Gay marriage - in support of

Following the thread on gay marriage in church two things come over - firstly the immature and insulting vocabulary used by some posters (is admin happy about this?) and secondly the impression that gay men and women are somehow inferior to straight men and women.
The love between a same-sex couple is not inferior to that between mixed-sex couples. If any couple wants to get married in church then they should be allowed to - can anyone give a good reason why they shouldn't?

 

You need to ask that question of the Church.

 

Does not believing that they should be allowed to marry in church mean that I think they can't love each other as much as a heterosexual couple or that they are inferior? Whether they should be allowed or not should be the decision of the church and not the government.

 

Don't the government grant licenses for weddings?

 

I'm not saying that homosexual love isn't the same, but isn't the definition of marriage between a man and a woman?

 

It's who the licenses are issued to that the church will be concerned about. I'm certainly no expert on religious legislation so I'm not sure if this would mean that gay couples had to be allowed the same rights in mosques, synagogues and other religious buidings as is being propsed for churches.

 

Because the place they want to get married in doesn't believe they should.

I am neither homosexual nor religious so I can look at this dispassionately. The church believes that homosexuality is wrong and as that is part of their religious belief, this has to be respected as much as someone's right to be gay. The church is not on a crusade against homosexuality they are just not permitting gay marriage in their place of worship. Where does respect for one person's way of life begin and another's end??

I'd love to see a gay couple try and get married in a Mosque.

 

That what it says in the scriptures

 

Some text below that I have copied from a Christian website, raises some interesting points but maybe a little alarmist on if gay marriage in Church was allowed.

-


Outside of the privacy of their homes, young girls will be discouraged from imagining one day marrying their prince charming—to do so would be declared “heterosexist,” morally equivalent to racist. Rather, they will be told to imagine a prince or a princess. Schoolbooks will not be allowed to describe marriage in male-female ways alone. Little girls will be asked by other girls and by teachers if they want one day to marry a man or a woman….
Any advocacy of man-woman marriage alone will be regarded morally as hate speech, and shortly thereafter it will be deemed so in law.
Companies that advertise engagement rings will have to show a man putting a ring on a man’s finger—if they show only women’s fingers, they will be boycotted just as a company having racist ads would be now.
Films that only show man-woman married couples will be regarded as antisocial and as morally irresponsible as films that show people smoking have become.
Traditional Jews and Christians—i.e., those who believe in a divine scripture—will be marginalized.

 

Then surely it's up to the Church to decide on it, as it is their beliefs.

If the government step in and say that gay marriage should be allowed in churches, it would have to be allowed in all other religious arenas such as mosques, which I really can not see happening.

 

Good people, we have come together in the presence of God to witness and proclaim the joining together of this man and this woman in marriage. About this way of life, hear what our God says:
"From the beginning of creation, 'God made them male and female.'
"'For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife,
and the two shall become one.' So they are no longer two but one.
What therefore God has joined together, let not man put asunder."
It is ordained: That husband and wife may give to each other lifelong companionship, help, and comfort, both in prosperity and in adversity; That God may hallow and direct the natural instinct and affections which were pronounced "good" at creation, and which are guided by the teachings of Christ;
That children may be born and brought up in families in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ to the glory of God;
That marriage being thus held in honor, human society may stand upon firm foundations.

Is that reason enough???

 

Not a chance the government would dare tell the Muslims they would have to allow same sex marriages. Then again I don't think they have any right to tell any religion.

 

I think if you are hetrosexual Worsborough, you have a a big suprise coming if you thing Homosexual Love is the same as Hetrosexual Love... sweetie.

 

Who cares?

If fudge packers wanna get married......let em....no big deal..............each to their own is my opinion

hope this helps but i guess it won't

 

It's more down to the belief system of the religion. A church isn't just some place where you can get married, I honestly do not know why people who don't seem to deem themselves religious end up wanting a church wedding. I was brought up as CofE and it was something I always recall was a bug bear to my parents that people wanted to church for weddings and funerals but not at other times. But I digress.

There is a big difference on this between the Church of England and any other religion including Catholics. The Cof E is part of the State, you don't need a registrar to be married in the CofE because the Priest has the legal power to marry as well as the religious power, that is not the case with Catholics, Muslims etc where they have to have a registrar there. If gay marriage is legal then a registrar, as far as I know, would not legally be able to refuse to perform a gay marriage and this is where the State is coming in to conflict with the Church because the Priest in CofE is also, effectively, registrar.

It's an anomoly cause by having a state religion. The government would not be able to tell a Catholic or Muslim establishment to perform a gay marraige as that is a private institution. It would be the church refusing, not the legal registrar refusing who could go elsewhere. But in the case of the Cof E then you have the state appointed registrar who would be refusing.

Ultimately I do think it's down to the religious establishment to set their boundaries within the overall context of the law of the land. So the question really should be why do homosexuals want to be part of a religion that wants to exclude them?

 

But it also says in scripture that you should stone the adulterer.

Check out You tube for the clip from The West Wing on this....one of the best rants ever!

I found a transcript of it here

Bartlet launched into an impassioned diatribe which was interspersed with shots of an uncomfortable Jacobs fidgeting: "Chapter and verse. I wanted to ask you a couple of questions while I had you here. I'm interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. She's a Georgetown sophomore, speaks fluent Italian, always cleared the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be? [silence in the room] While thinking about that can I ask another? My chief-of-staff, Leo McGarry, insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself or is it okay to call the police?
"Here's one that's really important, 'cause we've got a lot of sports fans in this town. Touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean, Leviticus 11:7. If they promise to wear gloves can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point? Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother John for planting different crops side-by-side? Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads? Think about those questions, would you.

 

As with women clergy the Church faces a huge challenge over this issue.
The Church does not object to someone being homosexual but paradoxically has a problem with the issue of practising homosexuals. The love between two men or between two women can be equally as strong as that between a woman and a man and should not be regarded as being inferior.
Would it really be so catastrophic for the church if a gay couple was married at its altar?

 

Yes a marriage in the eyes of God (whoever he is) is between a man and a woman for the procreation of more children... and as far as I`m concerned buggary doesn`t achieve the same result...as the thing that a man and a woman do....

 

eek!
and so you would exclude women past child-bearing age a church marriage?

 

Not sure what the eek! is all about but, if you wish to persue this silly line..

I think there is still a better chance of a woman past child bearing age conceiving, than two men committing soddomy.. Give us a kiss sweetie..