality is wrong and immoral, that's your own opinion. but that's got nothing to do with working for a church, or providing social services to those in need.
My mind is as boggled as Irvine's. Jesus said, "he who is without sin, cast the first stone," among other things about loving thy neighbor. If the Church does this, they would lose quite a few parishoners I am sure. I know I would walk out.

And if the Church does want homosexuals to change (if its possible), they got to be more compassionate rather than hostile. Hostility never works when confronting someone.
__________________
Pearl is offline  
Old 11-12-2009, 11:41 PM   #802
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
But I think if there are 16 year olds who can actually prove financial independence then they should have that right.
Please correct me I am misrepresenting your logic. You seem to be saying...

"IF there is a possible way to truly make a consenting relationship, and find a legal way to create an equal relationship"

and IF 16 year olds can prove financial independence

THEN, these 16 years olds could - in theory - enter into a marriage of three or more. Is this correct?

Also, it seems you are okay - in some circumstances - with allowing the states to grant or deny this fundamental "human right" of marriage when they deem appropriate. Is this also correct?

Quote:
But that's another thread. AEON between you and I we could do spin off threads all night long
very true...
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 11-12-2009, 11:47 PM   #803
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,483
Local Time: 08:51 AM
Jerry Lee Lewis married his 13 year old cousin.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 11-12-2009, 11:51 PM   #804
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,671
Local Time: 07:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
Please correct me I am misrepresenting your logic. You seem to be saying...

"IF there is a possible way to truly make a consenting relationship, and find a legal way to create an equal relationship"

and IF 16 year olds can prove financial independence

THEN, these 16 years olds could - in theory - enter into a marriage of three or more. Is this correct?
I'm saying the variance between 16 and 18 is a very gray area, there are a few 16 year olds that are mature enough, and if they have somehow found a way to be financially independent and they choose to marry right now under this current definition why stop them?

IF, and that's a big IF because I don't think it's possible to create a truly consentual polygamous marriage then why deny it if we hold ourselves to be the freest country in the world?


Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
Also, it seems you are okay - in some circumstances - with allowing the states to grant or deny this fundamental "human right" of marriage when they deem appropriate. Is this also correct?
I'm not quite sure where you gather this from...
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 11-13-2009, 12:29 AM   #805
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post


I'm not quite sure where you gather this from...
You said marriage is a fundamental human right, but you also agreed (I think) that states can determine the age when to grant this right (16,18...whatever). It seems to follow that you or okay with allowing states to determine when, who, and how human rights are granted.

Usually, fundamental human rights, from my understanding, are something government can neither grant nor deny (only protect). So you are either claiming that marriage is not necessary a human right, or that human rights CAN be granted or denied by the government.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 11-13-2009, 12:39 AM   #806
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 30,343
Local Time: 08:51 AM
I'm sorry, but does any of this have anything to do with denying homosexuals the right to marry? Because to me it looks like a bunch of semantics meant to distract from the real issue, not to mention a desperate attempt to grasp at anything to prove those gays should just stay away from your marriage.
__________________
phillyfan26 is offline  
Old 11-13-2009, 12:45 AM   #807
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post

i think this gets to the heart of some of the problems. what will happen when same-sex marriage is legal is that it will be illegal to discriminate against gay people if you are an organization that takes public money. gay people will be as protected as blacks, asians, jews, the handicapped, etc. i guess for some, that's a bad thing?

it boggles the mind.
This is why I am big supporter of the Separation of Church and State concept (it's not a law, it's never mentioned in the Constitution - but it is still a great concept).

The reason I support it is NOT because I fear the church's influence on the state - no, I fear the state's influence on the church.

It seems wrong the city would attach strings to organizations wishing to feed the poor.
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 11-13-2009, 12:51 AM   #808
Blue Crack Supplier
 
coolian2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hamilton (No longer STD capital of NZ)
Posts: 42,920
Local Time: 02:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by AEON View Post
This is why I am big supporter of the Separation of Church and State concept (it not a law, it is never mentioned in the Constitution - but it is still a great concept).
Quote:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
?
__________________
coolian2 is offline  
Old 11-13-2009, 12:56 AM   #809
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
AEON's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: California
Posts: 4,052
Local Time: 06:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by coolian2 View Post
?
When is the last time anyone called for congress to officially establish a religion?

Funny enough, this does not prohibit the state congress from establishing a state religion. But I agree, that wouldn't be a good idea.

Also, the phrase "Separation of Church and State" is not there...
__________________
AEON is offline  
Old 11-13-2009, 01:02 AM   #810
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 07:51 AM
Neither is a right to healthcare but whaddya gonna do.
__________________

__________________
INDY500 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:51 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com