|
Published: January 4, 2010
“On a par with Venice or San Francisco”
Mexico City legalizes same-sex marriages, opponents promise legal challenges, demonstrations
Mexico City has legalized same-sex marriages and will permit homosexuals to adopt children, a move that has brought stinging criticism from the Church and vows of intervention by the federal government.
On Dec. 21, the legislative assembly of the Federal District, dominated by the left-leaning Party of the Democratic Revolution, voted 39-20 to amend the capital city’s civil code to change the definition of marriage to the “free uniting of two people." The new definition will allow same-sex couples to adopt children, apply for joint bank loans, inherit property and be name as beneficiaries on each other’s insurance policies.
 The Federal District, which includes Mexico City, has its own legislature and is similar to Washington, D.C. -- a federal enclave that serves as the nation’s capital. The move by the district’s local legislature is the most recent to send shockwaves across the country. In April 2007, the same legislature legalized unrestricted abortion through the 12th week of pregnancy. The law was challenged as unconstitutional by the federal government, but Mexico’s Supreme Court later upheld the measure.
The right-of-center National Action Party of President Felipe Calderon, which currently governs Mexico, has promised to fight the same-sex marriage law in the courts, noting particular concern about the adoption provisions, while Church leaders and the College of Catholic Lawyers have decried its passage.
In a Sunday homily following the adoption of the law, Cardinal Norberto Rivera, Archbishop of Mexico City, said the measure attacks "the essence of the family.” Armando Martinez, president of the College of Catholic Lawyers, told the press his group would support legal challenges to the new law, and has planned demonstrations against same-sex marriages in the sprawling city.
"We are going to carry out exhaustive campaigns at the offices of the justices of the peace in the city, using acts of peaceful civil resistance to prevent homosexual couples from being married," Martinez said.
"They have given Mexicans the most bitter Christmas," Martínez told reporters. “They are permitting adoption and in one stroke of the pen have erased the term 'mother' and 'father.'” He has also called on traditional couples to boycott Mexico City as a site for their weddings.
Supporters of same-sex marriage said the law will make Mexico City a “vanguard city” among homosexuals and lead to an increase in tourism revenues. "Mexico City will become a center, where (gay) people from all over the world will be able to come and have their wedding, and then spend their honeymoon here," Alejandro Rojas, the city’s tourism secretary, told the Associated Press. "We are already in talks with some travel agencies that are planning to offer package tours that include flights, hotels, guides, and everything they need for the wedding, like banquets. We are going to become a city on a par with Venice or San Francisco."
The law permitting same-sex marriages in Mexico City takes effect in March.
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 12:34 AM By reddog
They used to send orphans to Catholic run facilities. I think they are better off being adopted by Gays. Don't you?
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 3:01 AM By BJ
Why do we accept the title 'gay' rather than sodomite.... which makes it plainer to understand what is being talked about?
Similarly, the taking of unborn human life gets called 'abortion' which again abstracts and helps distance the procedure from the awful stark reality. Our Lady of Guadalupe is surely weeping for the lost sheep of Mexico City.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 4:59 AM By 1abqdad
The turbulent history of Mexico is filled with attacks on its cultural foundation by socialists, communists, and heretics. It began in 1850 with the removal of any religious influence from government. This was followed in the 20th century with rebellious groups and the destructive influences of the USSR and Cuba, who wanted to take over all of Central America for obvious reasons. It is amazing that ANY of its Catholic heritage remains, given the intentional efforts of various anti-Catholic forces! We must pray for Mexico and the remaining Catholics that they will continue to strengthen and return Mexico to Her Catholic roots!
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 5:16 AM By Thomas Edward Miles
I'm thinking of BECOMING GAY, however, no blenders or toaster as wedding gift! Does anyone think Mexico City will any faster because of this EQUAL RIGHTS law?!!
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 7:39 AM By JLS
Well, they couldn't erase the Church by violence, so now they're trying seduction.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 9:37 AM By JLS
tem, you already are gay. Spare us your idea of a wedding gift, though.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 9:38 AM By JLS
No, reddog, the Catholic orphages that did the abuse were all gay ones ... so that's what happens when gays are in charge of kids, whether secretly or openly.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 9:48 AM By Peter
BJ - You moniker is "BJ". What are you talking about?
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 11:15 AM By Alsachti
Dear BJ,
Quote : Why do we accept the title 'gay' rather than sodomite ]
Because a gay is an homosexual, whereas a sodomite is someone, gay or straight, that practice anal intercourse. Moreover, sodomy does not concern lesbians.
Quote : the taking of unborn human life gets called 'abortion' ]
Abortion does not refer to the taking of human life. Abortion is the removal of a foetus.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 11:40 AM By Ronnie
"They used to send orphans to Catholic run facilities. I think they are better off being adopted by Gays. Don't you?".....Reddog...No I don't think so considering as the Pope has stated you're actually doing violence to children and their development by placing them with people who have confused gender identity. Their disordered orientation is not only confusing to children but as we have witnessed from the mess in the homosexual Priest sex abuse scandal abuse is rampant in this lifestyle.....l
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 1:02 PM By JLS
Sodomy, contrary to the gay apologist Alsachti, is any man on man, or woman on woman sex whether physical or fantasy.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 2:05 PM By Anne
Adoption by anyone short of a perfect Joseph and Mary couple is "doing violence" to children. That means 99%+ of adoptions by heterosexual couples are "doing violence" to children. Many opposite sexl couples do far more violence to children than same sex couples. Some same sex couples are as heterosexual as the Queen of England and her nanny.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 2:35 PM By fatiam
Eternal salvation lost.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 3:35 PM By Mark from PA
Yes, Reddog, the orphans would have been better off being adopted by qualified gay people than being in those orphanages in Ireland, that is for sure. Alsachti is correct, gay refers to a person's orientation, sodomite refers to a particular practice that is done by gay and straight people.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 4:40 PM By Eric
Sodom was a hostile heterosexual society that acted out power trips by raping unwilling strangers of the same sex. The nice gay people had long left that town leaving the hostile heterosexuals with no one to pick on but nice strangers like the two angels that came to town.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 4:49 PM By Laurette Elsberry
Why does CalCatholic allow Mark in PA, Grisha, Thomas Ewdard Miles and others like them to promote the sodomite and homosexualist lifestyle? These "gay" apologists are are very subtle and insidious in getting their points across. The devil must be pleased!!!!!!!!!.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 5:58 PM By Abeca Christian
Mark from PA again you speak so very foolish. No children do not benefit to be adopted to a gay couple. Science has shown that children do better with a mom and a dad stable home life. Again you just infuriate me with your silly posts!
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 6:18 PM By T. Arden
I can see her lawyering on J Day using this flawed reasoning against the Lord. I feel sorry for her.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 6:45 PM By JLS
Nonsense, Anne. Most normal parents, and most of them are normal, especially when they are not glued to the TV set, treat their kids well. We do not need perfection to thrive as individuals or as a society, because of the resilient nature created by God, along with His mercy. He loves us to the extent that He has provided for us a way to unite with Him. All same sex couples violate their kids with perversion; whereas, most heterosexual couples do not commit grave sins in teaching their kids.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 6:48 PM By JLS
PA, your shrewd jesuistry comes to the fore once again ... "qualified gay couples"; this concept is an oxymoron, PA, because there is no such thing as qualified gay couples when it comes to parenting children. Secondly, and your smokescreen, is to distinguish morally between gay couple parenting and the gay Irish child abuse scandal ... it's the same thing, PA. Both are extremely corrupt.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 7:18 PM By JLS
Where does "Venice" appear in the article other than in the title?
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 7:20 PM By JLS
Anne, what are you talking about the English for in the sense of heterosexual reputation? You need desparately to disengage from the homosexual lifestyle and get a life where you are not confused.
|
Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 9:45 PM By Anne T.
Heeeello? Something seems to be missing in your thinking, reddog. The majority of the children molested by priests in this country were boys molested by men. Please don't give me the old canard that it was because the priests had easy access to the boys and not the girls. The whole point is that they should not have had easy access to the boys, either. Non-relatives should not be working alone with children--period, to protect the children and the reputation of the adults. Even in private homes there should be other older children or teens around or another adult if the child is not related. Homosexual adoption certainly is not the answer to the problem.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 05, 2010 3:03 AM By BJ
So a human foetus is not human life,( what then?) and can be terminated,sorry 'removed'( there you go again) at will? From the Biblical destruction of Sodom we get the term sodomy and the adjective sodomite... to describe the homosexual in general and if required the abhorrent behaviour of either homos or heteros.
Apologists for sinful behaviour use semantics to distance themselves from cold, harsh realities. Why not put your hands up and clearly state that you will NEVER accept Christian doctrines or disciplines unless the holy scriptures are rewritten to accomodate your particular desires? That would be way more honest. All of us have desires which are contrary to religious teachings. None of us are any better intrinsically........but WE accept that 'what is wrong is wrong' and we ask for the grace and inspiration to overcome our weaknesses.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 05, 2010 10:28 AM By Mark from PA
JLS, read what happened to those kids in Irish orphanages. Read about what the Christian Brothers did. Those orphanages were like prisons and the kids were treated like inmates. In the institutions for boys, beatings and sexual abuse were systemic. And most of the abuse was done by brutal heterosexual men. The Christian Brothers did pay restitution, however, on the condition that the names of those that beat and raped children were not publicized. Too bad they weren't as interested in protecting the kids as they were in protecting the reputations of the abusers.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 06, 2010 6:36 AM By BJ
As someone who spent time in an Irish religious orphanage i testify that i was NEVER abused in any way. There are many thousands like me who would have died had it not been for the religious orders who provided food,clothing,shelter, education and a 'future'.... but that doesn't suit the sulfuric anti religious frenzy. These people prefer to ignore the ratios involved to promote the myth that all religious were sexual( very largely 'homo', by the way) deviants, when infact the reality is the opposite.Physical punishment( it was called 'corporal') was the norm in Britain and Ireland at the time and was extensively encouraged by the governments and 'educators' of that time period, and was practised in homes all over the country, not just institutions! I am among the many, many thousands of the living proof of the protection, love and generosity provided by the religious orders in Ireland circa 1957. There'll always be no shortage of Judas'...... but get it into perspective. If you offer the same amount of 'compensation' money( avg. 70,000Euro!) for people to come forward with my kind of experience, you would see a much more balanced picture of the reality. That doesn't mean that evil didn't take place, but it certainly wasn't just in 'religious' institutions and the physical punsihment cannot be( conveniently) taken out of its historical context.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 06, 2010 3:47 PM By Mark from PA
BJ, that is good that you were never abused. Are you a woman? In general, from what I have read, girls in these institutions were not subject to sexual abuse. Sexual abuse was mostly present in institutions for boys run by the Christian Brothers. Some children were abused by the Mercy Sisters, other orders of religious sisters had better records. From what I have read, the religious sisters were pretty much exploited in a way. Many of the sisters did not have adequate training and they had too many children per sister to care for so that in many institutions, children did not get individual attention and were regimented. So many sisters worked 16 hour days, 365 days a year, with no respite. In my opinion, the Irish government pretty much got child care on the cheap from the orders of religious women and should have done more to make sure that the children and the religious sisters were not in need. Those in the religious life who nurtured in gentle kindness needy children, and never raised a hand in anger against them, need to be commended for their kindness and generosity.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 06, 2010 8:51 PM By simone_dubois
Reddog, Alsachti, Mark from PA, TEM, et al. Absolute ridiculousness. Thanks for the laughs though I truly will pray for you, your patronizing condescension and fallicy for argument is extremely funny. I am reminded of the sophmoric rhetoric in philosophy courses I took in college with all the young kids who didn't know who they where and I gotta say, quite sincerely, thanks for the laughs.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 06, 2010 11:06 PM By JLS
No, PA, the sexual abuse of boys in the places you mention was not done by heterosexual men, but by homosexuals. Same sex sex is homosexual not heterosexual. As bad as heterosexuals can be, you have to respect what St Paul says about homosexuality being the consequence of sin. It is the bottom of the barrel, PA.
|
Posted Wednesday, January 06, 2010 11:13 PM By JLS
The population of Sodom and Gomorrah was homosexual. Perversion leads to perverted thinking such as Eric demonstrates, when he claims that it was heterosexuals that raped others of the same sex. Eric's confused anti-thinking represents what happens to the mind when the person defies God and nature. Eric, there is one way you can find relief from your stumbling thoughts, and that is to humble yourself before God. Believe this, Eric, you are no match for God, although this may come as a shock to you.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 12:07 AM By Abeca Christian
BJ you are right. We had many orphanages who had wonderful priests, I only know this because my grandmother use to tell us wonderful stories of saints who served in these orphanages. I'm sure like with anything, there was abuse in some situations. I guess if you look at reality, abuse can't be prevented, it happens anywhere there is a person who is defected. Since adoption to homosexual couples is new these past years, don't be surprised that in the future, you will hear a lot of stories of abuse from these little ones, growing into adult years, the truth will come out. Society has damaged these poor little ones, society has definitely and continues to screw up our youth.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 4:24 AM By Mark from PA
Note to Simone Dubois, "Thank for the laughs?" I don't think that sexual and physical abuse of children is all that funny a topic. I don't think that prejudice against a group of people that one despises is all that funny either.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 4:52 AM By BJ
Thousands of boys my age were given life and a future thanks to religious orders in 1950s Ireland. Yes, the government was delighted to have a cheap service and were surely aware of the use of strict corporal punishment as it was 'normal' thoroughout Ireland and Britain at the time,right up until the 70's!
Today's 'pro-choice' promoters would probably not see a mortal sin had all we Irish orphans been 'removed as foetuses'( i.e. 'removed' to the garbage can or incinerator) from the womb, before birth. But yet they so quickly and incessantly cast up the sins of those relatively few( yes, unforgivable) Judas apostles in Ireland( and wherever) who also succumb to evil, unGodly, scripturally prohibited practises. We are ALL stumbling sinners, but those who insist that their particular lifestyle 'choice', sexual inclination or whatever behaviour has been misrepresented by 'archaic religious ideas' and simply MUST be made acceptable, are the most misguided and most vulnerable to eternal pain. Nobody wants that.Honestly. Take it from a fully grown 'foetus' who was 'not removed/terminated', but rather saved by those religious orders.The far far greater number were good,sincere,overworked 24/7, unpaid!, untrained in child care struggling, Brothers and Nuns, saving many thousands from abandonment and destitution. Some did despicable things, May God Forgive Them, but let us never forget the much greater Love that was also shown and which the world's media has conveniently ignored.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 8:36 AM By Ski Ven
That was a good one, Mark from PA. You're such a nice person. You are certainly much nicer than the rest of us creeps. Saying that a group of people that you disagree with are the creepiest on earth is LOL material for you. Yeah, that's a really nice thing to do. I guess you thought that we already forgot about that.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 10:02 AM By RR
Ski Ven: I didn't forget. Here's the proof: Posted Monday, January 04, 2010 4:08 PM By Mark from PA
"Oh my gosh, Peter, you have me laughing here. LOL I have to admit that some of the things that some people say here are scary." Article: "Mentally disturbed or something." He laughed (LOL) at Peter, who was criticizing Canisius, JLS, and others who state Church teachings.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 10:09 AM By Abeca Christian
Ski Ven you bring up a good point there! But I do have to agree with PA abuse is nothing to laugh about. I don't find it funny at all. Nor do I find funny calling the faithful creeps and haters either. Simone Dubois I guess it is OK to have a good sense of humor when dealing with the lukewarm, so maybe that is why you found some comments funny.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 12:01 PM By Ski Ven
Abeca, PA was trying to twist Simone's words. Simone was not laughing at child abuse at PA knows it.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 8:03 PM By simone_dubois
No the content is not funny but the technique certianly is. Thank you Ski Ven and Abeca Christian please be assured I do not laugh at the subject. It is the absurdity of rationalizing the absurd that struck me as funny. See above post where PA essentially says that BJ must have been a woman because BJ escaped the abuse. MarkPA refuses to allow a good and kind thing to be said lest we think well of most religious, most religious are good and do good. Instead MarkPA spins that the only way a person could have benefitted was if they weren't a man. And the oh so condescention of the tone. Pure spin. Pure disingenuousness. Pure absurdity. Truly the sophistry of it made me laugh. The dark side is the purposeful 'spin' of those who wish to portray good as evil and evil as good. There is no reasoning with those who just want to spin to justify their position. ... ie., some can only be cast out with prayer and fasting.
|
Posted Thursday, January 07, 2010 10:06 PM By Abeca Christian
Ski Ven I just re-read the post and you are right. I guess I fell for one of PA's twisted comments. Thanks for pointing that out.
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 9:36 AM By Ski Ven
I know what Simone is talking about. Mark from PA is one of the most funniest posters here. I wonder if he is still telling everyone about how pious he is. I wonder if the people at his parish are used to seeing someone levitate.
|
Posted Friday, January 08, 2010 11:33 PM By JLS
The nuns used to wash PA's mouth out with soap, and now he is exacting his vengeance by twisting tongue like a knife.
|
Posted Saturday, January 09, 2010 6:50 PM By Mark from PA
Ski Ven, I don't really know all that much about levitation, sorry. I don't think I am one of the most funniest.
|
Posted Tuesday, January 12, 2010 9:27 AM By Ski Ven
Yeah PA, you don't think you are one of the most funniest. You think Peter is. Touche!
|
Posted Sunday, January 17, 2010 10:32 PM By Abeca Christian
I have thought about teenagers who may be adopted out to a homosexual couple. Can you imagine, what if the teenager objects? Does the teenager have a right to object to being adopted to such couples? I don't know what rights these youths have when it comes to these types of situations. I know that younger children, as young as babies have no say so because they are so innocent and are to young to form a moral and logic opinion.
|
Posted Saturday, January 23, 2010 8:59 PM By pharmacy tech
nice post. thanks.
|
© California Catholic Daily 2010. All Rights Reserved.
|