ChatterBank0 min ago
Gay Marriage
127 Answers
How pathetic are the church? They tried to pull The Bible out and now they are referring to a dictionary.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17329902
Why can't they just admit that they are scared that this will diminish their already waning power? The church does not own the word 'marriage', the taxpayer owns this word and most taxpayers rightly do not care a jot about who gets 'married', let alone whether they are the same sex or not.
The only reason I care is that to my mind it is another nail in the coffin of religion. All thoughts welcome!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17329902
Why can't they just admit that they are scared that this will diminish their already waning power? The church does not own the word 'marriage', the taxpayer owns this word and most taxpayers rightly do not care a jot about who gets 'married', let alone whether they are the same sex or not.
The only reason I care is that to my mind it is another nail in the coffin of religion. All thoughts welcome!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ll_billym. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I seem to be in agreement with you here!
The idea that any government should listen to a bunch of deluded idiots who believe (against all logic) in the existence of a 'God' is clearly ridiculous.
Irrespective of party politics, I welcome the Government's decision to allow couples to do what they want to do, unencumbered by the prejudices of a load of thickos who can't see the wood from the trees.
However it still strikes me as odd that such decisions can (thankfully) become reality in a country where religion is constitutionally linked to government (e.g. with the Queen as both head of state and head of the established church, and with bishops in the House of Lords) whereas countries such as the USA and Turkey (which both have constitutions separating the state from religion) are unable to do the same.
The idea that any government should listen to a bunch of deluded idiots who believe (against all logic) in the existence of a 'God' is clearly ridiculous.
Irrespective of party politics, I welcome the Government's decision to allow couples to do what they want to do, unencumbered by the prejudices of a load of thickos who can't see the wood from the trees.
However it still strikes me as odd that such decisions can (thankfully) become reality in a country where religion is constitutionally linked to government (e.g. with the Queen as both head of state and head of the established church, and with bishops in the House of Lords) whereas countries such as the USA and Turkey (which both have constitutions separating the state from religion) are unable to do the same.
Ridiculously so.
What I do find ironic is the amount of clergy who are undoubtedly gay yet as a result of the Church's stance couldn't possibly declare themselves as 'out'.
As for their unwillingness to accept that a small number of clergy have been involved in the systematic abuse of children and vulnerable adults for decades, compounded by their reluctance to banish offenders and report such offences, well, let's not even get started on that one.......
That's why I enjoy the BBC comedy series Rev so much. It highlights the totally contradictory stance taken by the Church so often on an almost daily basis.
What I do find ironic is the amount of clergy who are undoubtedly gay yet as a result of the Church's stance couldn't possibly declare themselves as 'out'.
As for their unwillingness to accept that a small number of clergy have been involved in the systematic abuse of children and vulnerable adults for decades, compounded by their reluctance to banish offenders and report such offences, well, let's not even get started on that one.......
That's why I enjoy the BBC comedy series Rev so much. It highlights the totally contradictory stance taken by the Church so often on an almost daily basis.
Why use the word 'marriage' when same sex couples wont be traditional Mr & Mrs. Call it coupling, partnership, union or some other suitable name. Same sex dont respect the church's teachings by their very act, therefore a registry office should suffice.
As for religious beliefs; each to his own. As a tax payer I object to traditions being interefered with on minor whims.
Philtaz, a small percentage of churchmen abuse children; notice I said men as the abusers. Am sure this comment is as offensive as yours to those men who have a true calling to serve their diocese.
As for religious beliefs; each to his own. As a tax payer I object to traditions being interefered with on minor whims.
Philtaz, a small percentage of churchmen abuse children; notice I said men as the abusers. Am sure this comment is as offensive as yours to those men who have a true calling to serve their diocese.
If religion is such an outdated and ridiculous thing - pathetic - God doesnt exist etc, then why not stick to civil partnerships for same sex couples. Why would they want to go into a church or bother about the word marriage if it is linked to a religion, blessing the union etc. Keep it civil. Sort out the financial and legal side of the pairing if this is what is important to you.
There have been many cases where people have been seriously financially and socially disadvantaged by not being able to be a legally recognised couple. I don't think that the all forgiving and compassionate christian church should be allowed to impose their prejucices on people that do not subscribe to their religion. If the legal acceptance of 'gay marriage' helps the church come to terms with it's bigotry then it would be a good thing.
Grasscarp, I don’t think it’s reasonable to assume that gay people are automatically devoid of religious belief. Check out the gay Christian websites – there are plenty of them. A case could be offered for gay Christian couples who love each other no less than any heterosexual couple who want to be married, and therefore would like their commitment to be recognised by their church and ‘blessed’ by God, just as other unions are.
After all marriage was once a way of formalising bloodlines for the purpose of inheritance... with couples marrying beyond childbearing age and others able to make a choice of remianing childfree the old rationale has gone... I had friends who were both #Gay and christian in the go to church and actually think someone died on a cross for them... they have more right to a roper church wedding than probably 90% of those who want a nice setting for the phot
os
os
I'm sure the Bible does.......and even if it wasn't explicit, someone somewhere would be able to turn any of the many verses to confirm that it was implicit. :o)
However, I don't particularly call for 'religious' marriages, I would simply like the union/contract that I am going to undergo to be called a marriage rather than a CP.
I have posted the link before, but it was at the end of a similar discussion and I'm not sure how many people saw it or took any notice.
It is long, and refers to American Law and their legal processes, but I think it addresses any and all questions raised by the issue.
And it has George Clooney in it.........LoL
However, I don't particularly call for 'religious' marriages, I would simply like the union/contract that I am going to undergo to be called a marriage rather than a CP.
I have posted the link before, but it was at the end of a similar discussion and I'm not sure how many people saw it or took any notice.
It is long, and refers to American Law and their legal processes, but I think it addresses any and all questions raised by the issue.
And it has George Clooney in it.........LoL
The Catholic Church really needs to butt out of peoples live that dont want to accept their ridiculous beliefs.
The Catholic church has caused so many millions of deaths and this continues today by their preaching against the use of condoms, this nonsense is still spreading aids and resulting of babies dying from starvation and aids etc. in third world countries.
I really think they should get their house in order before trying to dictate on morals and gay relationships.
And they think they have moral standards, they make me sick, I detest the Catholic church.!!!
Rant Over!!!!!!!!!
The Catholic church has caused so many millions of deaths and this continues today by their preaching against the use of condoms, this nonsense is still spreading aids and resulting of babies dying from starvation and aids etc. in third world countries.
I really think they should get their house in order before trying to dictate on morals and gay relationships.
And they think they have moral standards, they make me sick, I detest the Catholic church.!!!
Rant Over!!!!!!!!!
The word 'Marriage' is NOT linked to religion, though.....not really. There are people who like to claim it is, but it is not.
Allowing gay people to marry does not mean that the most picturesque churches in the land will have to throw their doors open to a succession of 'Adam and Steve's' (ho ho ho :o( ) plighting their troths. It means that *however and wherever* a service/ceremony is carried out, the participants will be able to call themselves 'married'.
Allowing gay people to marry does not mean that the most picturesque churches in the land will have to throw their doors open to a succession of 'Adam and Steve's' (ho ho ho :o( ) plighting their troths. It means that *however and wherever* a service/ceremony is carried out, the participants will be able to call themselves 'married'.
I really don't know why there are such anti church opinions being stated here. Applying the word 'marriage' to cover any gender match relationships is a change of its use/meaning. A change that strikes at the heart of what the church believes to be right and wrong. An area it is traditionally the authority in. It is hardly surprising that it objects. That's not pathetic, that's what one should expect. The real question is why, given that society is providing ceremonies for couples than want them regardless of gender, there is an insistence on calling same couple ceremonies marriage. Since it changes nothing about the ceremony, it seems to me the obvious answer can only be a desire to be hurtful to those who wish to retain the original meaning of marriage.
Anyway, the sooner everyone realises it's an irrelevant ceremony anyway, changes nothing about the relationship save within bad law, then the sooner it can be discarded and voila, there's no more disagreement.
Anyway, the sooner everyone realises it's an irrelevant ceremony anyway, changes nothing about the relationship save within bad law, then the sooner it can be discarded and voila, there's no more disagreement.
Grasscarp, I can only speak for myself, but I don’t believe I’ve ever called anyone here a ‘deluded idiot’. In response to your post which appeared to assume that all gay people are devoid of religion, I was simply saying that isn’t true and attempting to consider the issue from the point of view of those that are.
Jack, society is linked to religion and has been for thousands of years. Shaking off restrictive shackles that have controlled people for so long that they’ve become embedded is no easy task!
Jack, society is linked to religion and has been for thousands of years. Shaking off restrictive shackles that have controlled people for so long that they’ve become embedded is no easy task!
tambourine,
I don't see what was offensive about my post. A small number of clergy abuse children. This is illegal, not to mention deemed abhorrent by society and rightly so. In other professions/walks of life the offenders are identified and rightly prosecuted but not so often in the clergy, who prefer to turn a blind eye and invariably move the offender to another area/diocese.
Yes there are the majority who follow their 'calling', I'm just pointing out that the Church often do not and have not followed the normal protocol and procedure when dealing with such matters.
I don't see what was offensive about my post. A small number of clergy abuse children. This is illegal, not to mention deemed abhorrent by society and rightly so. In other professions/walks of life the offenders are identified and rightly prosecuted but not so often in the clergy, who prefer to turn a blind eye and invariably move the offender to another area/diocese.
Yes there are the majority who follow their 'calling', I'm just pointing out that the Church often do not and have not followed the normal protocol and procedure when dealing with such matters.
grasscarp "Keep it civil. Sort out the financial and legal side of the pairing if this is what is important to you."
I got married in a Registry Office, not a church. I am a spiritual person but not religious. Marriage was important to me because I wanted to express my commitment and love for the person I married and wanted them to be my life partner. The financial and legal side didn't even matter to me. You don't have to be religious to be a thinking, caring person. A lot of so called 'religious' people who do get married in churches have shown far less respect for their marriages and vowes than people such as I.
I entirely agree with the OP. I do not see the word 'marriage' as belonging to the church in any way whatsoever. The church shouldn't have any say whatsoever in who can get married.
However, I do not agree that people who are not religious should get married in a religious place with a religious ceremony. That surely should be up to the person in charge of a particular church - nothing to do with the law.
I got married in a Registry Office, not a church. I am a spiritual person but not religious. Marriage was important to me because I wanted to express my commitment and love for the person I married and wanted them to be my life partner. The financial and legal side didn't even matter to me. You don't have to be religious to be a thinking, caring person. A lot of so called 'religious' people who do get married in churches have shown far less respect for their marriages and vowes than people such as I.
I entirely agree with the OP. I do not see the word 'marriage' as belonging to the church in any way whatsoever. The church shouldn't have any say whatsoever in who can get married.
However, I do not agree that people who are not religious should get married in a religious place with a religious ceremony. That surely should be up to the person in charge of a particular church - nothing to do with the law.
Latest Posts
News4 mins ago
ChatterBank4 mins ago
ChatterBank9 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles12 mins ago
 |
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
 |