to think that everyone should be forced to see homosexuals as equal......

[PosiePumblechook]

In every discussion regarding gay marriage, or marriage as I like to call it, there seems to be this crazy insistence that the church/mosque/Synagogue won't be forced to perform gay marriages.... It's still okay for them to condemn it too.

Why are people, some of which are not homophobic, still following a God that, at best, is homophobic?

Does that mean the Bible believing Christians who are homophobic and quote scripture to support their views are wrong? -IMO it does mean they are wrong. And I say that as a Christian.

In fairness though, this was seen as an extreme view by the church as well.

But it shouldn't have been, according to their definitions. I accept that there are articles of faith which cannot be proven or disproven (the effectiveness of prayer, for example). But if a religion wishes to hold a particular view of the purpose of marriage, it needs to hold this consistently. I accept as well that a couple who marry and then discover they are unable to have children are acting within the spirit of that conviction but if the statement that marriage is intended for the procreation and education of children is intended to override the earlier one that there are many reasons why people get married (which presumably it is) then everyone who falls outside those parameters must be excluded.

TheFallenMadonna
couldn't agree more. I've always thought that the word marriage has become loaded in this context and a large part of the reason why some oppose same-sex marriages. I think the legal document/contract should have a neutral title such as Civil Union/Partnership/Contract etc. which is available to all and carries all the legal rights and benefits. Then whatever private blessing or ceremony people want to get is their own business and they can call it whatever they like.

swallowedafly but in the scenario you outline, surely that individual, being brought up in the church and it being a huge part of her life would have known for as long as she was aware of her sexuality that she would not be able to be married in that church. She could probably have a blessing on the CP. Personally I think that all non-religious ceremonies should be called CP rather than marriages and that people who co-habit but who are not romantically involved should also be able to enter into one for legal reasons (eg siblings). Marriage is an ancient institution, religious in origin and if the situation were as I have outlined above there would be less feeling perhaps that homosexuals are being singled out. Lots of people are barred from lots of things - men can't join the WI, I can't join most the private members clubs in London - the marriage /CP thing is really only a semantic issue for people who want things to get annoyed about. Religious groups have the right to define their terms as they see fit. We currently feel in (this) society that homosexuality is normal, not an abberation etc (and I happen to agree) but that does not mean we are objectively, morally right. We have no more moral authority on this than anyone else who has different views. Just because the majority of people in the West accept it does not de facto make it right and if you come from any religious tradition the morality of that religion comes from God and therefore DOES have more authority, FOR THEM. Why should (even supposing you could to refer back to the OP) they be forced to go against the beliefs that they hold as dearly as the rest of us do?

Seeker - yes, they have got it wrong and are missing the point of their religion massively!
(Am fully aware tis a tad arrogant of me to say thousands of Christians in USA are wrong and I'm right, but I do think this!)

Lesley - yes I know that...but not all churches hold the same view...would you really want to be part of a community that openly disapproved of how you lived your life and only agreed to performing marriage ceremonies because they had been forced to? I just really wondered if churches and mosques that took this stance were made to accommodate this whether there would be a load of people queueing up to be married there, I can't see it.

I wouldn't want to celebrate my marriage with someone saying the ceremony through gritted teeth knowing they didn't believe in what they were saying...

That's why I said "Bible believing!"

Where is the evidence that God is not homophobic?

yes of course they are wrong seeker, why don't you ask whether terrorist extremists have their interpretations and use of sacred texts wrong too?

I don't know why I am quite so upset about that stupid letter, I don't go to church to be reminded of all that is impossible about the institution - I go for inspiration to find practical applications of my faith, for comfort and guidance and for the Eucharist and to be part of a community who are active in caring for one another and the wider community beyond the parish itself.

it is not just religious people that are homophobic,
tbh I think the pig ignorant non church person is just as bad.

Where is the evidence that God is not homophobic?

What sort of evidence are you looking for seeker?

YANBU surely their actions should be illegal too.

I think the existence of homosexuality is substantive evidence that god is not homophobic.

Wouldn't we need to start with evidence that God existed first?!
I don't think God is homophobic based on the definition of the word, and how I interpret that. God is all-good being one of the accepted definitions - if you're homophobic you're not omnibenevolent. So a homophobic God wouldn't really be "God", in my opinion.

Oh and btw I agree that all should be treated equally in law, so Yanbu.

YABU - forcing anyone to do anything is just as bad as what you are suggesting

Catholic prelates have a flaming cheek preaching on sexual morality, given the wholesale abuse of thousands of children in every continent of the world on which human beings live. Abuse which is still being covered up. Look at Ealing Abbey and the 'child protection officer' in the South West who has been arrested for having images of abuse on his computer.

Joseph Ratzinger sent a letter to Catholic priests telling them to hide child abuse before he became Pope. The whole institution is rotten to the core.

(That doesn't mean individual Catholics are evil, of course. But the institution is. I assume senior Catholic priests are liars who don't actually believe a word of the religion they claim to profess, otherwise they wouldn't have done all this in the name of someone who said 'suffer the little children to come unto me'.)

"Where is the evidence that God is not homophobic?

What sort of evidence are you looking for seeker?"

No idea! Everything I have ever heard people say over q long life has pointed to the fact that he must be, because his followers almost always are. I was just wondering if there was any evidence to the contrary that I had missed. It seems to me significant that non homophobic Christians always have to do a bit of a logical/linguistic jig-step to explain their liberal views!

So would a church refuse to marry two elderly people, on the grounds that their union is unlikely to result in babies?

Freedom of association doesn't really exist in this country. If you refuse to employ someone or have them stay in your hotel, on the grounds that they are gay and you personally think homosexuality is wrong, you would rightly be prevented from doing so. But the church can say it won't marry people who are gay. Imagine a church being allowed to operate in this country which stated that it didn't believe in equality for black members or female members or disabled members. It wouldn't be allowed to continue, on the grounds that is contravenes out equality laws. And rightly so. But no one gives a shit about gay people. Perfectly okay to ignore their entitlement to equal treatment under the law.

It comes down to whether church law is deemed to be more important than state law. If we are going to say that churches are excepted from compliance with equality laws, then religions will be able to impose all sorts of things on their followers which contradict national laws. At what point does the state say 'no, this isn't acceptable'.

I had the most horrific discussion at work about homosexuals last week, i didn't start the conversation, it came about after a bit of banter in the office, not started by me either, and it turned into how accepting people are of gay people. I said i wasn't homophobic in anyway, and its nothing to do with me who other people choose to sleep with, then..

by bosses started comparing gay people to pedophiles, saying they were the same, and other stuff to awful to write..

I honestly couldn't believe how people can still have this attitude.

How stupid.

God not being homophobic is found in the same scripture as women and men are equal!!

I am mostly antoganistic, but frequently attend church to support DH who is Catholic. I was shocked to be read the letter linked to above in this morning's service, but don't think it is something for concern: DH came out of the service saying the letter had changed his mind. Having heard the church's argument he is now in favour of gay marriage because of how poor the argument was.

It does give an image of an out of touch homophobic church though, and will make it less likely that I will go again.

was it read in every parish then?

It felt very forced, our pp did not seem to relish delivering the message at all, it was nothing like his usual message.