The Moral Decline Of The Late Great United States

Miami’s Catholic archbishop, Thomas Wenski, said establishing “gay marriage” would corrupt the natural setting for rearing children by a mother and a father, and further spread “moral relativism,” one of the signs that democracy is “on its way to totalitarianism.”

The state has always recognized and favored heterosexual marriages “because such marriages best provide the optimal conditions for the raising of future generations of its citizens,” said Archbishop Wenski in an Apr. 24 homily at the Red Mass for the Miami Catholic Lawyers Guild. “And all honest social research as well as anecdotal evidence shows that children are ‘hard-wired’ to be best raised by a mother and father who are married to each other in a low conflict relationship.”

In other words, he said, “it’s about what’s best for children. Only in the marriage of a man and a woman can ‘two become one flesh’ (Genesis 2: 24) and thus create a conjugal society – or family – which provides that the individuals who give life to children should be the ones to raise them in a bonded and enduring relationship.”

The push for “so-called same-sex marriage, if it prevails,” said the archbishop, “will fundamentally change” the mother-father-children family and “open a Pandora’s Box of unforeseen and, to be sure, unintended consequences – as the more permissive no-fault divorce legislation did some 40 years ago.”

“[T]he proponents of so-called same-sex marriage would now redefine marriage for all as existing solely for the gratification of two (and why just two?) consenting adults,” said Abp. Wenski.

The archbishop, who represents 1.3 million Catholics in 118 churches in South Florida, said the push for same-sex marriage is just the logical consequence of the moral relativism found in Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood, which “virtually establishes a new secular religion based on the ‘right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and the mystery of human life.’”

“When a democracy bases itself on moral relativism and when it considers every ethical principle or value to be negotiable (including every human being’s fundamental right to life), it is already, and in spite of its formal rules, on its way to totalitarianism,” said Abp. Wenski. “The might of right quickly becomes might makes right.”

In ending his homily, the archbishop noted that America’s founding fathers established a society upon a “vision of freedom” in accordance with “ordered liberties” that are evident in the natural order, such as the complementarity of man and woman, and the right of children to a mother and a father – in short, as he cited from the Declaration of Independence, “We hold these truths to be self-evident ….”

They are natural and obvious truths, said the archbishop, who called upon the legal experts and lawmakers in attendance at the Red Mass to remember the example of St. Thomas More, the patron saint of lawyers and politicians, who described himself as “the King’s good servant but God’s servant first.”

Archbishop Wenski also quoted a phrase from Abraham Lincoln to argue that gay marriage is a legal construct not based on reality: “If you call a tail a leg, then how many legs does a cow have? Four, because calling a tail a leg doesn’t make it one.”

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/mia...al-relativism-society-its-way-totalitarianism

 

Well, when talking about the founders they messed up the very first sentence. They should have practiced what they preached. It was a house built on sand, as your Savior clearly tells you.

 

What are you doing in my United States? Go to North Korea where you belong!

 

As usual you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

I will just as soon as you go back to Europe....where YOU belong.

 

We hold these truths....etc. etc.

It took America from 1775 to 1965 to finally get this one right.

 

Marriage ,from the State point of view has nothing to do with love, honor, or commitment. It only confirms that 2 people are willing to get into a legal bubble the state has set up.

Society financially subsidizes marriage quite a bit for the purpose of protecting children. Tax free transfers of estates is one way. Automatic ridership on insurance policies...etc.

Why should I subsidize marriages that will not produce children.
I say you only get the benefits of favorable tax arrangements if you have children.

 

I could care less who people want to marry. Let them marry each other...or farm animals. Or furniture. Let them have relationships with their relatives, or with construction machinery. To each, their own. I have no more right to tell them how to be happy than they have a right to tell me what to think or do.

Eventually, if they are allowed to do as they wish, they will breed themselves out of existence anyway (or NOT breed themselves into continuity, as the case may be). They will become fewer and fewer, and their noise will fade from time as they are allowed to pursue whatever end they choose. Meanwhile, men will continue to have children with women, and there won't be a single thing laws can do to make gays more fertile with each other. Nature saw fit to hardcode that.

 

If there were no Democrats it would have happened in 1865.

The Republicans did as much as it could including dying in a brutal war.

 

That's a novel way to get a tax deduction. Marry your car and claim it as a dependent.

But, then, all those things aren't really marriage, are they?