Aibu to think that sueing the church over gay marriage is not acceptable?

[Orlux]

Here:

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2383686/Millionaire-gay-fathers-sue-Church-England-allowing-married-church.html

I supported the right of gay couples to have same rights as heterosexual ones, but I feel this is going to far. Plus my religious friends (I'm agnostic) are now having a go at my naivety.

in the UK

It does if true - the whole thing would stink of rank hypocrisy. It would indicate there's no practising Christianity here, so they might as well take their claim to marry to a mosque or a synagogue.

I don't think that churches should be forced to conduct gay weddings but get a grip - a wedding is just one day! What's more important is how welcoming the church / synagogue / mosque is after the wedding. Can children be baptised? Have a bar mitzvah? Etc

Basically it would be cherry picking the bits of Christianity which suit them and - surprise surprise - that obviously wouldn't involve anything which stops them doing exactly what they want to do, whenever they want to do it, including upsetting vast numbers of people, simply because they want to, not because it has any impact on their life, or stops them having children, or having their relationship legally recognised, or even recognised by a religious institution, or having a family life, or anything. Simply because they want to and they can, and as MrsDV so rightly points out, because they've got the money to do it. Quite frankly if they're so enamoured of gay rights there are plenty better ways to spend the money to improve the rights of gay people round the world. But they wouldn't get quite so much attention or upset so many middle-stump people. They could upset some intolerant people who would get genuinely angry and be genuinely troublesome to this couple, but there's no way they'd do that. Too much trouble in return for too little attention.

The Old Testament is full of multiple marriages too - well multiple wives anyway. I am fairly sure that in at least some cases it was God who set up the arrangements, or at the very least blessed them. Plus a fair few handmaids were pressed into service for the purpose of bearing children. I'm not sure that the Bible is a helpful guide to modern morals.

And in any case as MrsDV says it is utterly irrelevant. The CoE as the establishment church should not have barriers to entry, or at the very least they should not be discriminatory in nature. If everyone had to be 'pure' to get married there would be very very few marriages.

And god forbid (!) anyone ever 'cherry pick' bits of Christianity, like that bloke in the New Testament who suggested, er, cherry-picking bits of the Old Testament. I'm sure I'll remember his name in a minute.

Of course it has relevance. They're taking this case to the Cof E specifically because they claim to be practising Christians. If they're not, then they might as well take it to a mosque or a synagogue.

Do the rules cover all religions? What are other religious leaders saying about gay marriage in their religions?

Everyone cherry picks bits of Christianity! Much of the Bible is really very unpleasant or just rather weird. Even the churches ignore great chunks of it. The central message of the New Testament is about love, not sex.

I suspect that they are taking it to the CoE because under the new legislation it is the only church that is specifically prohibited from marrying gay people. If it had not been I very much doubt this case would have been brought at all.

Yup - they can have a civil partnership and a religious ceremony but they just want the one thing they think other people have and they can't. Childish behaviour, with money behind it. I don't believe there's anything genuine here, not for one minute, except a genuine desire to cause trouble and create hostility and upset.

Many people do try to cherry pick - and the Church of England is exceptionally tolerant. Most people don't try to bring the Church to its knees while doing so.

'Perhaps the comment I'm hoping for is a "thanks for the education", or a "gosh I had no idea I was so naïve'

Naïve about what? How dreadful Muslims are?

Being openly homophobic and racist (or religionist?) outs you as either very, very stupid or a goady troll, both of which are generally best ignored.

The problem stems from the fact that the C of E is an established religion. Ridiculous, in this day and age, and that's what led to that stipulation in the bill that gay marriage in the CofE was expressly prohibited. There should be disestablishment, and then the CofE would be in the same boat as other religions ie it couldn't be forced to reform gay marriage (but not expressly prohibited either).

Forgive me for suggesting that perhaps if the Church spent more time on its knees, things would be better?

That is after all one of the primary functions - to pray, not to alienate and judge people.

I have been neither racist or homophobe - but there we are - when the argument weakens one falls back on insults. You prove my point.

No, not how dreadful Muslims are, and I sincerely hope you do not believe that. You indicated that there was no more intolerance in the Muslim community/Muslim countries than where? England? Christian countries. Why would you believe that unless you didn't know about the levels of intolerance, the laws, the death penalties, the sharia communities in the UK?

Neat elision LRD. I meant bring the Church down. But neat elision

What on earth do you think I'm eliding?

That's right because occasionally marrying gay Christians would destroy the CoE wouldn't it? What absolute tosh.

'They're taking this case to the Cof E specifically because they claim to be practising Christians. If they're not, then they might as well take it to a mosque or a synagogue.'

fess up, you don't even know what the law is do you?!

They're taking it to the CofE because that's the only one they're banned by law from. They can legally get married in a Mosque or Synagogue!

By bringing the church to its knees I meant bringing the church down, not making it pray. Perhaps I meant to say "deliberately misunderstanding" not eliding.

They're probably 'picking' on the CofE because it's the official religion of the country which has permanent seats in the house of lords.

Yes - I do but the other religious organisations who don't want to conduct gay marriage have what's being called a quadruple lock to protect them and would be just as vulnerable to legal action . If this couple aren't practising Christians they have no reason to wish to be married in a Church at all and no reason to bring this case.

Basically none of this is about marriage or love or the sanctity of marriage. None of it. Thanks for confirming it.

Yes, the CofE as an established religion is the problem here. Once the state accepts that gay people are allowed to marry on the same basis as straight people, then to exclude gay couples from marriage in the official state religion is discriminatory and unjustifiable.