to think that only people who worship Christ should have a church wedding or baptism

[HollyMiamiFLA]

And that those people who are not Christians but have a church wedding are just doing it because they want to be the centre of attention in a lovely white dress, to walk down the aisle with music playing and that all that stuff the vicar says about God etc is irrelevant because they don't actually believe it but they're going with the flow and it's traditional.

AIBU to think it's a facade - vicars go along with it because it keeps the church going, couples go along with it because it's tradition and they can ignore the religious stuff and true Christians probably get a bit annoyed but accept it?

HollyMiami, I don't understand what you mean sorry?!

''Well - you let most people in to have weddings there. But not all. And God forbid you let a female Bishop do the service.''

Your statement has nothing to do with the original post?

By the same vein only those who believe and worship Christ should celebrate Christmas?!??!?!

I don't really understand the view of the OP. Many people aren't active worshippers in God / Christ but still believe or feel its part of their heritage. if they want a Church wedding or baptism then why not?

Gay marriages. Are gay people who believe in God allowed to marry in their local church?

No.

Are people who are atheists allowed to marry in their local church?
Yes. If they are not gay.

just doing it because they want to be the centre of attention in a lovely white dress, to walk down the aisle with music playing

I'm a bit out of touch. Are there places you can get a civil marriage which are suitable for a formal wedding with lots of guests. Because I don't see anything wrong with the aisle and the music playing for non-christians.

With respect HollyMiami, the OP's post does not centre on gay rights. This might be a point worth raising on AIBU though?

Er, holly IS the OP...

With respect - I am the OP.

And when people say on the thread that the church welcomes all - that's not exactly true, is it?

Limara - get a grip Holly is the OO.

Personally I think that only true Christians who believe in following all the rules laid down in the Holy book of Leviticus (especially those relating to shellfish) should be allowed anywhere near a church. Anybody who thinks that the universe is older than 6000 years should also be banned. As should those who find the idea of the rapture to be laughable.
Potential marriage candidates should also be required to confirm that they believe that Noah topped up his ark with dinosaurs, apart from that anything goes.

So Limara - is the church open and welcoming to all for their marriage?

Regardless of faith and belief. Or lack of?

Not just Limara - any Christian who's posted on here and said the church is open to anyone to have a wedding there as it's part of the Commmunity and also the State Religion. And we are a Christian country after all.

Is it allowed to have a female bishop conduct the service? Just more of the Church's acceptance of everyone into their fold?

I like redbinneo's plan.

Leviticus is ...interesting. Always good to bring it up though. There's lots of rules and guidance in it.

Most of which seems to be forgotten

I also don't think it's all or nothing, and people are allowed to be at different stages at different times in their lives...

(liberal CofEs here)

I agree. I had an acquaintance who has never to my knowledge been to church other than at her christening get snotty with me about my civil ceremony because she got married in a church "because it's a wedding of
course. [snide glance]". I'm not christened and my children aren't either. I'm afraid I would find standing up there a bit hypocritical.

redbinneo Sun 16-Feb-14 20:10:19

Limara - get a grip Holly is the OO

I beg your pardon? I wouldn't dream of speaking to someone in real life like this I think you owe me an apology otherwise I will report you.

Have you been on MN long?
That's mild.

HollyMiami - I understood your post to be about hetrosexual couples because of references to a dress and did not see any reference to gay couples?

If you read my post, I say: "So, who am I to sit in judgement?" after I quoted Truffle who pretty much summed this view up.

I will not be drawn in to a discussion about gays or female bishops because I don't have enough knowledge about it and you did not refer to this in your original post.

Holly, I joined years ago but I will not be spoken to like that. There is no excuse for this cowardly behaviour, period.

Posts move on.

People have said that the church is open to all. It's been said a lot on this thread.

It isn't. So that's just more lies from the Church and lack of tolerance.

This is AIBU. Being told to get a grip is mild.

And TBF - you did not realise I was the OP and had a go at me for adding to my thread.

As the thread starter, I think I can take this thread anywhere I want

Holy- how did I have a go at you?

I said: With respect HollyMiami, the OP's post does not centre on gay rights. This might be a point worth raising on AIBU though? Perfectly rational post.

"
"Your statement has nothing to do with the original post?"

Implying that I should not post if it's not about the OP.

Which I can. Because there's not many rules on AIBU.

Before this turns into a big fight...
I can see why the OP is seemingly referring to heterosexual weddings only, as same-sex weddings cannot take place in church (assuming we are talking mainstream).
However, holly is right that the posts have developed, and she was answering those points.
One thing confuses me though - gay women do wear dresses.
Oh, and I hate 'gays' as a term.
And breathe...