www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall Queen angers gay groups

Does the King of Spain have to sign each act of the Cortes? I don't know, but would be interested.

If His Majesty must sign each such act, I would take it for granted that the King has no power of veto - and no desire to "go on his travels again", if I may borrow a phrase from Charles II of England and Scotland. If the Church wishes to take effective action involving the Spanish government, the Church must address herself to the government, not to the King.

The King's most important quasi-political role is to ensure that democratic government persists and there is no "restoration" of Fascism. Other than that, he keeps the royal nose out of politics. By all accounts, His Majesty is doing an amazingly good job and is likely to leave the Kingdom intact to his son. God grant that it be so.

Fr. Serge

It's amazing that people could become angry about a person expressing there views in a book or interview, but that's the new world we live in. I applaud Queen Sofia for her stance, but I'm not at all surprised that her husband Juan Carlos would sign a bill legalizing homosexual unions. This is the same man who pushed for the legalization of Spain's various Communist parties in the 1970's, when a number of people still had vivid memories of the burning of churches, and the mutilated corpses of countless priests and nuns, courtesy of those parties.

Don't you know that intolerance is intolerable?

At the time that the King insisted on the legalization of the Communist Party, lots of people had plenty of highly unsavory memories of Francisco Franco, but his war-making activities and his techniques of governing Spain. The King's concern was to heal the wounds of Spain, not to increase them.

Dolores Ibarruri is now dead, but she was elected to the new Cortes from the same constitutency which had elected her forty years previously. Somehow that seems to indicate that the King knew what he was doing.

Would you have preferred the King to keep the Communist Party illegal at the cost of another Civil War?

Fr. Serge

I used gender as there is a filter on words that begin with S and end with Xs...

Problem solved!


but honestly now - the issue is mainly a media and propaganda issue.
Somehow, and I hope I am very wrong, it seems that the Church has nothing to do with media and media usage!
Homosexual people are winning every battle because they convince people of what they think by using the sympathetic media while the church speaks not - or worse - speaks in a language that cannot be understood by most readers.

The Holy See should buy the NY times!

"winning every battle?" Did you really not notice the results on Proposition 8 in California last week?

Overstating the case is unwise, to put it mildly.

Fr. Serge

Let us remember that "homosexual people" are our brothers and sisters in Christ.

Telling the Queen that she may not express her opinions in public is a call for censorship. You have (inadvertently?) called for the censorship of Christian values. This is not a political issue. It is a moral issue. Homosexual people deserve our respect and help as Christ calls them to refrain from homosexual sex. The Queen has a right and a responsibility to work condemn gay marriage, gay pride marches and abortion for they are and always will be immoral.

No it is not overstating the case. The homosexual lobby is now petitioning the court to throw out the Constitutional Amendment banning homosexual marriage.

Didn't you see the protesting in front of Christian and Mormon churches? It even made CNN, though CNN made the Christians and Mormons look like the evil aggressors for not abandoning Christ's Teaching.

Actually I didn't see the news today at all - I'm either doing liturgical things or preparing to do more of them.

Fr. Serge

Homosexaulity is a moral issue,but legislation relating to it is a political issue. Saying that Queen Sofia shouldn't publically remark on legal/political issues in Spain may seem like censorship, but it is simply saying she should follow the conventions of constitutional monarchy. As I have pointed out one of the main critics of her statements was the political party who led the opposition to SSM in Spain. this is because they realize she was speaking out of turn. It may seem like censorship to those of us who live in republics, but is the norm in European style monarchies. In fact in most monarchies the monarch and thier family aren't even allowed to vote. If she feels it is her place to further a particualr political view, perhaps she should advocate for her husband's throne to be abolished and replaced by an elected head of state. But don't hold your breath.

Unless it is liturgical... then the rules get thrown out the window in order to curry favor with some group that is crying out about oppression

<sarcasm>Opps... did I type that out loud... MY BAD... Please forgive me... </sarcasm>

Dear David,

Truth be told, I'm a constitutional monarchist and you make a salient point about royalty not getting involved in politics.

A monarch is not only someone who smiles and waves, but also someone who advises and consults, however, - something that republicans often forget in their overall assessment of the role of contemporary monarchs. When the His Royal Highness the King of Spain signed that bill into law, he did so as part of his constitutional duties as the Sovereign, irrespective of his own views on the matter. The fact that he did sign it into law does not mean anything about his personal views on the subject of the particular law.

But the King can and does take his own initiative. For instance, when Spain's generals were preparing to topple him, he invited each one of them to his room where he "smoothed things over" by invoking the historic traditions of the Spanish Monarchy and by telling each general that "I am your King." Each general knelt and renewed their oath of allegiance to him and the revolution was over.

What his consort said was not and cannot be construed to be "political." It could be in the American context, but not in the European.

It would have been political in the true sense if she said that homosexuals have "no right whatever." Then that would have been a truly political stance.

She was only commenting on how homosexual union might be recognized so as to safeguard the historical, natural understanding of marriage. The Queen of Spain cannot be asked to ignore the Catholic moral imperatives which are also imbedded in the royal culture of Spain.

Again, at no time did she deny homosexual unions any rights in terms of benefits of any kind, or did she ever contend that they should not exist. She was only bringing a Catholic, natural law perspective to bear on what marriage has always meant in a Christian society (and many others too).

Spanish politicians in general give a grudging acknowledgement to the Monarchy and I daresay it will still take time for them to get used to having a crowned head of state in contemporary times. They may believe that the Monarchy is a matter only of esthetics and the stuff of which tourism is made. But then, why have a Monarchy, if this is so? Why not simply have an elected head of state whose loyalty is primarily to the political interests that elected him or her?

A Monarchy is nothing if it does not defend and promote traditional values - that is its job.

Thank God for sovereigns like the Queen of Spain.

Alex

Legislation regarding abortion is a moral issue with political dimensions.

Legislation regarding homosexual sex and special rights for homosexuals is a moral issue with political dimensions.

All legislation and law is rooted in morality.

Saying that anyone should not speak to these issues is censorship. Period.

It's a self censorship that goes with the job of being royalty. The writing of a biography is a first in Europe as far as I can tell. I would be unthinkable in other kingdoms. There are other avenues available to the Queen to allow her to make her views known on a number of topics, they are just as powerful, just not so in your face. The Gay lobby in Spain is not to be sneezed at, as Spain has a huge Gay business network (clubs etc)and ranks with Germany and The Netherlands in it's size. A lot of this is foreign owned.