To think that the C of E church should not take a step back in time

[2beesornot2beesthatisthehoney]

So the bishops have made a statement that sex belongs only in a heterosexual marriage not in a gay relationship, marriage or otherwise , not in a civil partnership and not outside marriage. WTF
In an age where many have turned their back on religion aibu to think that they will alienate even more people
IMO the c of e used to be a broad welcoming church: it has become more and more conservative and evangelical in the last 10 years I don’t recognise it anymore.

The next head of the Church of England, Charles, has hardly led a life conforming to those ideals. And the next head after that, William, was openly living with Kate before they married.
Most couples live together before marriage and there can only be a handful of people who are virgins when they marry. Is this a way of bringing back the weekly castigating of sinners from the pulpit?

The Archbishop of York continually opposes adoption by gay people/couples.

This latest announcement shouldn't come as a surprise.

I’m appalled somebody in that position is allowed to publicly state and encourage such hideous views. My son and other teens like him are going to feel lovely on reading them.

Amylox, I'm bisexual. I can't force myself to be straight. So being against homophobia and not wanting to be seen as inferior because I'm not straight is 'woke' now? My G-d, I thought Mumsnet was LGB friendly at least.

The church has stated that it will stick to putting the rights and needs of children over adult sexual needs, shock horror.

How does homophobia put the needs and rights of children first. It does the exact reverse and damages children.

The church has stated that it will stick to putting the rights and needs of children over adult sexual needs, shock horror

What does that even mean?

The church has stated that it will stick to putting the rights and needs of children over adult sexual needs, shock horror.

@muminabun

How does the recent statement do that?

the point being made which you are missing totally is that it is not the being attracted to someone of the same sex that is considered a sin, it is the sexual act

That's still homophobic

The church has always recognised that marriage is between a man and a woman for the purposes of raising children. Not for any other reason. The church would argue that if this is the purpose then gay marriage is not marriage in the religious sense. Rightly or wrongly the church represents a religious faith and we are supposed to respect religions even if we may disagree with many things about them. Islam for example.

I will never respect any religion that preaches homophobia. None of us has to and shouldn’t. It needs to be called out.

Rightly or wrongly the church represents a religious faith and we are supposed to respect religions

Says who?

Rightly or wrongly the church represents a religious faith and we are supposed to respect religions [] Says who?

Well to start with, they [religions] do. Although sometimes it can get a tad over enthusiastic and they demand it. At which point it's game over. They're just a bunch of fascists in fancy dress.

What was the point of that non apology?

What was the point of that non apology?

Something must be done !

Hurrah !

It just adds insult to injury really.

Still want to know what @muminabun means by the rights and needs of children.

@Gliese163
The rights and needs of children to be brought up where possible by their biological mum and dad in a loving home. That is why the church support small Promotes marriage and always have. This is the core of the reason behind the church opposition to gay marriage although they have softened on that a lot.
The equality act 2010 makes religion and belief a protected characteristic in law but that doesn’t mean we cant and shouldn’t have reasonable
challenge

Unless your gay then your supposed to be celibate your whole life.

The rights and needs of children to be brought up where possible by their biological mum and dad in a loving home.

You are actually trying to defend the church's homophobia by stating that biological parents, whether they be violent, neglectful, abusive, addicts, etc, are better parents than a loving couple that happen to both be the same sex? Good grief.

The church is apparently okay with 'celibate civil partnerships. Is it okay for two people of the same sex to raise a child if they never have sex?

@Muminabun

@Otherewearethen
Can you show me where I have made that statement. You are hysterical 😂😂😂😂

@thewitcher
I don’t know because I don’t run the church and cannot speak for it. I imagine that this would be ok with the church if there was a reason why the child could not be raised by their biological mum and dad for example adoption etc.

It's all relative to whether you personally agree isn't it?

no-one would bat an eyelid if the CoE was to speak against adultery, underage sex, bestiality, or anyother form of sex they agree is wrong or undesirable.

If you agree these things are wrong then there is no need for anyone else who declares them wrong to be speaking only for themselves.

And if someone declares you Islamophobic for speaking out against child-marriage say, you don't care and carry on talking.

Whereas if you think X is not wrong then anyone else who declares it wrong should only speak for themselves.

Plus declaring them homophobic (or other pejorative term) is expected to immediately shut them up and stop them from speaking further.

no-one would bat an eyelid if the CoE was to speak against adultery, underage sex, bestiality, or anyother form of sex they agree is wrong or undesirable.

Yes, because those things are actually harmful.

Plus declaring them homophobic (or other pejorative term) is expected to immediately shut them up and stop them from speaking further.

But they are homophobic. They are using their position as the state religion to say that same sex relationships are somehow lesser than opposite sex relationships and gay people should not be allowed to get married.