Same sex marriage

[thesummerqueen]

He's using all the same old bullshit arguments to show why they shouldn't have equal footing.

I'm surprised he hasn't said that hetero marriages that haven't been made in a church shouldn't be recognized either.

There's nothing magical about having a religious leader do your ceremony other than your own belief that it means you are married in the eyes of God by his earthly representative.

[StatCrux]

He's using all the same old bullshit arguments to show why they shouldn't have equal footing.

I'm surprised he hasn't said that hetero marriages that haven't been made in a church shouldn't be recognized either.

There's nothing magical about having a religious leader do your ceremony other than your own belief that it means you are married in the eyes of God by his earthly representative.

They already have equal footing in the UK. They simply want to call a civil partnership a marriage

Its also quite amusing that you keep referring to me as HE...assumptions at work

[Tiberius]

That isn't equal then is it. If you can't call it the same thing, it isn't equal.

[thesummerqueen]

So what is so magical about the word "marriage?"

Excuse me. I'll use the genderless "ze." I don't give a fuck what sex you are - you're being ridiculous.

[StatCrux]

That isn't equal then is it. If you can't call it the same thing, it isn't equal.

But it isn't the same thing is it? A man and a woman is different to a man and a man, isn't that obvious? Maybe we should get rid of the terms man and woman too? just call us all wom or something?

[Tiberius]

So wait, are you admitting that gay people don't have equal footing in the UK or not?

[StatCrux]

So what is so magical about the word "marriage?"

Excuse me. I'll use the genderless "ze." I don't give a fuck what sex you are - you're being ridiculous.

Its not ridiculous, its a valid point, we all use terms and words that distinguish male and female, because we ARE different, just as a male-female union and same sex union ARE different and should have different terms to describe them. I'm sure you don't think its wrong or unequal to have two different terms to distinguish someones sex, just as it isn't wrong to have two different terms to distinguish two different forms of partnership. They still have all the same rights as a married couple so whats the problem?

---

So wait, are you admitting that gay people don't have equal footing in the UK or not?

No, i'm saying your question was equivocating, not being the same thing is not the same as not being equal, thats a fallacy. Men and women are not the same thing but are equal. Just as a male-female relationship and a same sex relationship are not the same thing, but could still be viewed as equal in law. I simply want to retain the distinction by use of the terms civil partnership and marriage whilst still allowing equal status in civil law.

[thesummerqueen]

I'm not sure why a male-female union vs a same sex union has any difference except in the eyes of the religious.

If you want to call a state-sanctioned combination a union and the religiously ordained combination a marriage, then fine. But don't equate the two. And don't pretend they're separated by gender issues either. That's just your way of prettying up your bigotry.

---

Which means, by the way, that any straight couples who have a straight secular union can't be called "married".

[NoMoreFaith]

They already have equal footing in the UK. They simply want to call a civil partnership a marriage

So what?

You think if its called a marriage instead of civil partnership, that your church will be forced into conducting marriages of all sexes.

Nobody forced you to marry divorcees, or those not in the regular congregation, why should you be forced to marry homosexuals.

Instead, you want to declare what other churches can and can't do, on a pretence of moral objection.

The issue is that religious homosexuals can't have a religious ceremony in a place of worship. That is all.

As has been said, the most obvious option is to remove the legal standing of marriage itself, so that it has the same legal status as the eucharist. People can do whatever funky religious ceremony they want to partake in to declare that partnership under their God, without it actually having any legal status.
If a marriage ceremony involves the contract of civil partnership, then its a legal position, regardless of the religion.

My best analogy on this;
Civil Partnership should be the "Tenure of Property", as Marriage is to "Home". You can call anywhere Home, but for the state to be involved, you need legal right of Tenure.

[thesummerqueen]

NoMoreFaith, I'd like to sit down and have a beer with you some time. Seriously.