Same sex marriage

[AlpineExile]

well church is the accepted house of god, the almighty, the great computer programmer, call it what you want. weather you believe it or not.

But what god?

Why don't you present your god before us so we can have a look at him/her/it?

 

[Junior Birdman]

So she believes in the Bible. Well, that along with every other religion is the cause of more trouble than anything else.

I don't see many atheist's taking the moral high ground on such subjects.

That being said, great surname for tennis.

 

[aukq]

Are you saying that marriages not specifically sanctioned by and in a church are not proper marriages?

nope. when I married my wife it wasn't in a church and the ceremony was civil.

because we were not religious a church service was clearly not appropriate to us.

church services clearly are not appropriate for various reasons.

It is possible to be religious and non-straight at the same time.

you tell me. i'm not religious myself and am hetrosexual.

does scripture speak against it though? like I say, just debating it really

 

[Some Random Guy]

but why would they insist on doing it the bible way, in a church before god, when scripture etc denies it

civil partnerships?

obv I don't really care myself, nor do I go to church. it does appear to completely go agasint thd doctrines of christianity

Imo it should be up to the church on whether they are willing to perform a same sex marriage.

If civil partnerships are the same as marriage then who cares, call it a marriage. Giving a same sex couple the right to marry doesn't take anything away from heterosexual marriage, there really isn't a good argument against it.

 

[Mick Dundee]

Has anyone said "gays should have the right to be as miserable as the rest of us" yet?

 

[The Legendary Tongue]

It is possible to be religious and non-straight at the same time.

Aye it's called being a Catholic priest.

 

[Cockney Mackem]

nope. when I married my wife it wasn't in a church and the ceremony was civil.

because we were not religious a church service was clearly not appropriate to us.

church services clearly are not appropriate for various reasons.



you tell me. i'm not religious myself and am hetrosexual.

does scripture speak against though?

But you've been arguing over the course of several posts that if a marriage isn't acceptable in a church before god as you put it, it shouldn't be recognised as a legal marriage.

 

[AlpineExile]

Imo it should be up to the church on whether they are willing to perform a same sex marriage.

If civil partnerships are the same as marriage then who cares, call it a marriage. Giving a same sex couple the right to marry doesn't take anything away from heterosexual marriage, there really isn't a good argument against it.

Do you think it should be up to "the church" as to whether they agree to marry people of different races? Or where one of them is disabled?

 

[aukq]

Imo it should be up to the church on whether they are willing to perform a same sex marriage.

If civil partnerships are the same as marriage then who cares, call it a marriage. Giving a same sex couple the right to marry doesn't take anything away from heterosexual marriage, there really isn't a good argument against it.

traditionally the church already has a clear set of guidelines though, thats what i'm saying

 

[Some Random Guy]

It is possible to be religious and non-straight at the same time.

I don't see why not. Being religious, or simply having a belief in a higher power, isn't the same as believing the literal word of any given religious text.

The vast majority of people who are religious use their religion to guide their lives rather than define them.

I would argue that every person alive today should be crucified or stoned to death if you went by the literal word of all religious texts.

 

[aukq]

Do you think it should be up to "the church" as to whether they agree to marry people of different races? Or where one of them is disabled?

what does scripture say about it? 'the rules'

I don't see why not. Being religious, or simply having a belief in a higher power, isn't the same as believing the literal word of any given religious text.

The vast majority of people who are religious use their religion to guide their lives rather than define them.

I would argue that every person alive today should be crucified or stoned to death if you went by the literal word of all religious texts.

clearly depends on the religion. if its christianity or islam or judaism, surely its a case of having your cake and eating it.

 

[AlpineExile]

what does scripture say about it? 'the rules'

Given that religious folk reinterpret their scriptures as and when they see fit: who knows ...

 

[Some Random Guy]

Do you think it should be up to "the church" as to whether they agree to marry people of different races? Or where one of them is disabled?

Yup, it should be decided on a case by case basis regardless regardless of race, creed, colour, which genitals you like playing with, or whether you can go for a jog.

When I say "the church" I don't mean a vast organisation, I mean the actual church where you want the service to be held. I'm talking about the local vicar, priest, or deacon, who will perform the ceremony and should be having conversations with anyone getting married their around their values etc.

clearly depends on the religion. if its christianity or islam or judaism, surely its a case of having your cake and eating it.

Many Catholics use condoms, many Muslims drink beer, never been around many Jewish people but I'm sure there are plenty that would munch on a bacon sandwich.

There are many different sects in all of those religions, all take scripture to different extremes, and members of their congregations will have their own a level of devotion.

 

[AlpineExile]

Yup, it should be decided on a case by case basis regardless regardless of race, creed, colour, which genitals you like playing with, or whether you can go for a jog.

When I say "the church" I don't mean a vast organisation, I mean the actual church where you want the service to be held. I'm talking about the local vicar, priest, or deacon, who will perform the ceremony and should be having conversations with anyone getting married their around their values etc.


Many Catholics use condoms, many Muslims drink beer, never been around many Jewish people but I'm sure there are plenty that would munch on a bacon sandwich.

There are many different sects in all of those religions, all take scripture to different extremes, and members of their congregations will have their own a level of devotion.

Then they should lose all support from the general taxpayer for starters. And that includes their charity status or the exemption from income tax for their bigoted preachers.

 

[Some Random Guy]

Then they should lose all support from the general taxpayer for starters. And that includes their charity status or the exemption from income tax for their bigoted preachers.

I don't disagree with that to be honest, they've had it easy for millennia, fuck em.

 

[AndrewP]

If two people love each other and want to get married, why shouldn't they.

 

[Twisted]

Yup, it should be decided on a case by case basis regardless regardless of race, creed, colour, which genitals you like playing with, or whether you can go for a jog.

do you feel the same way about if a restaurant serves you food, a pub will serve you a beer or if a shop will sell you a dvd or not?

"no sorry, i'm not selling you a packet of polos, you're black and it is my decision"

f***ing ludicrous

 

[FootballFan]

bloody hell, the backlash here. I'm allowed to have an opinion I think you'll all find

 

[Cockney Mackem]

bloody hell, the backlash here. I'm allowed to have an opinion I think you'll all find

Are people allowed to critique that opinion?

 

[FootballFan]

Are people allowed to critique that opinion?

they are - but not to call me names.