In not understanding why churches are anti gay marriage?

[BlingLoving]

I don't agree with, but do understand, why churches will refuse to sanctify gay marriage. The Church ultimately decides what's right for its individual practitioners.

But I don't understand why they feel gay marriage must not happen full stop and why it supposedly undermines heterosexual marriage? The catholic church does not agree with pre-marital sex but it isn't out there trying to stop the rest of us.

I genuinely would like to understand why some religious groups think same sex marriage harms their heterosexual relationships. If simply makes no sense to me.

Krumbum

We shouldn't make allowances for bigots. That's like saying a hotel owner should be able to not allow black people to stay at their hotel and we can't interfere because they just have different beliefs than non racists.

If we should make no allowance for bigots, then we should be making no allowance for you. Your obstinate intolerance to the views of other people makes you no different to the church. Of course, I know you think you're "right" and everyone else is "wrong", and by your definition of bigotry, you can only be a bigot if you oppose gay marriage.

But who's more dogmatic here? The church, refusing to sanctify gay marriage, or you, for decreeing that churches should be forbidden from sanctifying marriages unless they bow to your early 21st century western metropolitan left-wing views?

Flatpack - they are not refusing to sanctify gay marriage (and I personally don't have issues with faiths refusing that if that's their stance) but I have an issue that they are lobbying to not let civil partnerships be called 'marriage'. Now that I do have an issue with.

We shouldn't make allowances for bigots. That's like saying a hotel owner should be able to not allow black people to stay at their hotel and we can't interfere because they just have different beliefs than non racists.

Hmm interesting. I was about to disagree and say that it's the Church's business what marriages they perform and which ones they don't, they just don't have the right to prevent civil marriages. But then, if they refused to marry a mixed-race man and woman, everyone would be up in arms about it.

I'm advocating freedom they are advocating restriction. If you want to do the job of performing marriages it shouldn't be up to you who gets married.

I was married by a humanist, no religion involved. Have I undermined marriage then too?

But then, if they refused to marry a mixed-race man and woman, everyone would be up in arms about it.

Did you not see this one in the papers the other day?

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/9436486/Mississippi-church-turns-black-couple-away-who-wanted-to-marry.html

Do you know what the bible says about cyber-sex? Nothing. Times change, mankind grows and moves forwards. Jesus didn't have all the answers to everything that happens in the future so the idea that everybody should live their life according to a 2000 year old book is ridiculous. If God doesn't like it he's perfectly able to send somebody down and give us an updated version.

Mosques really don;t like gay any thing. To the point of stoning

Personally I think people who marry and divorce multiple times ruin the sanctity of marriage. It actually does make it meaningless. But the church will let people do this happily. I'd never want to stop people having the right to marry over and over again because it's not my business though.
It's funny how if you look at ultra right wing anti gay rights people in the media they have often been married 3 or more times!

Churches are anti gay marriage because according to the bible marriage is between a man and woman only for the purpose of procreation.

In the uk you can be married by a registrar ( civil non relegious marriage - this is what gay couples have now) or as we are a Christian country albeit non secular state in church. ( not enabled for gay couples) If you are Muslim, Jewish or another you get married by registrar for the legalities and then technically blessed by your own religious service as you so wish. ( currently also available for straight/ homosexual)

If we pass a law enabling gays to be married in church then you place the church in an invidious position whereby legally it has an obligation to marry gays but fundamentally they cannot as it goes againt their beliefs. The church ( catholic ) will respond as it did when adoption agencies were forced to place children with gay couples they immediately shut them down. The catholic church and COE have said if you force this on us then we will have no choice but to cease marrying anybody in church to prevent us being sued for discrimination. The gov is now trying to create a fudge to say we will give you legal protection against that type of suit.

It is a complicated issue. I think all couples gay or straight have the right to declare their love and lifelong commitment but I do not believe that the average jack and jill in the street should have the opportunity to get married in church denied to them because a small minority want to force religious change

Tiggy - good point - and these organisations want to dominate what the term 'marriage' means. Well language changes and the term 'marriage' is ripe for change.

Your blaming the the wrong people there. It's not the fault of gay people if the church choose to shut down performing weddings. That's their own choice.

Because the church whether it be Catholic, Protestant, Baptist, Muslim, Mormon etc. etc. are all run by bigoted, fascist, racist, sexist, homophobic, prejudiced men, who pick and choose the rules themselves as and when they see fit.

As far as I know the Catholic Church doesn't recognise civil marriage anyway.

People who get married in a registry office are not married and are living in sin. Ergo, gay people who get married in a registry office will also not actually be married in the eyes of the Catholic Church.

I'm not sure how two people not getting married (in the eyes of the Church) can undermine good Catholic marriages .

Tbh, as a practicing Christian the whole thing has made me think we should just be like France and make anyone who wants a legal marriage get married in a civil ceremony. What you do after that (Church wedding, pagan handfasting ceremony, Jewish/Muslim/Hindu ceremony) is up to you. Then it's completely separate and they've got nothing to moan about.

Jules, noone is proposing a law that would force churches to marry gay people. This is all about civil marriage.

The Churches' arguments in this regard is a big ol' straw man.

Exactly what sleepy head said. We don't need the church to marry us if we go down the same route as France.

I personally couldn't give 2hoots if the church sees me as married, in the eyes of the law I am and that is good enough for me.

For example, the Catholic Church currently refuses to marry whole swathes of people that can quite legally get married in a civil ceremony.

And yet, and yet... we don't have thousands of divorced people beating at the doors of the courts to change this discriminatory position.

"noone is proposing a law that would force churches to marry gay people"

Actually I think churches should have to make provision for the marriage of gay people. There are enough Christians who take the view that it would be a good thing, so their views should be provided for. No individual will have to decide to do so, but the church should allow it for those believers who choose it :)

And "oh well you can have a civil ceremony" isn't good enough; it's still discriminatory.

"And yet, and yet... we don't have thousands of divorced people beating at the doors of the courts to change this discriminatory position."

And what if these people were prevented from even having their first wedding in church, just because of their sexuality? I expect they'd be protesting...

I agree canoe.

Churches, plural, are not opposed to gay marriage. The Quakers, for instance, are in favour. Some churches are over-reaching their powers by trying to make the rules for civil marriage. None of their business at all. What's more, the Catholic church should sort out its own problems before condemning anyone else.

Isn't there an issue that the Church of England is required to marry people who want to get married there, as the established church? [haven't done the reading on this]

So if it becomes legal to be married to a partner of the same sex, you will also have the right to marry someone of the same sex in your parish church?

This would obviously, in my view, be a good thing and a v positive development for the church. Possibly the church hierarchy feels they either have to sign up to this or go for disestablishment, which would be a big deal as well. Not sure I've got it right though?

some churches oppose some things, not al churches oppose all things.

There are enough liberal churches out there, United Reformed for example, who marry divorcees, no quibble.

One would have thought if you are a practicing XYZ then you know the XYZ church stance on divorce, homophobia, whatever, therefore you wouldn't ask to marry in that church. If you just want pretty wedding photos, then you go somewhere, like United Reformed, who will marry anyone.

I wasn't allowed to get married in a Catholic church because dh had been married before. I was disappointed but I accept that the church has its beliefs and that's that. It's not just gay couples who have this issue.