Posts by Tess Rooney
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Nice. My three lovely, gorgeous, wonderful daughters are sins.
Not at all. They are precious.
There are a variety of beliefs about IVF from individual Catholics. In the current NZ Catholic Joy Cowley writes that IVF is pro-life given how wanted the children are.
I'm very sorry that your experience of the Church re: your infertility was horrible. I was speaking of the experience of my friends which has been positive in terms of prayer and support.
-
...we have been doing things differently... Expect that to continue.
I do, and I have said before I think the best way to go forward is through a democratic process. We aren't going to please everyone, but it's important that everyone's voices are heard and democracy is our best shot at that.
The whole beauty of the democratic system is that it reflects culture in a dynamic way. No one "owns" a concept as Idiot and I agreed. I don't have to agree with Emma's concept of marriage, but I do have to respect the freedom she has to promote it and for citizens to decide themselves what they want.
As for religious holidays. Meh. I'm not fussed either way.
-
Firstly, is it worth pointing out that we don't live in Western Europe? Secondly, again, reproduction and marriage were not intertwined for the Catholic Church, sorry.
New Zealand is a society informed by European culture. Our main language is English, our legal system is based on European Law, especially Britian and our understandings of marriage (in the dominant narrative anyway) have been products of European mores.
So for example, Islam has divorce, where as we frowned upon divorce until recently because we are products of a Christian context.
As to reproduction and marriage these are intertwined in the theology of the Church, of course there are always examples where individuals fall short of the mark and Catholics are no better than any other group of people.
As to annulments, both John Paul II and Benedict XVI have requested that the Roman Rota be much more careful of the annulments they grant. There have been obvious abuses and it needs to stop.
-
There has never been, in ANZ, such a thing as an homogenous society - nor, 'in the West' has *anything* ever been understood universally.
That's a fair comment.
In that case let me say it this way:
For those with political agency who were regarded as citizens in good standing and had the power to build the dominant narrative in Western European culture, marriage had an understanding consistent with the Catholic Church, where reproduction and marriage were intertwined.
-
But Tess, can I say I admire the skillful and sincere way you're pursuing an argument at odds with the majority view of the thread. Nicely done.
:) Thank you.
Blame it on the bloody fields of mortal combat from the Realm of Insanity.
That and I know some of the people here from university, and it's awesome to have a place to stay when I'm in Palmerston North. These folk will forgive an argument they disagree with, but never with one argued badly.
Also... I'm a geek. In fact so are my kids and husband, just now the oldest boy (10) who is in the bath wanted his brother (8) to come and play with him. What he actually said was "Please come and interact with me."
-
Why would they need to? In New Zealand, all marriages are civil. You lost ownership of the word ~ 200 years ago in our legal tradition.
One doesn't "own" a concept. Until very recently marriage in the West was understood universally. It's only been since artificial contraception, which could physically separate sex and reproduction, that our understanding of marriage as a society has begun to change.
The important point is that we hold to the democratic process of working through this issue. That we all maintain our civility in discussion is important, likewise not reducing those who disagree with us into mere caricatures.
I think everyone wants what is best for society, we just have different interpretations of what that would be.
-
Like: 'here, you have civil unions, everyone, and we'll keep this Very Important Ritual Which Is Better to ourselves.'
Not really, given that other Christians (except the Orthodox) don't believe in sacramental marriage the way Catholics do. They have their own theological understanding of marriage. Likewise other religions have specific ideas about marriage. They each feel theirs is correct and I'm not about to argue with them about it.
Likewise those who don't see marriage as part of any religious tradition feel that their way is the best way. We're all being equally "ghettoised" I guess.
-
I'm claiming that the Catholic doctrine (as expressed by you upthread) that their marriage is the only "proper" marriage does.
Well, you can hold that opinon (although I think it's strange). As far as I know no one has ever actually brought any prosecution about it though. So legally I don't think you have a leg to stand on.
But what you can't do is use the power of the state to inflict your religious beliefs and definitions on others.
Gah. I wouldn't want to do that.
Society's definition of "marriage" is something worked out through the democratic process. At least while we have civil marriages it is. Just as I don't want to inflict my understanding of marriage onto you, nor do I want your understanding of marriage inflicted upon me.
Obviously couples, regardless of gender, need legal protections. I think the state should cease defining "marriage" altogether and just make sure that couples have legal protection through civil unions and the current de facto arrangement that we have now.
-
I assume you'll be voting for that, too?
Yes I would. However I suspect that no politician would be prepared to get rid of "marriage" and replace it with civil unions completely. Which I think is a shame.
All couples need legal protections, how we understand "marriage" should be something personal and done within our own cultural context.
-
Nobody is trying to take anything away from you, or even affect you in any way.
It is however explicity demonstrating that the Catholic definition of marriage isn't correct as far as society is concerned.
As you say, I'm expected to acknowledge same-sex marriage and regard it as legitimate, ontologically, legally and morally.