News

Catholic Church should have no part in gay marriage debate

Catholic Church should have no part in gay marriage debate

Louisa Wall, above, the MP who authored New Zealand’s same-sex marriage bill, has slammed the Catholic Church for poking its nose into Australia’s postal survey on gay marriage.

Wall is reported here as saying that, given its record of child sexual abuse, the Church has no moral authority to interfere with the same-sex marriage ballot currently being held in Australia.

She said that she was perplexed by the prominent role of the Catholic Church and its leaders in the marriage survey.

I can’t understand why they haven’t been told to not lead the ‘no’ campaign. They don’t have any moral authority. How can you, when your institution over 70 years actively covered up all the sexual abuse of children?

The process they’re leading is affecting all the LGBT young people. It’s just disgusting.

Earlier this week, Brisbane Archbishop Mark Coleridge, above, said love between two people of the same sex was:

Like the love of friends. It is love and it is valuable but it’s not and it can’t be the kind of love that we call marriage.

In making his argument against same-sex marriage, Coleridge pointed out that siblings cannot marry siblings and parents cannot marry their children.

Three Catholic archdioceses — Sydney, Hobart, and Broken Bay — are listed as official partners with the Coalition for Marriage, which is spearheading the “vote no” campaign,

Last month, Archbishop of Melbourne Denis Hart wrote an open letter to Catholics urging a “no” vote and asking them to consider the consequences of legalising same-sex marriage. A similar directive was issued by the Archbishop of Perth, Timothy Costelloe.

Wall was surprised more Australians hadn’t told the Catholic Church to butt out of the same-sex marriage debate.

I wish you’d talk about it and say to them, ‘If you want to be a moral crusader, why don’t you eliminate child sexual abuse? And be a leader in that?’ Not against human rights, and especially in a process where young Australians are being so adversely affected.

I find it absolutely appalling that they’ve come out and been so vigorous in their opposition.

She also said the “scaremongering” from Catholic archbishops and former Prime Ministers John Howard and Tony Abbott was:

So yesterday. This legislation is about the future, it’s not about the past.

Speaking of Abbot, a giant mural recently popped up in a Sydney suburb showing Abbott marrying himself.  Artist Scottie Marsh created the mural to lampoon Abbott and to support the same-sex marriage postal survey.

Wall, formerly an elite sportsperson who represented New Zealand in rugby and netball before entering politics, said her bill had come in the midst of a global conversation about same-sex marriage.

It’s a bit like sport – timing is everything. We basically joined a global conversation, then had a very local conversation about the role of the state in marriage.

She said New Zealand’s debate on same-sex marriage was on the whole “incredibly collegial” but it did, at times get nasty.

She got hate mail saying she would go to hell, and that she had caused earthquakes and a whole lot of droughts.

It’s quite interesting they think that as a lesbian woman I had so much power!

Wall’s same-sex marriage bill was passed into law by the New Zealand parliament in 2013, making it the first country in the Asia Pacific to grant same-sex couples the right to marry.

13 responses to “Catholic Church should have no part in gay marriage debate”

  1. barriejohn says:

    Mark Coleridge:

    https://youtu.be/YOtpgz4L5d8

    “You won’t catch me with my trousers down!”

  2. L.Long says:

    The catlicks are still stoopid….”In making his argument against same-sex marriage, Coleridge pointed out that siblings cannot marry siblings and parents cannot marry their children.” Which pure BS as siblings CAN get married and have sex (and incest is OK in the damned buyBull!) The reason siblings don’t get married is because it is UNLAWFUL to be caught doing it! not because they can’t!

  3. Tee says:

    In your style “Catlicks are not stoopid” They know exactly what they are doing, they have been doing it for centuries and accumulating immense wealth and power with only the false notion of a god as a USP. Not Stoopid … right. Evil, dishonest, disingenuous, lying, criminal, immoral, hateful and any other perjorative adjective you can think of. But NOT stoopid.

  4. sailor1031 says:

    I agree with Ms Wall that RCC Inc. has no moral authority, but her focus is way too narrow. They lack moral authority as a result of their 1700-year crime spree involving thefts of huge tracts of lands, murder of heretics, murder of non-catholics, overthrow of legitimate governments, constant interference with and opposition to temporal authorities; more recently modern crimes such as running concentration camps, genocide, fraud on a grand scale, money laundering, helping nazis escape justice and murder as well as rape and seduction of the weak and defenseless going back not seventy years but seventeen hundred.

    More importantly however than lack of moral authority to intervene is their lack of any actual authority – nobody has ever voted for hostile takeover by RCC Inc.

    Barriejohn: I had never come across that TV series. I had to play it twice to get all the dialog but how funny and macabre all at the same time. Took me a few minutes to get the “Strawman” references…big difference between british and american TV. Thanks.

  5. gedediah says:

    Defending the indefensible is the surest way to losing your moral authority and losing your followers.

    Keep it up, I say.

  6. Q says:

    Name the crime and the Catholic Church is guilty of it. As for undermining legitimate governments just remember that Guy Fawkes was a catholic.And for me the only redeeming feature of the reign of Henry8 was his opposition to ambitions of the papacy.

  7. Broga says:

    “Archbishop Mark Coleridge, above, said love between two people of the same sex was:
    Like the love of friends. It is love and it is valuable but it’s not and it can’t be the kind of love that we call marriage.”

    Coleridge is celibate isn’t he? So what makes him such an expert on love within marriage?

  8. sailor1031 says:

    pounds side of head “wicker man”…..

  9. barriejohn says:

    @sailor1031: I think British humour has always been more obtuse. The League of Gentlemen (after an old film featuring Jack Hawkins) was a stage, radio and TV series that was , indeed, full of black humour. I thought Coleridge was the image of Edward in that photo, and the “poofter” reference was the icing on the cake. Glad you got it in the end – perseverance pays off!

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_League_of_Gentlemen

  10. AgentCormac says:

    Louisa Wall is absolutely right. While, inexplicably, the RCC professes to have some kind of claim on morality, every bit of evidence points in totally the opposite direction. These people are the absolute antithesis of morality. Their institution has, endlessly, shown itself to be entirely unscrupulous, dishonest and utterly corrupt.

    And once again, what is it with the obsession they have with love and sex? (Rhetorical question, by the way – because they know if they can control such basic human urges and impulses they can control everything else.) You only have to look at the hag Shelley Donahue a couple of threads back to see just how consumed they are with the subject. It’s not only unhealthy, it’s actually perverse. And what right do these people think they have to intervene in the relationships of others? How dare they assume that they somehow have the right to pass judgement on others?

    I’ll tell you this – if Shelley Donahue didn’t have sex before marriage (which I bet she did), I’m 100% sure she craved it, just the same as the rest of us. And if, back in the day, she and her partner had just used a condom instead of denial, then she might might well have enjoyed years of sexual pleasure instead of being the frigid, joyless person I have very little doubt that she is.

  11. Dionigi says:

    Perhaps the Archbishop of Melbourne could help me out by giving his opinion on what will be the consequences of same sex marriage. We can then check them against places where it is already legal and see if his ideas have come true.

  12. 1859 says:

    Since same sex marriage was enacted here in NZ in 2013, I have been waiting for the All Blacks to lose,storms to rage, pestilence to sweep the land, the social fabric to fall apart and general anarchy to reign supreme. But for some odd reason god seems to be in asleep. My guess is he has turned an omniscient blind eye to what is happening in NZ (All Blacks success etc.,) because there must be a whole heap of same sex marriages being celebrated in heaven given the propensity of angels with nothing to do but play harps all day and night.

  13. barriejohn says:

    @1859: I wouldn’t be so relaxed. There are those who think that God has been very angry with NZ before!

    http://www.findingtruthmatters.org/articles/earthquakes/How%20Should%20Christians%20Think%20About%20Earthquakes.pdf