Same Gender Marriage


log in

Advanced search

Message boards : Politics : Same Gender Marriage

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 7 · Next
Author Message
Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 30991
Credit: 11,182,757
RAC: 19,942
United Kingdom
Message 1315530 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 11:18:45 UTC

Anyway, this is meant to be a drugs thread, we can discuss this marriage issue elsewhere.

Sorry, as you brought it up I had to comment.

No need to apologise, I shouldn't really have added that gay marriage quote myself! It just seemed relevant at the time.

Just let me ask one thing, does a Christian gay person have less rights than a heterosexual non Christian

No they both have the same rights. By that I mean that I don't think either should properly be married in a church.

Perhaps you would like to start a new thread, because remember, when I got married I was, as now, an agnostic and chose a registry office. I could however have got married in a church as I had been baptised as a baby.

When I got married in 1969, neither myself nor my wife were regular churchgoers. To be honest it was probably christenings, funerals, and friends marriages, and my Scouts Church parade on a Sunday. But we both believed that in all respects we led a Christian way of life, even if we didn't regularly attend a place of worship, and it was her choice of wanting a white church wedding. In those days over 40 years ago, you had to be interviewed at length by the vicar at the Vicarage, and convince him that you understood the vows of marriage and what a church service meant etc before he would agree to marry you in his church. Both of us had been Christened but neither of us had been confirmed, and as it was the main Parish church he gave us quite a grilling I can assure you! Then we had to have the Banns read for 3 weeks, I'm not sure if they do that any more.

These days, older and wiser, and freed from childhood indoctrination, and society expectations, I would class myself as an Agnostic veering towards an Atheist. An agnostic is someone who neither believes nor disbelieves in the existence of a deity or deities, whereas an atheist simply disbelieves.

Who you are marrying should not be important, your faith should.

Sorry I can't agree. If you are marrying the right person for the right reason, then faith has nothing to do with it. If you are both devoutly religious people, then it will work well for you. If you are both Agnostics or Atheists then it will work well for you. A mixture maybe won't. I most certainly would not say to a future wife that I put my faith or belief before her. If I did she'd be making quite sure that I wouldn't be getting married again in the first place!

I think that in all relationships the important thing is to be open and honest with each other and say, hey here I am with no hidden secrets.



Profile {BDC} Thomas Dupont
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 9 Dec 11
Posts: 3601
Credit: 1,287,942
RAC: 693
France
Message 1315539 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 11:59:20 UTC - in response to Message 1315530.

Maybe Bernie spoke of having faith in each other and not necessarily in religion...
____________
Team Founder BRIGADE DU COSMOS




BRIGADE DU COSMOS is proudly sponsored by Zenovia Digital Exchange

Profile Bernie Vine
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 May 99
Posts: 6782
Credit: 24,437,999
RAC: 26,997
United Kingdom
Message 1315559 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 12:27:36 UTC

Just let me ask one thing, does a Christian gay person have less rights than a heterosexual non Christian

No they both have the same rights. By that I mean that I don't think either should properly be married in a church.


But a heterosexual non Christian CAN get married in a church. So would you also support a law to ban heterosexual no Christians from church marriages

So let me re ask the question in a different way

Does a gay Christian have less rights than a heterosexual Christian?
____________


Today is life, the only life we're sure of. Make the most of today.

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 30991
Credit: 11,182,757
RAC: 19,942
United Kingdom
Message 1315568 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 13:02:08 UTC

Does a gay Christian have less rights than a heterosexual Christian?

Now that is a different question altogether. I personally would say no in general society terms. But according to the Bible same-sex relationships were evil in God's eyes, therefore in a church environment, they do apparently have less rights.

There are two separate questions here which are in danger of being mixed up.
    1. Should same gender marriages be permitted in Society.
    2. Should same gender marriages be permitted by the Church


In answer to question 1 I would say, in the modern 21C, yes. In answer to question 2, I don't make the religious rules the Church does, based upon the Bible. If the Bible says it is unacceptable, then in religious terms it is.

Now then, if the worlds religious leaders all got together and re-wrote the Bible to allow same sex relationships, then I would have no objection to same gender people being married in a church. As it stands at present it is not acceptable. I might not agree with a lot of the religion about, but I respect it. That is probably mainly as a result of my generation being brought up in the 40's and 50's, but there we are.


Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 2082
Credit: 37,623,668
RAC: 9,881
Message 1315582 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 14:04:46 UTC

Why do athiests HAVE to go to a church OR the government to get married?

Profile soft^spirit
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6374
Credit: 28,628,452
RAC: 1,233
United States
Message 1315583 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 14:08:18 UTC - in response to Message 1315568.

Does a gay Christian have less rights than a heterosexual Christian?

Now that is a different question altogether. I personally would say no in general society terms. But according to the Bible same-sex relationships were evil in God's eyes, therefore in a church environment, they do apparently have less rights.

There are two separate questions here which are in danger of being mixed up.
    1. Should same gender marriages be permitted in Society.
    2. Should same gender marriages be permitted by the Church


In answer to question 1 I would say, in the modern 21C, yes. In answer to question 2, I don't make the religious rules the Church does, based upon the Bible. If the Bible says it is unacceptable, then in religious terms it is.

Now then, if the worlds religious leaders all got together and re-wrote the Bible to allow same sex relationships, then I would have no objection to same gender people being married in a church. As it stands at present it is not acceptable. I might not agree with a lot of the religion about, but I respect it. That is probably mainly as a result of my generation being brought up in the 40's and 50's, but there we are.



Different religious leaders will read the same text with differing views. I would say leave it up to the churches and then people can vote with their feet.
Not all churches are X-tian. Not all use the same "books" in their bible.

People have the right to define their own marriage (between consenting adults as with ANY binding legal agreement, marriage is in fact a partnership) and governments intruding on that in any way are over stepping their bounds.

Anyone that is offended by it needs to be offended.
____________

Janice

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 30991
Credit: 11,182,757
RAC: 19,942
United Kingdom
Message 1315586 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 14:32:02 UTC
Last modified: 15 Dec 2012, 14:33:47 UTC

Why do athiests HAVE to go to a church OR the government to get married?

We are going back here to the point I made earlier about the Church and society being different.

If you are religious, then it means a lot to you to have your marriage blessed in the sight of God in a church. If you are not religious, then a Civil Marriage in an Registry Office will make it just as official in law and suit you just as well. However, these days, most Pension funds will accept "Common law" wives/husbands as being entitled to widows/widowers pensions upon death, provided a declaration of intent has been made beforehand, and quite right too.

Marriage is in fact a partnership

And I think that too many people lose sight of that fact.

My own view is that if two people wish to live together in a long term loving relationship, then it shouldn't matter whether they are of the opposite sex or the same gender. They should still get the same State benefits as other traditional married couples. A view that, I've just moved in with my boyfriend/girlfriend, what can I get out of it? is not acceptable.

These days it doesn't matter so much to society, but it does still matter to the church. This of course brings us to the ultimate question.

Is the church, of whatever denomination, still relevant in modern society? In the West no, in the East and Middle east, unfortunately yes.


Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 2082
Credit: 37,623,668
RAC: 9,881
Message 1315588 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 14:45:33 UTC
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 18:24:10 UTC

--

Profile soft^spirit
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 18 May 99
Posts: 6374
Credit: 28,628,452
RAC: 1,233
United States
Message 1315589 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 14:56:54 UTC - in response to Message 1315586.

Chris, I would certainly say a church is relevent to the members. It should not matter in any way as far as our laws are concerned. In other words YOUR church is not relevent to ME. Nor mine to you.
____________

Janice

Profile Gary Charpentier
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 25 Dec 00
Posts: 12043
Credit: 6,371,404
RAC: 8,620
United States
Message 1315600 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 16:10:34 UTC

Say you and your four wives are married at the mosque, are you married in a Catholic church? A Baptist church? A Mormon church? A Jewish temple?

____________

Profile Bernie Vine
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 May 99
Posts: 6782
Credit: 24,437,999
RAC: 26,997
United Kingdom
Message 1315620 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 17:09:42 UTC

The reason for this thread was that Chris stated in another thread that he was against same sex marriages in Church!

Simple and unambiguous.

I then asked;

Just let me ask one thing, does a Christian gay person have less rights than a heterosexual non Christian


Chris replied

No they both have the same rights. By that I mean that I don't think either should properly be married in a church.



But still not answered this
But a heterosexual non Christian CAN get married in a church. So would you also support a law to ban heterosexual non Christians from church marriages


Which to me is the crux of the matter, how can you justify a heterosexual non christian couple being allowed to marry in church and yet a christian gay couple cannot!

In this modern day and age that attitude is 100% discrimination.
____________


Today is life, the only life we're sure of. Make the most of today.


Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 2082
Credit: 37,623,668
RAC: 9,881
Message 1315624 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 17:14:47 UTC - in response to Message 1315620.
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 18:23:23 UTC

--

Profile Bernie Vine
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 May 99
Posts: 6782
Credit: 24,437,999
RAC: 26,997
United Kingdom
Message 1315645 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 17:44:28 UTC - in response to Message 1315624.

Why have marriage in the first place? If there is no marriage, then there can't be any discrimination.

A wonderful insightful comment that brings nothing to the conversation.

Why don't you start a thread on the reasons for and against marriage?
____________


Today is life, the only life we're sure of. Make the most of today.

Profile Es99
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 8615
Credit: 244,097
RAC: 141
Canada
Message 1315650 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 17:50:06 UTC

Marriage has always been a business transaction, always been about property, possessions etc.

That is why it was invented.

The reason why it is so important to recognise the rights of gay people to marriage is because the awful situation where some people were left in when their long term partners died.

I've known situations where on the death of a loved one, the deceased's family (who never approved of the relationship) moved in and took over the funeral arrangements and left the bereaved person unable to say good bye, attend the funeral, and not even have any rights of the possessions they shared together. They were given no say over the hospital care, and the estranged family were able to come in make decisions for the sick person when they don't even know what their wishes were.

This is obviously wrong and heartbreaking.

Imagine, spending your life with the person you love, at at the moment when you both need each other the most, being driven away and excluded as if you were nothing.
____________
Are you a feminist? Take the test

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 30991
Credit: 11,182,757
RAC: 19,942
United Kingdom
Message 1315655 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 17:56:53 UTC

But still not answered this

But a heterosexual non Christian CAN get married in a church. So would you also support a law to ban heterosexual non Christians from church marriages

Which to me is the crux of the matter, how can you justify a heterosexual non christian couple being allowed to marry in church and yet a christian gay couple cannot!

In this modern day and age that attitude is 100% discrimination.


I knew I shouldn't have started this, I really should have known better ....

1. It is up the the Church concerned, whether or not they wish to conduct a marriage service for heterosexual non christians or not. Some churches and pastors/vicars will, some wont.

2.Generally speaking churches will not conduct marriage services for gay couples, as it is against the bibles teachings.

In the first case if you are not Christian then it doesn't seem right to have a christian marriage. In the second case I didn't write the Bible, so I simply respect those that adhere to its teachings.

If people think all this is discrimination, then make your case to the Church, not to me.

So would you also support a law to ban heterosexual non Christians from church marriages

Of course not. It would not bother me one way or the other if non Christians were married in church. It also would not bother me one way or the other if same gender couples were to be married in church. At the present moment I don't think that either should be out of respect for the churches teachings, whether or not I agree with them.

Profile Es99
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 8615
Credit: 244,097
RAC: 141
Canada
Message 1315657 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 17:59:33 UTC - in response to Message 1315655.

But still not answered this

But a heterosexual non Christian CAN get married in a church. So would you also support a law to ban heterosexual non Christians from church marriages

Which to me is the crux of the matter, how can you justify a heterosexual non christian couple being allowed to marry in church and yet a christian gay couple cannot!

In this modern day and age that attitude is 100% discrimination.


I knew I shouldn't have started this, I really should have known better ....

1. It is up the the Church concerned, whether or not they wish to conduct a marriage service for heterosexual non christians or not. Some churches and pastors/vicars will, some wont.

2.Generally speaking churches will not conduct marriage services for gay couples, as it is against the bibles teachings.

In the first case if you are not Christian then it doesn't seem right to have a christian marriage. In the second case I didn't write the Bible, so I simply respect those that adhere to its teachings.

If people think all this is discrimination, then make your case to the Church, not to me.

So would you also support a law to ban heterosexual non Christians from church marriages

Of course not. It would not bother me one way or the other if non Christians were married in church. It also would not bother me one way or the other if same gender couples were to be married in church. At the present moment I don't think that either should be out of respect for the churches teachings, whether or not I agree with them.


The church used to consider woman property. Thankfully people have become a little more enlightened since then
____________
Are you a feminist? Take the test


Send message
Joined: 3 Apr 99
Posts: 2082
Credit: 37,623,668
RAC: 9,881
Message 1315660 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 18:19:19 UTC
Last modified: 21 Mar 2014, 18:37:27 UTC

--

Profile Chris S
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 30991
Credit: 11,182,757
RAC: 19,942
United Kingdom
Message 1315668 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 18:32:31 UTC

Guy, I simply cannot agree with that attitude. I'll let Es have the say, she'll put it better than I could.

Profile Es99
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 23 Aug 05
Posts: 8615
Credit: 244,097
RAC: 141
Canada
Message 1315673 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 18:44:43 UTC - in response to Message 1315660.

Marriage has always been a business transaction, always been about property, possessions etc.


OMG! There's a name for people like this. Amsterdam displays them in windows. Thailand has bars full of them. It's legal everywhere in Nevada except Las Vegas.

Now you are starting to understand a little why the feminist movement has fought so hard to change things.

I am glad your shocked. It's a shameful part of our history.

As a person whose gender identity is tied to his penis, I'm totally offended by this.

Good. It is offensive.

Marriage began as a way to ensure that property was passed down to ones male airs. The other side was to ensure that a man knew exactly who had fathered his children.

Dowries were not phased out so long ago, and are still around in some cultures. When a man married a woman she became his property along with any property she possessed. That has only changed recently with women being allowed to vote and own property in their own right.

Marriages were used to forge alliances between the ruling classes, and heaven help any woman who married against the families wishes. There are still remnants if this with tradition of the groom having to ask the brides father for permission. Remember, the woman was the property of the father until she was passed to the husband.

Until the Victorian era, not everyone got married. The poor had common law marriage and didn't always feel the need to actually wed.

Marriage is not an institution with a noble history...and your analogy of the prostitutes is a little off as women were considered little more than property. Prostitutes have a little more say in who they sell themselves to.
____________
Are you a feminist? Take the test

Profile Bernie Vine
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar
Send message
Joined: 26 May 99
Posts: 6782
Credit: 24,437,999
RAC: 26,997
United Kingdom
Message 1315680 - Posted: 15 Dec 2012, 19:03:53 UTC

I knew I shouldn't have started this, I really should have known better ....

Possibly, possibly not. It was your statement:

"I'm also not happy with their support of gay marriage." In reference to Nick Clegg and the Liberal Democrats support that made me question how I felt about it and found I agreed with them.

If gay people are accepted in society and are allowed "civil" partnerships and all the rights associated with that, it seems strange that one organisation, the Church, can deny them those same rights.

I actually know the reasons and I know that many people in the Church have a problem with women priests, let alone homosexuals. I do not suspect the Church will move in the 21st century in my lifetime.

"Politics and Religion" two subjects destined to cause fierce arguments, as a close friend always reminds me!!




____________


Today is life, the only life we're sure of. Make the most of today.

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 7 · Next

Message boards : Politics : Same Gender Marriage

Copyright © 2014 University of California