|
Same sex marriage
|
If same sex marriage is legal and you are an instiution that marries people, then to refuse on the grounds of gender would be seen as discriminatory and so against the law.
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid. Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.  (May 19, 2012 at 10:48 am)downbeatplumb Wrote: If same sex marriage is legal and you are an instiution that marries people, then to refuse on the grounds of gender would be seen as discriminatory and so against the law. That is precisely my point. Is that a desirable position for society to be in? Do you think it's a good idea to try and force the Catholic Church to perform same sex marriages? Do you think that would be a good thing? 
Separation of Church and State works both ways.
For those who say such is discriminatory, France got around this by having marriage become a state service. The religious folk then can have their own separate marriage ceremony. That works out for everyone IMO.
But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, His Son, purifies us from all sin.
RE: Same sex marriage
May 19, 2012 at 1:03 pm
(This post was last modified: May 19, 2012 at 1:17 pm by StatCrux.)
(May 14, 2012 at 11:10 am)NoMoreFaith Wrote: Church of England are pro-samesex marriage. This is simply NOT TRUE Quote:Marriage is a pattern that God has given in creation, deeply rooted in our social instincts, through which a man and a woman may learn love together over the course of their lives. Quote:The three blessings that belong to marriage are traditionally described as the procreation and nurture of children, the hallowing and right direction of natural instincts and affections, and the mutual society, help and comfort which each affords the other in prosperity and adversity. Marriage: A Teaching Document, Church of England Preface by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York 1999. http://www.churchofengland.org/media/45645/marriage.pdf 
This whole same-sex marriage issue shouldn't even be an issue. I'm still blown away that there are people out there who seriously want to deny people rights purely because of their sexual orientation Discrimination is so ugly, especially when they try to dress it up with religion.
![[Image: SigBarSping_zpscd7e35e1.png]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=i169.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fu224%2FUchiha_Kina%2FTags%2FSigBarSping_zpscd7e35e1.png) (May 19, 2012 at 1:51 pm)Annik Wrote: This whole same-sex marriage issue shouldn't even be an issue. I'm still blown away that there are people out there who seriously want to deny people rights purely because of their sexual orientation Discrimination is so ugly, especially when they try to dress it up with religion. Well the especially has been the norm for thousands of years, so... But at least it has gotten toned down and is starting to diminish.
But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, His Son, purifies us from all sin.
My point is that religion shouldn't even factor into the equation. A lot of folks use it as a smokescreen for their own prejudices.
(May 19, 2012 at 1:58 pm)Annik Wrote: My point is that religion shouldn't even factor into the equation. A lot of folks use it as a smokescreen for their own prejudices. In many instances, it is the source of those prejudices.
But if we walk in the light, as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus, His Son, purifies us from all sin.
 (May 19, 2012 at 8:48 am)StatCrux Wrote: Firstly, we are talking specifically about the legal definition of marriage, that's the whole issue! Nobody cares what the dictionary definition is or isn't. O...k...I don't really see what the point of using the current legal definition is, when the debate is about what the legal definition SHOULD be. We know what it is and we believe it should be changed. Didn't you get that? So when it changes to allow same sex marriage, the definition will stop referring to gender/sexuality and will just say something like 'two consenting adults'. Will you agree with it? If not, then you've no right to use the current definition as your argument. As I said, legal definitions evolve and change all the time. (May 19, 2012 at 2:18 pm)ElDinero Wrote:(May 19, 2012 at 8:48 am)StatCrux Wrote: Firstly, we are talking specifically about the legal definition of marriage, that's the whole issue! Nobody cares what the dictionary definition is or isn't. I was asked to provide the legal definition, which I did. |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
