tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post2311486237239783113..comments2023-08-19T23:23:19.849+10:00Comments on Sentire cum Ecclesia: Yes!Schützhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05026181010471282505noreply@blogger.comBlogger48125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-48257772252965523352010-09-08T22:22:41.000+10:002010-09-08T22:22:41.000+10:00I shouldn’t have used the word polygamy, what abou...<i>I shouldn’t have used the word polygamy, what about any combination? How about 2 men and 3 women as a marriage?</i><br><br>Whatever you call it, Paul, I think it's still a 'slippery slope' argument as presented.Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-74843200990985479912010-09-08T22:14:14.000+10:002010-09-08T22:14:14.000+10:00Both parties made commitments; both parties need t...<i>Both parties made commitments; both parties need the Christian vote come the next election, and the numbers in favour of same sex ‘marriage’ do not yet stack up.</i><br><br>Aren't you being presumptuous about the 'Christian' vote Terra?Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-58421155283329014232010-09-09T21:36:13.000+10:002010-09-09T21:36:13.000+10:00Ultimately even if the Laws of our land continue t...Ultimately even if the Laws of our land continue to diverge from Truth it does not alter our individual obligation to live in Truth and Love <br>What does it profit any one of us if we are feted and loved by the world and lose our soul?<br>All that a politician can do is vote according to his conscience which for a Catholic is formed by the teachings of the Church handed down over 2000 years and protected from error by the Holy Spirit.<br>Christian politicians should take comfort that they live in less life threatening times than Thomas More!Paxnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-29511092364910010592010-09-08T10:40:39.000+10:002010-09-08T10:40:39.000+10:00David,do you think MP's will get a conscience ...David,do you think MP's will get a conscience vote on this issue or be forced to vote on party lines?Peter Goldingnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-32388301268910350492010-09-08T12:41:34.000+10:002010-09-08T12:41:34.000+10:00I don't see it the same way you do, Peregrinus...I don't see it the same way you do, Peregrinus. Parties will be hunting for every preference they can possibly get, especially the 5% of SAns whos voted FFP. Both parties also went to the election with clear promises not to touch marriage. *Something* motivated both Abbott and Gillard to oppose gay marrigae before to do that...<br><br>Thing is, marriage in Australia is I think almost entirely a cultural institution, not a legal one. What rights to married couples have that unmarried ones don't have after a few years of being defacto?<br><br>Also, what leads you to say that pollies are more liberal than voters as a whole? I've always supposed it was the opposite, although maybe that's just because they tend to be older on average.Alexandernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-48968546728491115512010-09-08T13:16:58.000+10:002010-09-08T13:16:58.000+10:00I said: I think they would even do well out of a d...I said: <i>I think they would even do well out of a double dissolution if it had’ve come to that.</i><br><br>I meant "they would've done well", that is, if Abbott had've been prime minister, an early election (despite the media's hostility to the idea) wouldn't've hurt his chances at reelection.Alexandernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-74552001173477864542010-09-08T17:58:41.000+10:002010-09-08T17:58:41.000+10:00I agree with your assessment Alexander. Here in SA...I agree with your assessment Alexander. Here in SA the sky didn't fall in and we had a minority government with indies (in one case our only National Party member) in the Cabinet. It worked so well for Labor that they governed in their own right in the following elections.<br><br>For the opposition, it means the target of their opposition is not just Labor but Labor+. They simply can't be as gung-ho in their opposition given that they may need indies themselves one day.<br><br>Of course it call all go pear-shaped very quickly, but as long as Labor can make it work -- and that is the big question -- there will be more honey in the chalice than poison.Tonyhttp://beyondpews.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-52545160314467244242010-09-08T18:07:27.000+10:002010-09-08T18:07:27.000+10:00Essentially I agree with you Pere. This is new ter...Essentially I agree with you Pere. <br><br>This is new territory in many ways, but if the effect of a private members bill is that is works like a conscience vote, I think some sort of gay marriage bill will get in by a good majority and the only people who'll oppose it will be those on the right of the Coalition (I'm not sure that is as true of Labor -- Gillard may offer token opposition to appear to be consistent with her pre-election statements).<br><br>In the previous parliament it was an issue that Labor may have been inclined to be in favor of -- I simply can't believe that a woman living in 'sin' is against it for reasons of principle! --but wouldn't have been game to risk. Now I can imagine it can be voted for with little political downside.Tonyhttp://beyondpews.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-91998823290470369992010-09-08T20:24:37.000+10:002010-09-08T20:24:37.000+10:00I can't see that either major party can allow ...I can't see that either major party can allow a conscience vote in this term on this given their election commitments, and Labor's refusal to concede on this issue in response to bids from Wilkie and the Greens in the negotiation process.<br><br>Both parties made commitments; both parties need the Christian vote come the next election, and the numbers in favour of same sex 'marriage' do not yet stack up. <br><br>Its only a matter of time though since the gay lobby is out there actively campaign and no one seems to be making a very strong case in rebuttal.Terrahttp://australiaincognita.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-73676499475757329682010-09-08T21:01:18.000+10:002010-09-08T21:01:18.000+10:00Speaking of the camouflaged greenAndrew Wilkie,I e...Speaking of the camouflaged greenAndrew Wilkie,I emialed him regarding his push to debate the troops staying the course in Afghanistan,a few days ago. no response yet but await with interest his reply. My interest- i have a son about to depart for basic training at Kapooka- recruit training regiment,then further training as a armoured car crewman at Puckapunyal. He has been told he could be Over There 8 to 18 months after joining.Matthiasnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-6560238278005932512010-09-09T00:00:29.000+10:002010-09-09T00:00:29.000+10:00Mmm Tony, you dismiss my views because I suggest t...Mmm Tony, you dismiss my views because I suggest that a highly biased poll commissioned by a highly biased group is dubious (I would say that is good critical thinking on my behalf) and that from my experience I believe that the majority of Australian are as a matter of fact opposed to homosexual marriage (not a hard fact to disprove considering Julia Gillard's and Penny Wongs stance) and yet you then suggest that you know better than God???<br><br>What you believe is good for you but is irrelevant here because as Catholics we believe that God has laid out his plan and moral code for mankind and this can not be argued with, neither mocked. <br><br>We are not discussing warped views here, but the eternal truth of God.Garethnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-19546509432113937442010-09-09T03:15:39.001+10:002010-09-09T03:15:39.001+10:00Point taken Tony,but it must be remembered that st...Point taken Tony,but it must be remembered that state govts are largely about the delivery of services-health,education,law & order etc.<br>Federal govt is a different animal in that there are many "big picture"policy platforms such as immigration,foreign affairs,indiginous affairs,industrial relations,welfare and the environment.Good luck to Jules trying to please everybody on these issues.Peter Goldingnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-24527640856237832062010-09-09T03:28:50.000+10:002010-09-09T03:28:50.000+10:00You're right, Peter, extrapolation from State ...You're right, Peter, extrapolation from State to Federal might be risky (as with any predictions in the current climate!) but they're both about managing power-oriented egos and consultation and negotiation.<br><br>While the situation is less stable than a clear majority, I don't think 'Jules' will be too overwhelmed at least not in terms of the survival of the govt. There may be some legislative programs that have to run the gauntlet of endless argy bargy and some that may just not get up, but if it proves largely workable, 'Jules' will come out better for it in electoral terms.<br><br>I also think that many Liberals will start remembering that Tony Abbott got in by one or two votes if he starts to lose popularity and their record for replacing leaders is a whole lot worse than Labor's.Tonynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-40383577235701171542010-09-09T03:50:59.000+10:002010-09-09T03:50:59.000+10:00Grow Up Tony.Grow Up Tony.Garethnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-12720096981762339812010-09-09T04:03:55.000+10:002010-09-09T04:03:55.000+10:00The fact that someone rejects one of the key chara...<i>The fact that someone rejects one of the key characteristics of the Christian concept of marriage </i><br><br>Point of order there, Perry. We're not arguing about a specifically "Christian" view of marriage. We are arguing about a understanding of the nature of that which we human beings call "marriage" which has been universally shared by the entire human race from the very beginning. No society, no religion, no race, no tribe anywhere EVER has ever even imagined that what goes on between two people of the same sex (however taboo or accepted) could be described as "marriage". That's the real point. This is a radical shift of ground unprecedented in human history. It is hard to argue that accepting such a radical redefinition of "marriage" would be inconsequential for genuine marriage.Schützhttp://www.scecclesia.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-19529955503424013762010-09-09T04:10:17.000+10:002010-09-09T04:10:17.000+10:00I am rather surprised at your support for same-sex...I am rather surprised at your support for same-sex "marriage", Tony. Perhaps you could tell us what you consider to be the essential definition or characteristic of the relationship we call "marriage", so that we can understand where you are coming from.Schützhttp://www.scecclesia.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-50711288508855480272010-09-09T04:49:56.000+10:002010-09-09T04:49:56.000+10:00Hi DavidI'm not arguing that it has no consequ...Hi David<br><br>I'm not arguing that it has no consequences. I'm only saying that it is not inevitable that the consequences will in particular include a rejection of the exclusive nature of marriage (as understood in the West).Peregrinusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-43804615190726315772010-09-09T05:06:15.000+10:002010-09-09T05:06:15.000+10:00PS: Re Liberal 'memory'.24 hours later and...PS: Re Liberal 'memory'.<br><br>24 hours later and there's rumbling in the camp with <a href="http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/coalition-mps-vent-over-independent-duos-decision-to-back-labor/story-fn59niix-1225915920922" rel="nofollow">Coalition MPs going for the independents</a> and rumours that 'The Cockroach' <a href="http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/can-julie-bishop-survive-again/#item3994" rel="nofollow">may not survive</a> this time.<br><br>One thing that 'Jules' has on her side -- albeit tentatively -- is the 'spoils of victory' and this may make it easier to keep her troops in line. The old 'crash or crash through' Abbott may have been supressed for the election campaign, but who knows if and when it will surface again?Tonyhttp://beyondpews.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-38757328891596163042010-09-09T05:36:13.001+10:002010-09-09T05:36:13.001+10:00If it did, then this is a horse which bolted long ...<i>If it did, then this is a horse which bolted long ago. For well over a hundred and fifty years both civil law and popular morality have rejected the notion that marriage is indissoluble and irrevocable.</i><br><br>I don't think it's true to say that civil law and popular morality have rejected indissoluble and irrevocable marriage, except inasmuch as they've rejected them in their absolute cases. Even the Catholic Church recognises that there are cases in which an apparent marriage may be terminated.<br><br>However, I do think gay marriage stems directly from the modern conception of marriage brought about (wordwide) with divorce-on-demand in the 1970s and contraception in the decades preceding that.Alexandernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-77813823706855623492010-09-09T05:36:13.000+10:002010-09-09T05:36:13.000+10:00I disagree Pere - infact there is a case before th...I disagree Pere - infact there is a case before the Canadian Supreme Court that is arguing that since certain legal rights have been extended to homosexuals, why not polygamists?<br><br>One cant be consistent and argue that society should legally or socially look favourably upon homsexuality, whilst condemening polygamists relationships on the other hand. It is sheer hypocrosy.Garethnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-19451237395469700432010-09-09T05:39:29.000+10:002010-09-09T05:39:29.000+10:00I shouldn’t have used the word polygamy, what abou...<i>I shouldn’t have used the word polygamy, what about any combination? How about 2 men and 3 women as a marriage?</i><br><br>Be not mistaken; although in a liberal society that permits multiple relationships like you describe, there will be some non-traditional ones. But the main beneficiaries will be "traditional" polygamous/polygynous marriages because it is the only form that can be considered natural. This is why I said earlier "Because, at the end of the day, the beneficiaries will predominately be hims".<br><br><i>By the way, isn’t polyamorous a beautiful word? Its meaning may be a bit dodgy, but the word is wonderful.</i><br><br>It's an evil word! It combines a Latin root with a Greek prefix! Far better had the concept been called "multiamory"...Alexandernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-59708881672878088912010-09-09T05:45:18.000+10:002010-09-09T05:45:18.000+10:00Why is it a good thing to encourage long term, fai...Why is it a good thing to encourage long term, faithful, loving relationships for heterosexuals? Your premiss is only valid if the justification for long-term heterosexual relationships can be applied equally to homosexual ones, but it my mind it can't be.Alexandernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-55699964105737728372010-09-09T08:04:04.000+10:002010-09-09T08:04:04.000+10:00I don't think gays (or at least very many of t...I don't think gays (or at least very many of them) are really all that interested in an exclusive and thoroughly monogamous, life-long relationship though.Louisenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-57098275101500518362010-09-09T08:06:53.000+10:002010-09-09T08:06:53.000+10:00I don't think the OT endorses polygamy exactly...I don't think the OT endorses polygamy exactly. It just describes the instances of it. Seems to me that this was merely tolerated. I often think the book of Genesis (and perhaps the OT generally) could be subtitled "Patriarchs behaving badly." IOW just b/c the Patriarchs did it (murder and what-not) doesn't mean it's okay!Louisenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21487528.post-72509231642664968222010-09-09T08:08:41.000+10:002010-09-09T08:08:41.000+10:00Well, there are Christians and then there are secu...Well, there are Christians and then there are secularists-with-a-bit-of-God-sprinkled-on-top. The latter pretty well describes the UCA as far as I can tell.Louisenoreply@blogger.com