We have talked about this issue on this website before. Especially when Pope Francis mentioned how he supported same sex unions granted by the state. Being the libertarian that I am, I have also contemplated this issue as well. Do I believe that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is a mortal sin? You bet I do. It is one of those things that God despises the most. Possibly more so than adultery. It is probably one of the top 5 mortal sins that offends God.

However, should we make it against the law with consequences? And I am referring to ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity in general. I definitely agree that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs should not have any positions of power nor should they be represented in the media in any kind of way. This being because I don't want their presence to influence other people. But should their lifestyle be banned, by law, entirely? I am not so sure. But then again I am not completely against banning it either. I just need to see some more convincing arguments.

It seems to me that even if we were living in a completely Catholic state that we simply could not make every single mortal sin punishable by law. We are all sinners and we would all go to jail or suffer capital punishment one time or another. So how could you justify picking and choosing which mortal sins to ban when all mortal sins lead to death? Do you only ban the ones that offend God the most? The most abominable ones?

I am not trying to justify ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ marriage. I just know that some on this site would agree that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity should be punishable by death. Under this same logic, what about adultery, murder, etc.? Why is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity so much worse than some of those things in our society?

Why exactly should ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ unions be banned by a Catholic government? Should all mortal sins be baned by a Catholic government?

Your views are the epitome of what is wrong with libertarianism. Yes there should be laws regarding abortion, pornography, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ sodomy, gambling, divorce, adultery, etc. and this is because we as Catholics should support a moral society. Now we can't make Heaven here on Earth of course, but we can make our laws coincide with Natural Law and God's Law.

ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is unnatural, sickening, causes sickness and disease within our society, etc. and has been the downfall of every society like Weimar Germany and Rome. For the record I also support the death penalty for cold-blooded murder, rape and drug dealing.

By the way there is no such thing as "same-sex marriage" since sodomites and fairies have a sterile, but perverse relationship without children.

My opinion will not be popular, but no, ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ acts in private between adults should not be illegal.  They are immoral, but in a non-confessional state they are not the governments business.  

Absolutely!

The social Reign and Kingship of Jesus Christ must be acknowledged by men and states.

Major part of our downfall has been the separation between Church and State.

In a nutshell, this is the proper Catholic response to the question.
Societal concessions to disorder facilitate the damnation of souls.

The purpose of the Church and all Her laws is the salvation of souls.

And you better believe He will hold you accountable for toleration / disregard of a sin so evil that it  "cries out to Heaven for vengeance".  

Have we weakened so substantially in this standard?  Are trads that morally modernized?  

Amusing trivia: in ancient Germany sodomy was punished with death; murder, however, was not. The only other offence punished this severely was, according to the historian Tacitus, extreme cowardice. I received this from the "Germania" of Tacitus, which also contains as excellent a praise of monogamy as you will find among the ancient pagans:

Yet the laws of matrimony are severely observed there; for in the whole of their manners is aught more praiseworthy than this: for they are almost the only Barbarians contented with one wife, excepting a very few amongst them; men of dignity who marry divers wives, from no wantonness or lubricity, but courted for the lustre of their family into many alliances.

To the husband, the wife tenders no dowry; but the husband, to the wife. The parents and relations attend and declare their approbation of the presents, not presents adapted to feminine pomp and delicacy, nor such as serve to deck the new married woman; but oxen and horse accoutred, and a shield, with a javelin and sword. By virtue of these gifts, she is espoused. She too on her part brings her husband some arms. This they esteem the highest tie, these the holy mysteries, and matrimonial Gods. That the woman may not suppose herself free from the considerations of fortitude and fighting, or exempt from the casualties of war, the very first solemnities of her wedding serve to warn her, that she comes to her husband as a partner in his hazards and fatigues, that she is to suffer alike with him, to adventure alike, during peace or during war. This the oxen joined in the same yoke plainly indicate, this the horse ready equipped, this the present of arms. 'Tis thus she must be content to live, thus to resign life. The arms which she then receives she must preserve inviolate, and to her sons restore the same, as presents worthy of them, such as their wives may again receive, and still resign to her grandchildren.

They therefore live in a state of chastity well secured; corrupted by no seducing shows and public diversions, by no irritations from banqueting. Of learning and of any secret intercourse by letters, they are all equally ignorant, men and women. Amongst a people so numerous, adultery is exceeding rare; a crime instantly punished, and the punishment left to be inflicted by the husband. He, having cut off her hair, expells her from his house naked, in presence of her kindred, and pursues her with stripes throughout the village. For, to a woman who has prostituted her person, no pardon is ever granted. However beautiful she may be, however young, however abounding in wealth, a husband she can never find. In truth, nobody turns vices into mirth there, nor is the practice of corrupting and of yielding to corruption, called the custom of the Age. Better still do those communities, in which none but virgins marry, and where to a single marriage all their views and inclinations are at once confined. Thus, as they have but one body and one life, they take but one husband, that beyond him they may have no thought, no further wishes, nor love him only as their husband but as their marriage. To restrain generation and the increase of children, is esteemed an abominable sin, as also to kill infants newly born. And more powerful with them are good manners, than with other people are good laws.

Quote from: Traditional Guy 20

[b

By the way there is no such thing as "same-sex marriage" since sodomites and fairies have a sterile, but perverse relationship without children[/b].

Unless they adopt which they do.

Yes. SSM is a misnomer since the very defintion of a "marriage" is the coming together of two opposites.

The queers and their minions have even sacked the NORMAL meaning of words and terminology like the word "gαy" which has nothing to do with two men consenting to anal sex on one another.

There is only one word to describe ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ acts which Yahweh declared in the O.T. and that is AN ABOMINATION. And there's only one way to deal with  unrepentant sodomites like Yahweh did in the O.T. as well.

We have talked about this issue on this website before. Especially when Pope Francis mentioned how he supported same sex unions granted by the state. Being the libertarian that I am, I have also contemplated this issue as well. Do I believe that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity is a mortal sin? You bet I do. It is one of those things that God despises the most. Possibly more so than adultery. It is probably one of the top 5 mortal sins that offends God.

However, should we make it against the law with consequences? And I am referring to ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity in general. I definitely agree that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖs should not have any positions of power nor should they be represented in the media in any kind of way. This being because I don't want their presence to influence other people. But should their lifestyle be banned, by law, entirely? I am not so sure. But then again I am not completely against banning it either. I just need to see some more convincing arguments.

It seems to me that even if we were living in a completely Catholic state that we simply could not make every single mortal sin punishable by law. We are all sinners and we would all go to jail or suffer capital punishment one time or another. So how could you justify picking and choosing which mortal sins to ban when all mortal sins lead to death? Do you only ban the ones that offend God the most? The most abominable ones?

I am not trying to justify ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ marriage. I just know that some on this site would agree that ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity should be punishable by death. Under this same logic, what about adultery, murder, etc.? Why is ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖity so much worse than some of those things in our society?

Why exactly should ɧoɱosɛҳųαƖ unions be banned by a Catholic government? Should all mortal sins be baned by a Catholic government?

SAME SEX = SS
SS = The occult nαzι's in 30's-40's

Guess what Rome/Vatican 'SS' stands for!

You know the occultist/Satanist/тαℓмυdist/Masons are up to no good when symbolically using 'SS' words!

Just like the nαzι Swastika (used as an early Christian symbol) ignorant Christians vent fury against it in a negative way.
Thus because of the nαzιs you vent fury at 'SS' by proxy.
Satanists love to collect the energy from hatred and fury.

Football / RUGBY etc 'Matches' - spark off trouble between supporters venting hatred at opposition.

(Hint - Matches used to be called "LUCIFERS")

+

Glaston, your posts that string together seemingly completely unrelated facts in the effort to find some conspiracy in them are becoming increasingly bizarre. Needless to say, the word "game" is not related to French occultism and Satanism, nor is that an angle in the popular name of the imperial struggle between Russia and England. You seem to simply be combining random things that have slight similarities to one another without any understanding of cause and effect. Maybe you should take a break from that line of thinking. I doubt that this post will have the desired effect, but at least I tried.