Anti gay-marriage atheist??

[MTL]

CL, would it astound you to know that I agree with you? I have argued for gay civil unions, but I draw the line at forcing churches to hold marriages.  One is equality, another is about religion.  These two things have never been equal.  I believe that churches will hold gay marriages - some are already - but we should let them change in their own time and in their own way, as long as they aren't actively lobbying to take away the rights of homosexuals.

I agree too, and I don't believe many people have an agenda pushing for this to happen. If I'm wrong about that, I'd be interested to know! It would be against church/state separation as far as I'm aware to force churches to host gay marriages. Legally, their role is entirely ceremonial anyway.

Personally I find it disgusting that churches want not to marry gays, but as long as they aren't trying to force that rule on society at large I'm happy to leave them to it.

I also agree that churches will eventually start hosting gay marriages, simply out of necessity for survival. I think the new generations are going to buy the dogma less and less, and if the church doesn't accommodate, they're going to lose. I'm sure there will be some ridiculous caveat so they get out of actually changing their position, while acting contrary to their position.

The problem with calling same gender sex or marriage "immoral" is that it's a totally different usage of the word.  Murder, rape, theft etc. are immoral because they hurt people. As such, they are easily defended, even if religious people want to include religious reasons as well. But the "harm" being causes by homosexuality is now some sort of mysterious "sin" which doesn't actually do anything. I would love for anyone to tell me why it matters that it is a sin. What are the consequences? Is it simply that God puts a black mark against you? Are god's feelings hurt? I'm being serious. What are the consequences? Why does it matter at all? I can understand Christians not wanting to break their own doctrine, but to apply the word "immoral" in a blanket style to non believers implies there is some sort of negative consequences for their actions. What is this consequences? And if there isn't any, what does it mean or matter that it's immoral?

I'm very glad to hear that CL does not support the church lobbying to oppose gay marriage. To me, on the whole "bigot" issue, I call someone a bigot if their actions discriminate against people, or they support other people/organisations taking such actions. If they just have a personal view which doesn't impact anyone's actions, then I would not call them a bigot. It seems in this case, CL in no way takes or supports bigoted actions. There is of course the matter of tithes and the implicit support there, which is a tricky issue. But I'm not going to call her bigoted for that as she is explicitly saying she doesn't want the money spent that way.

While I 100% support LGBT rights, including the legal right to marry,

I agree that no clergy or organized church should TECHNICALLY be forced to marry a gay couple,
because that may well run against their religious beliefs

(having said that, I have to admit that it would look good on them...after so many years of forcing people to do THEIR  bidding, in their private lives).

but I think it's a non-issue:  every denomination of Christianity broke away from another because they disagreed on some point of order.  It's happening now in the Anglican church; half the congregation supports gay marriage, the other half is adamantly against it.

Eventually, and once again, a new denomination will emerge as a result;
one that has no problem with gay marriage.

In short, there will be plenty of churches willing to marry gay couples.

It is still unconscionable that religion is being used to try to make it ILLEGAL for a gay couple to get married,
if they are able to find someone willing to marry them.