Sentences with phrase «for homosexual union»

What will it mean for homosexual unions (or heterosexual ones, in our difficult times) to «keep the sabbath»?

Not exact matches

It is precisely such a perspective that is needed in current debates on homosexuality and the issue of civil unions for homosexual persons.

Having uncovered the data of the natural law and the data of Revelation, we come full circle and consider again the question of civil unions for homosexual persons.

She had apparently got to the point where she honestly did not know that a child is the natural fruit of a union between a man and a woman: in her understanding «sex» is something done for pleasure, according to one's desires, whether lesbian or homosexual or whatever, and procreation an entirely different matter connected with options presented at various times, possibly involving in - vitro fertilization and test - tubes.

This is important for churches to consider, for parallel to the movement for homosexual civil unions is the movement to give blessings of churches to those unions.

Furthermore there is no rational argument for equating homosexual union, which is anatomically and physiologically dysfunctional and unproductive of new life, with heterosexual union.

«Writing the Ketubbà for males» means sanctioning homosexual union with a regime of legal and economic guarantees.

At another point, he writes that the «openness of the contract» between two homosexual males means that such a union will in fact be more durable than a heterosexual marriage because the contract contains an «understanding of the need for extramarital outlets» (emphasis added).

Blair omits the topic altogether, while Scanzoni and Mollenkott add only a brief postscript to their discussion, admitting that «for many Christians, the biggest barrier to accepting the possibility of homosexual unions pertains to an understanding of the creation accounts in chapters l, 2, and 5 of Genesis and in Jesus» commentary on them in Matthew, chapter 19.

There follow verbose passages about union, mutual love, and support, etc., sentiments one finds in romantic poetry and in the sincere expressions of homosexual lovers for each other.

Is America now more morally sensitive, more well structured in its laws and practices insofar as it accepts publicly avowed homosexual behavior; constructs laws that protect homosexuals from the criminal penalties formally attached to homosexual acts; and allows for civil unions or even gay marriages?

Church law declared homosexuality incompatible with Christian teaching and forbade ordination and unions for homosexuals.

Here's another, scarcely less oratorical in character, from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith: the title of this document (another wonderful example of Vatican bogus academic language when what is needed is a competent journalist used to writing informative headlines) is «Considerations regarding proposals to give legal recognition to unions between homosexual persons» (2003): The Church's teaching on marriage and on the complementarity of the sexes reiterates a truth that is evident to right reason and recognised as such by all the major cultures of the world.

If and when the church moves toward such liturgical recognition, it should also work for legal recognition of homosexual unions, involving such matters as tax laws and inheritance rights.

«Among the many errors and ambiguities of this book,» concludes the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, «are its positions on masturbation, homosexual acts, homosexual unions, the indissolubility of marriage and the problem of divorce and remarriage.»

And I wish especially to emphasize that in the framework of civil unions already in place in France, there is no reason that our concern for protecting partners would cause us to put in question the institution of marriage in the radical way implied by the authorization of homosexual marriage.

With this aim in mind, homosexual marriage and the right to adoption for same - sex couples appear as nothing more than a means for exploding the foundations of society, making possible all kinds of unions, finally liberated from an ancestral morality, and therefore definitively doing away with the very notion of sexual difference.

In a blog post entitled, «The Tornado, The Lutherans, and Homosexuality,» Piper confidently proclaims that the tornado that hit downtown Minneapolis yesterday was a result of divine judgment on a group of Lutherans meeting in a local church to discuss, among other things, a «social statement» that could make it easier for the church to accept homosexual unions.

As President Obama today expressed his support for gay marriage, the State of Florida continues to define marriage as «a legal union between one man and one woman,» leaving homosexuals in loving relationships in a state of legal limbo.

President Barack Obama is officially opposed to same - sex marriage, although he supports «full civil unions and federal rights» for homosexual couples and a full repeal of DOMA, and called California's Proposition 8 outlawing same - sex marriage in 2008 «unnecessary.»