Vatican Launches 'Anti-Gay Media Blitz,' Compares Gay Marriage To Polygamy, Polyandry

[MidnightVoice]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...n_2119557.html

According to Reuters, the governing body of the Catholic Church launched an anti-gay media campaign over the weekend, pledging to never stop fighting attempts to "erase the privileged role of heterosexual marriage" -- a union it called "an achievement of civilization."

The Associated Press writes:

In a front-page article in Saturday’s Vatican newspaper L’Osservatore Romano, the Holy See sought to frame itself as the lone voice of courage in opposing initiatives to give same-sex couples legal recognition. In a separate Vatican Radio editorial, the pope’s spokesman asked sarcastically why gay marriage proponents don’t now push for legal recognition for polygamous couples as well...

The Vatican’s anti-gay marriage media blitz came after three U.S. states approved same-sex marriage by popular vote in the election that returned Barack Obama to the U.S. presidency, Spain upheld its gay marriage law, and France pushed ahead with legislation that could see gay marriage legalized early next year.

"You could say that the church, on this level, is bound to lose," historian Lucetta Scaraffia wrote for the L’Osservatore Romano. "But this is not the case."

Scaraffia added that the "church's fight on moral issues such as gay marriage and abortion has drawn support and admiration from many non-Catholics," according to the Religion News Service.

[Discotrish]

Polygamists/Polyandrists have been persecuted along with homosexuals. The question is whether modern democracies such as the U.S. will continue denying polygamists/polyandrists their civil rights, even though they belong to a minority culture.

Patti

[OpIv37]

gotta love the desperation false equivalency argument.....

[chernobylwraiths]

considering the old testament promoted polygamy...

[imbondz]

considering the old testament promoted polygamy...

promoted? show me anywhere in the old testament where God promoted polygamy.

[mysticsoto]

promoted? show me anywhere in the old testament where God promoted polygamy.

The bible is the word of God and it seems to acknowledge polygamy as acceptable:

Deuteronomy 21:15-17

New International Version (NIV)

The Right of the Firstborn

¹⁵ If a man has two wives, and he loves one but not the other, and both bear him sons but the firstborn is the son of the wife he does not love, ¹⁶ when he wills his property to his sons, he must not give the rights of the firstborn to the son of the wife he loves in preference to his actual firstborn, the son of the wife he does not love. ¹⁷ He must acknowledge the son of his unloved wife as the firstborn by giving him a double share of all he has. That son is the first sign of his father’s strength. The right of the firstborn belongs to him.

[MidnightVoice]

From Wki:

Many of the Old Testament Prophets and Patriarchs had multiple wives, including Lamech, Abraham, Jacob, Esau, Gideon, Saul, David, Solomon, Rehoboam, Elkanah, Ashur, Abijah and Jehoiada. Some interpretations also suggest Moses had a second wife in Tharbis. Other polygamists identified in the Bible include Ahab, Ahasuerus, Ashur, Belshazzar, Benhadad, Caleb, Eliphaz, Ezra, Jehoiachin, Jehoram, Jerahmeel, Joash, Machir, Manasseh, Mered, Nahor, Shaharaim, Simeon, and Zedekiah.

The first polygamist mentioned in the Bible is Lamech, whose two wives were Adah and Zillah (Gen 4:19).[1] Abraham's 3+ wives were Sarah, Hagar (Gen 16:3, 21:1-13), Keturah (Gen 25:1), and concubines (which are also referred to as "wives" in other parts of the Bible) (Gen 25:6). The concubines were Hagar (Gen 16:3, 25:6) and Keturah (Gen 25:6, I Chr 1:32). There is no reason to presume that he had concubines other than Hagar and Keturah. Hagar, like the slave women of Jacob's wives, was more of a surrogate mother than a concubine in the normal sense as it appears that after using her in place of Sarah to provide a child, Abraham does not appear to have had sexual relations with her any more. Jacob's four wives are Leah and Rachel (Gen 29:28) and despite an oath with their father Laban to not take any additional wives (Gen 31:48-54), Jacob took Bilhah (Gen 30:4) and Zilpah (Gen 30:9). As with Hagar, Bilhah and Zilpah were surrogate mothers to provide children on behalf of their mistresses, Leah and Rachel. It does not appear that Jacob continued to have sexual relations with the two women. In each of the three cases of Sarah, Leah and Rachel, each woman commanded her slave to have sexual relations with their husbands respectively. Neither Abraham nor Jacob took it upon themselves to approach their wives' slave women. Moses' 2 wives Zipporah (Ex 2:21, Ex 18:1-6) and an Ethiopian (Gk "burnt face")(Cu****e < כושי, kooshiy, ultimate meaning unknown but from ancient times signifying Upper (southern) Egypt, Nubia, and dark skinned (see Jer 13:23) or even red haired people) woman (Num 12:1), which Moses was permitted to marry by God, despite all the rest of his people being forbidden to take a foreign (because foreigners were per se pagan) wife. There is dissent on this. Some think that Zipporah, daughter (Ex 2:21) of a Midianite priest (Ex 2:16, Ex 18:1, 2), is the "Ethiopian" woman. Other opinion is that Zipporah died and Moses married an Ethiopian woman in her place. Interestingly enough, Aaron and Miriam were punished for disapproving of Moses' forbidden marriage. Gideon (also named Jerub-Baal) "had many wives" (Judges 8:29-32). Elkanah, Samuel the priest's father, had 2 wives: Hannah and Peninnah (1 Samuel 1:1-2). Often, people studying King David, get confused between his "wives" and "concubines" because the Bible calls 10 of his concubines "wives" in several places. An accurate list of David's wives would include at least 4 named wives: 1) Michal (1 Sam 18:27, 19:11-18, 25:44; 2 Sam 3:13-14, 6:20-23), 2) Abigail of Carmel (1 Sam 25:39, 1 Chr 3), 3) Ahinoam of Jezreel (1 Sam 25:43, 1 Chr 3), 4) Eglah (2 Sam 3:4-5, 1 Chr 3), and 5) Bathsheba (2 Sam 12:24). David also took "more wives and concubines" in 2 Sam 5:13, 12:7-8, 1 Chr 14:3, bringing the total women to a minimum of 5 + 2+ additional wives + 2+ additional concubines = 9+ women. Three additional women are mentioned, but we are not told if they are wives or concubines: 1) Maacah (2 Sam 3:3, 1 Chr 3), 2) Abital (2 Sam 3:3-4, 1 Chr 3), and 3) Haggith (2 Sam 3:3, 1 Chr 3). The new total is 12+ women for King David. And lastly, there are the 10 concubines, or "wives" as they are also referred to as, in 2 Sam 5:13, 15:16, 16:21-23, 1 Chr 14:3), bringing David's total women to at least 22+ "wives/concubines". David's son, Solomon, chose 700 wives and 300 concubines, totaling 1,000 women in 1 Kings 11:3. The Hebrew and Greek terms translated into English as "wife" simply means "woman," that is, "female human being." It is by context that it has to be determined by a translator whether it should be translated "wife" or "woman" ("woman" < "wif" woman as we mean by it today + "mann" human being, individual member of mankind) the kind of human being suitable as a wife as we mean by it today.

Seemingly in support of polygamy, in addition to the many examples of plural marriage, the Pentateuch also lists guidelines and rules concerning the taking of multiple wives; noting that "If he takes another wife to himself, he shall not diminish her food, her clothing, or her marital rights, [Ex 21:10] and making it an obligation for men whose brothers have left a widow to marry her and support her family.[Deut 25:5–10] These verses encourage or promote polygamy and there are no verses in the law or Old Testament Bible that clearly forbid this practice.

Further is the practice of the levir (Latin "husband's brother," that is, the widow of one's brother: the surviving brother is the widow's brother-in-law). The Hebrew is יִבֵּם, yabam, yavam, signifies to perform the duty of a brother-in-law to the widow of one's brother who did not provide an heir to her husband (De 25:5). Its literal meaning is unknown. The firstborn child, or son, resulting from the sexual relations between a man and his brother's widow was listed and considered the son of the deceased (De 25:6). No allowance is given for a man who already had a wife. If he does not want to take his brother's widow, she has the right to publicly denounce and insult him (De 25:7-10). The first reference to this custom, which was later incorporated into the Deuteronomic Code, is found in Gen 38:8, 9. When Onan did not want to provide a son to his deceased brother, Er, but did not want to be publicly denounced and insulted by his brother's widow[original research?], he conformed with the requirement to have sexual relations with her but to avoid providing an heir to his brother's name, thereby losing the right to inherit his brother's estate to the child, he withdrew his member from his sister-in-law and "destroyed" his sperms "on the ground" (Ge. 38:9). For this act YHWH (LORD in the KJV) killed him (Ge 38:10).

The Pentateuch also gives a list of laws that applies to the person of Judean kings. One of the laws regarding kingship states: "The king must not acquire great numbers of horses for himself or make the people return to Egypt to get more of them, for the Lord has told you, "You are not to go back that way again." He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray." (De 17:16-17, New International Version (NIV) Bible translation). The New Living Translation (NLT) also gives an accurate translation of these verses: "The king must not build up a large stable of horses for himself or send his people to Egypt to buy horses, for the Lord has told you, ‘You must never return to Egypt.’ The king must not take many wives for himself, because they will turn his heart away from the Lord. And he must not accumulate large amounts of wealth in silver and gold for himself." Other versions substitute "multiply" instead of "take many", but this is more of a confusing translation because it alludes inaccurately that "more than one" may not be permitted. However, if you look at Deut 17:16, the same word "multipy" or "take many" is used with regard to horses, and clearly a king will need more than one horse. So these verses are referring to not amassing a great number of horses and wives.

The prophet Nathan speaking for God confronting David with the murder of Uriah the Hittite said that he (God) would have given David more wives if he had wanted them.[2Samuel 12:8] God Himself, Who is usually (except to Arians and those with a similar belief) understood according to John 1:1-4 to be the God later incarnated, born of a woman, is portrayed as a bigamist (a polygamist with two wives only) in Jeremiah 3, Ezekiel 16 and 23. And in the New Testament Jesus is portrayed variously as the husband of His wife, the church (Rev 21:9, 22:17), in a strictly monogamous relationship, teaching that He has but one church, and as the "husband" of each individual Christian, who has a relationship with Christ analogous to the relationship of a wife to her husband in the flesh.

[imbondz]

Many men in the old testament had multiple wives, harems...etc. But just because they had many wives, doesn't mean God promoted it. He never does. Thanks for trying though. No where in the bible does it say, 'have as many wives as you want, eat drink and be merry'.

[mysticsoto]

Now you'll get the standard 'disregard the OT' answer...

[BuffaloWingEater]

why should i listen to the catholic church anymore. they are an institution that knowingly allowed child molestation and swept it under the rug. they need to repent for their sins.

[BuffaloWingEater]

Many men in the old testament had multiple wives, harems...etc. But just because they had many wives, doesn't mean God promoted it. He never does. Thanks for trying though. No where in the bible does it say, 'have as many wives as you want, eat drink and be merry'.

did God denounce it?

[mysticsoto]

Many men in the old testament had multiple wives, harems...etc. But just because they had many wives, doesn't mean God promoted it. He never does. Thanks for trying though. No where in the bible does it say, 'have as many wives as you want, eat drink and be merry'.

So let's reverse that...does God condemn polygamy?

[Ingtar33]

Many men in the old testament had multiple wives, harems...etc. But just because they had many wives, doesn't mean God promoted it. He never does. Thanks for trying though. No where in the bible does it say, 'have as many wives as you want, eat drink and be merry'.

correct. Though God outlines proper behavior in the instance of multiple wives there are many occasions where God is indicated as encouraging or endorsing just one wife for one man. In fact i could quote the scripture regarding this, in both the old and new testament if i had the time. perhaps later I'll look it up. Though i recall in Samuel and Kings (or maybe it was chronicles) it speaking negatively about the multiple wives both David and Solomon took (as well as with other kings of Israel and Judea), and how God was displeased with this action (and i'm not talking about Bathsheba, which was a different and more atrocious matter all together).

[DraftBoy]

Sweet 1 total response that actually is on topic of how ridiculous the vatican is being with this campaign. Who cares whether the Bible technically endorses/condems polygamy. Has nothing to do with the Vatican, again, being idiotic.

[Ingtar33]

Sweet 1 total response that actually is on topic of how ridiculous the vatican is being with this campaign. Who cares whether the Bible technically endorses/condems polygamy. Has nothing to do with the Vatican, again, being idiotic.

True, i got off topic and meant to amend my answer directly to the Vatican's responce. I need to read what paul's letters say again on the issue of multiple wives (he does speak of it, but i think he qualified his comments with "this is my opinion only")... the trick is the Catholic church has this habit of "adding to" the bible, which incidentally IS directly commented on in the bible as the action of a false prophet or idolator... which i suppose was at the root of the propagandist reformation. If the bible at no point expressly outlines polygamy as a sin, then the catholic church is biblically wrong yet again (something that is sadly not that uncommon).

that said gay sexual relations are explicitly highlighted multiple times in both the old and new testament as a sin. there really isn't any bend on that issue for Christians (or Jews or Muslims i guess). Which is alright, as the bible makes it pretty clear that following Gods will correctly likely will never make you popular, nor will it be easy. The type of Christianity which is accepted by everyone is the type of Christianity which is in violation of itself. Christians desires to be popular are in direct contrast to this biblical fact... and probably would lead them into sin and away from the word.

[chernobylwraiths]

promoted? show me anywhere in the old testament where God promoted polygamy.

Who said "God" promoted it? I said the book does.

[MidnightVoice]

Many men in the old testament had multiple wives, harems...etc. But just because they had many wives, doesn't mean God promoted it. He never does. Thanks for trying though. No where in the bible does it say, 'have as many wives as you want, eat drink and be merry'.

Don't you mean trying and succeeding?

The prophet Nathan speaking for God confronting David with the murder of Uriah the Hittite said that he (God) would have given David more wives if he had wanted them.[2Samuel 12:8] God Himself, Who is usually (except to Arians and those with a similar belief) understood according to John 1:1-4 to be the God later incarnated, born of a woman, is portrayed as a bigamist (a polygamist with two wives only) in Jeremiah 3, Ezekiel 16 and 23.

[JoeMama]

The Catholic Church is so stupid.

For a bunch of virgin men that want to rape little boys, you'd think they'd push gay marriage and cross their fingers that society crumbles so far, that no one notices when they perv on kids.

[DraftBoy]

True, i got off topic and meant to amend my answer directly to the Vatican's responce. I need to read what paul's letters say again on the issue of multiple wives (he does speak of it, but i think he qualified his comments with "this is my opinion only")... the trick is the Catholic church has this habit of "adding to" the bible, which incidentally IS directly commented on in the bible as the action of a false prophet or idolator... which i suppose was at the root of the propagandist reformation. If the bible at no point expressly outlines polygamy as a sin, then the catholic church is biblically wrong yet again (something that is sadly not that uncommon).

that said gay sexual relations are explicitly highlighted multiple times in both the old and new testament as a sin. there really isn't any bend on that issue for Christians (or Jews or Muslims i guess). Which is alright, as the bible makes it pretty clear that following Gods will correctly likely will never make you popular, nor will it be easy. The type of Christianity which is accepted by everyone is the type of Christianity which is in violation of itself. Christians desires to be popular are in direct contrast to this biblical fact... and probably would lead them into sin and away from the word.

As a Christian I openly support Gay Marriage and do not support the stance that homosexuality is a sin.

[JoeMama]

As a Christian I openly support Gay Marriage and do not support the stance that homosexuality is a sin.

Why should you?

Most of the anti-gay rhetoric is crammed into the Old Testament, which also says that you should have blood sacrifices upon the tabernacle on your wedding day. And that women should be stoned to death if they aren't virgins on their wedding day.

Christians pick and choose what they want to believe all the time. How they can pretend they don't is insane to me.

Yes, you can abandon stupid ideas. That's what sane people do.