Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Right now, the rhetoric from the right is something along the lines of "The Supreme Court cannot redefine what the Supreme Being has already defined." This brings me to a few simple questions.
Why can conservative Christians not distinguish between civil marriage and covenant marriage? The only definition of marriage that has been changed is that recognized by the government. Churches are still free to define it according to their own beliefs just like they always have. Anybody who thinks otherwise needs to stop listening to Glenn Beck. America is not a theocracy so "God's definition" holds little sway in the court of law.
Secondly, why do fundamentalist Christians think they own marriage? There are affirming Christian denominations that have been marrying same sex couples for years now. Why does the legal definition of marriage have to be what fundamentalists think it should be, when evangelicals are only 30% of the population and true fundamentalists are an even smaller percent?
I think many can. I don't have a problem with gay marriage by the state but the Church should control their marriage ceremonies. In my belief, the Covenant of my marriage is between my wife, myself and our God...and really no one else or any group, state, or entity matters to me. Gays can have the same type of Covenant but I don't think it would be sanctioned by my Church...but there are churches such as Unitarian that would do it.
A union between a man and women in one body to create life is marriage ... a union between same sex couples is for pleasure not the creation of life.
That's just great. So people who can't have children should never get married? And two old people who have lost their previous mates can never get married again?
Nothing prevents you from getting a marriage that isn't issued from the government. If you want a Civil Marriage then you have to get it from the government.
If you don't want a marriage license that is recognized by the government, you are free to do that.
I think many can. I don't have a problem with gay marriage by the state but the Church should control their marriage ceremonies. In my belief, the Covenant of my marriage is between my wife, myself and our God...and really no one else or any group, state, or entity matters to me. Gays can have the same type of Covenant but I don't think it would be sanctioned by my Church...but there are churches such as Unitarian that would do it.
And that's how it is.
Your church wouldn't marry me - a Jewish woman - just because I really like the chapel. My synagogue wouldn't marry you, a Christian, because you want to feel closer to your religion's roots (though my synagogue specifically would marry you if you were marrying a Jewish person). That's how it is, that's how it will always be. Clergy can refuse to perform marriages for a whole host of reasons.
Legally and spiritually separate unions have always existed. In Judaism, divorce is allowed through a religious process where a husband gives his wife a "get" releasing her from the marriage. They still have to be legally divorced, but the legal divorce has no standing in the spiritual community when it comes to dating or remarriage.
Sorry, but in commerce and workplace, you do not have a license to discriminate on the basis of race, sex, gender, or creed. You can't have a restaurant that says "we don't serve black people here." And you can't have one that says "Gays not welcome. That's where the line is drawn: where your beliefs foster discrimination in the marketplace. Outside of that, you can hate them as much as you personally want.
there is a huge difference between serving people in a restaurant, and catering a gay wedding. if one chooses to be gay, i dont care, in fact i have had friends that are gay and i treated them as i would anyone else. try reading up on some of my old posts.
Quote:
Originally Posted by natalie469
That's your choice. It's not a religious objection though. It's just prejudice on your part. I'm catholic and believe god accepts everyone because god loves all. It's humans who find fault. Do we believe in different gods or something?
very true, god does love all people, that is not the point here. the point is that gay marriage and gay sex is frowned upon in the bible. i dont hate people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost
Nope. First Amendment is to protect your personal beliefs from the governments/mobs. It is not a right afforded to you to impose your religious beliefs on everybody else. That is my "leftist" view on the subject.
and i dont impose my beliefs on anyone. i oppose gay marriage, but i do not force anyone else to oppose it, that is their choice.
Quote:
Except that you're enforcing just that, by pushing against freedoms of others to enjoy the same public benefits that you assume for self. You're an intruder. Keep your personal beliefs to self, and expect others to do the same. I don't care about your personal beliefs until you come out as an aggressor and start screaming. And you should do the same.
rubbish. as i said, i oppose gay marriage, others however accept it. i wont force anyone to see things my way. when the opportunity came to vote for or against gay marriage, i voted against it, as did the majority of the rest of arizonans. as for coming out as an aggressor and screaming, i do not do that either, that is your imagination running away with you. however when the subject comes up, i will state my case, if you choose to accept it or not that is your choice, i wont force you to believe either way.
Quote:
Who is asking you to accept or support it? For that matter, if you think that is how the society works, then you're expecting others to accept and support you. See the problem?
who is asking me to support gay marriage? the lbgt lobby, that is who. if i am a business owner, and i refuse to cater a gay wedding, or supply said wedding, that doesnt mean i hate gays, i just means i dont support gay marriage. yet the lbgt lobby would sue me to force me to supply a gay wedding against my beliefs. so who is forcing their beliefs on others? i am not the one that goes to the courts to prevent gay weddings, i am not the one that protests outside a gay wedding and hurls insults and death threats at gays. on the other hand the lbgt lobby IS the ones doing those things. so again, tell me who is forcing who to accept what?
Quote:
This ruling does not make a law against a religion. For that matter, too many seem to believe that "marriage" is owned by Christianity. It ain't. It is a social and cultural institution, where government has stepped in to provide public benefits. If you think public benefits afforded to married couples is a religious institution, and you value the first amendment, you should rail against that... to remove the government authorized benefits towards marriage and keep it purely "religious".
ok i get it, the courts have ruled gay marriage is legal in all 50 states, fine, i still DONT accept it on religious grounds. dont ask me to cater a gay wedding, be a photographer at a gay wedding, etc, because i will not do those things. and i should NOT be forced to do those things either. this is what FREEDOM is all about. i have the right to refuse to do those things. if you sue me, and force me to do those things, then my rights, along with everyone elses, have been infringed upon. we no longer have the right to exercise our religion freely as the constitution says we do.
Quote:
If a loser runs a business as if it were his/her religion (it doesn't surprise me that religion is a business for a lot of people), it becomes a civil matter unless the business is registered as a religious institution and should be dealt accordingly. But making law to force or to protect them, would be unconstitutional and a violation of the First Amendment. And doesn't this already apply to people from other religions, atheists, divorcees, cheaters... or is all of that part of this business person's "religion"?
even in civil matters, i still have my constitutional right to exercise my religion as i see it. remember even in civil matters, its the courts that decide the case, and they STILL have to follow the constitution when applying the law to the case at hand.
Quote:
Keep your religious convictions to your own life, and first half of your first statement would be valid. Otherwise, no.
because my religious convictions pervade my life, they pervade ALL aspects of my life, that is what religious convictions are all about. religion isnt about controlling people, its a way of life.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur
So how do feel about blacks? Do you think skin color is a valid reason to refuse service?
i dont care about skin color, i care about character. you, like others, are assuming that just because i wont cater a gay wedding that i would also refuse service to people for other reasons, and that is just not so.
I think many can. I don't have a problem with gay marriage by the state but the Church should control their marriage ceremonies. In my belief, the Covenant of my marriage is between my wife, myself and our God...and really no one else or any group, state, or entity matters to me. Gays can have the same type of Covenant but I don't think it would be sanctioned by my Church...but there are churches such as Unitarian that would do it.
Churches have always had complete discretion over their own marriage ceremonies. No church is forced to marry any couple. Even today, many churches refuse to perform interracial marriages, and this is within their rights. I've never met a gay couple, or supporter of gay marriage who has any interest in forcing opposed churches to marry gay couples. This idea is simply a fear used to scare religious people, it's not grounded in the reality of what supporters of gay marriage wish to achieve. As you stated, there are plenty of churches that marry gay couples, and a secular ceremony is always an option, this is all the average gay marriage supporter ever wanted.
Supporters of gay marriage have only asked that churches refrain from crossing the line between church, and state by trying to create secular law based on their religious beliefs. Your church has every right to be opposed to gay marriage, and preach against it, but no church has the right to FORCE their beliefs on the rest of us through legislation.
I have supported equal rights for gays for as long as I can remember, but if some radical did try to force a church to marry gay couples, I'd be the first to speak out agains this. The first amendment is sacred, religions have every right to determine their own values, and they can use their freedom of speech and religion to be against gay marriage if they wish, but they do not have the right to force secular law to abide by THEIR religious beliefs.
It may surprise you to hear that the Bible has a deeper meaning in the words it uses and the stories it tells. This deeper meaning does not predict the future by some mysterious code; it is about you as you are on the inside. Once you see this, the Bible becomes an extraordinary tool for personal discovery, something very different from the Bible you may have struggled with and given up on. Learning about this deeper and more spiritual meaning may reawaken your interest. If you have never been interested in God or religion, or feel turned off by them, you may appreciate a chance to look again in the light of this new way of seeing the Bible.
I went to Catholic schools in Japan when I was a kid, the experience made me a much more tolerant person. I personally have no problems with gay marriage, I do believe individual church has the right not to give gay couples a religious ceremony.
Tolerance to me, well, There should be the need for a respectful and fair attitude towards others and the second is this attitude is directed towards those whose beliefs and opinions differ from ours. There is one important component – the right to reject someone’s claims or beliefs while respecting their right to say it.
I lost a boyfriend to suicide years ago. One church did not want to give him a religious burial, one church had no problems with it. The ceremony was emotional, yet beautiful.
I have no problems with the churches' decisions.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
