New Jersey marriage equality views by religion

No surprise (4.00 / 3)

As a Catholic, my experience has always been that there are a diversity of views among the faithful on this issue, including weekly churchgoers.

---

by: Jeff Gardner @ Thu Dec 10, 2009 at 15:30:33 PM UTC

Hopefully (0.00 / 0)

The Church's deplorable involvement in this issue will compel those who nominally call themselves Catholics to take a look at serious look at the institution they claim membership with.  

---

by: Michael Tracey @ Thu Dec 10, 2009 at 16:58:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Don't Confuse Catholicism With The Chuch.... (0.00 / 0)

... hierarchy.

Rank and file Catholics, especially in America are far more likely to be "cafeteria" style folk than they are to be hard core fundamentalists.

It's the hard core extremist fundamentalists of ALL religious stripes that are the opponents of progress.

These are the same people who gave us the Inquisition and the Taliban and Al Qaeda and witch burning and lynchings etc etc etc.

The bottom line, for me, always (when I'm a bit awake ;-) comes back to love vs fear.    From which place do we wish to live our lives?

---

by: Nick Lento @ Thu Dec 10, 2009 at 17:34:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I haven't confused them. (0.00 / 0)

In fact, Cafeteria Catholics are who I am talking to -- in my view, they are the worst sort. Or at least the most intellectually disingenuous. I don't know how you can affirm membership to an organization that purports to have a singular, divinely-inspired moral clairvoyance, yet engages in such repugnant activities. Especially if your membership serves to legitimize their political agenda. To me it reflects cognitive dissonance, intellectual apathy, or something in between -- and should be called out as such.

At least Andrew Sullivan has the gall to remain a Catholic but refuse communion out of respect for the authority of church leadership, who condemn him as a heretic.  

---

by: Michael Tracey @ Thu Dec 10, 2009 at 18:34:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Positive Outreach To All Rank And File.... (0.00 / 0)

humans is required here.

You have a bug up your butt in re the Catholic Church as an organized religion...and I understand that and likely share many (if not all!) of your well founded concerns.

Did you read the diary?   Do you see the significance of the poll?

I can criticize the Catholic church, and just about all of organized religion as well, if not better, than you can...........but to take what I have written here and to somehow try to put the onus on me personally for even acknowledging that I am a Catholic (who is does not buy in to the dictats of the "management") is not productive in terms of winning this battle.

I've stood up to hundreds of "Christian Fundamentalists" in public forums and took their hateful verbiage and cries of "apostate".  Those folks know who I am and what I stand for.  

We're on the same side "mtracey".  

May Peace be with you!   :-)

---

by: Nick Lento @ Thu Dec 10, 2009 at 19:52:03 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Funny (3.00 / 1)

this is basically why I left the Democratic Party.

---

by: Thurman Hart @ Thu Dec 10, 2009 at 19:54:05 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I hate to be in a position to defend the Catholic Church, but you're forcing me into a corner. (4.00 / 1)

I take particular offense to calling "Cafeteria Catholics" the worst sort - and even more offensive "intellectually disingenuous."  I think you are laying a broad assumption about all Catholics that is, to quote your comment: intellectually disingenuous.

For my family the Catholic church isn't about church leadership or any actions taken by church leadership in New Jersey, or the Vatican for that matter.  It's about tradition, reflection, and making yourself a morally better person. Sometimes the church has a different definition of morality than I, or my family does, but that doesn't mean we accept it like sheep.  

Even if you don't agree with my argument, your comment is rude and uncalled for - have some respect for other people's religions.  

---

by: Matthew Jordan @ Fri Dec 11, 2009 at 01:58:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

If you hate to do it, don't do it. (0.00 / 0)

I have respect for other peoples' religions -- enough that I want them to own up for what it is they claim to believe. Affiliating with a religious institution is a serious thing, and should be treated as such.

Why, in order to show respect, do I need to withhold criticism? This is exactly why the Catholic Church and other religious organizations are for the most part allowed to act with impunity.

Why are they allowed to intimidate legislators? Why are they allowed to send around second-collection plates during mass in opposition to same-sex marriage? Why is this organization not operating on the marginalized fringe of respectable society? I'll tell you why: because "Cafeteria Catholics" would rather bite their tongues than acknowledge the truth: that they are enabling the continued existence of an institution that does far more harm than good.

My allegation of intellectual inconsistency stands -- because I have never once heard an argument in favor of "Cafeteria Catholicism" that held any weight. I ask again: are retaining cultural and familial ties reason enough to legitimize such a deplorable political agenda? And additionally, do you really think that calling yourself a Catholic makes you "morally a better person"? I would hope that you had enough respect for your sovereignty as an individual than to make such a demeaning claim.  

And you're aware that by disagreeing with Church hierarchy, you are technically committing an act of heresy, right?

Sorry, but when a Church (or anyone else for that matter) calls my friends and family "evil" because of their sexual orientation, and says allowing them to marry is going to endanger children, I am not going to allow them to get away with it without objection.

---

by: Michael Tracey @ Fri Dec 11, 2009 at 19:28:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

A good point (0.00 / 0)

from the future State Senator (D - Hawthorne).

---

by: Thurman Hart @ Thu Dec 10, 2009 at 19:52:56 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Astounded (4.00 / 1)

Senator Sarlo's statement is astounding.

I mean, I deeply appreciate it for its frankness, but it is also appalling.

I hope he will reconsider his vote, on the floor.

How can he sit there and listen to clergy who want to marry gay people, and then say that his own religion comes before every other consideration, including other people's religion?

This is why hear-testimony-and-vote-immediately isn't conducive to reflection, deliberation, and so forth.

Courts, who take more time to reflect, of course, have come out in favor of gay relationship recognition far more often than legislatures and certainly more often than referenda.  This is why the 31-0 figure is almost meaningless...

---

by: Amicus @ Thu Dec 10, 2009 at 19:43:45 PM UTC

I will add... (0.00 / 0)

that I hope others who voted the same way, but didn't have the frankness to say it, also reconsider their position, when the next vote comes.

At least Sarlo has put it right out there, so we can talk about it, right?

---

by: Amicus @ Thu Dec 10, 2009 at 19:47:47 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I wonder (0.00 / 0)

if Sarlo is firm enough in his convictions to return any funds donated by the people he now votes against...

---

by: Thurman Hart @ Thu Dec 10, 2009 at 19:55:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

how many donors are we talking about? (0.00 / 0)

It would be an interesting exercise to look at ELEC reports for Sarlo and GSE and see if there are any names in common.  I can't imagine that there are many.

I would like to think that any LGBT or LGBT-friendly donor would be smart enough to know who Sarlo is and what he has stood for, particularly with regards to the fact that he and Loretta Weinberg have been on opposing sides of so many issues.

Anybody who was so ignorant of this that they would donate money to his re-election deserves what they get.

But to answer your question, I think that Sarlo would have to have convictions to be firm in them.

---

by: Bertin Lefkovic @ Fri Dec 11, 2009 at 01:05:43 AM UTC

[ Parent ]