Churches are very much about belief (note, state churches should be excluded from everything I say here). If a church believes that homosexuality is a sinful way of being, not to mention having gay sex, then it makes no sense to ask them to sanction that behaviour in their rituals. Much like you would not expect a synagogue's kitchen to boil meat in milk.
More importantly. Any homosexual couple wishing to belong to particular branch of the religion represented by such a church would be expected to hold roughly the same views and would not want to get married to someone of the same sex and have happy, sinful sex sanctioned by ritual (yes, I am simplifying).
And as long as the religious ritual of the particular church does not have any effect on legal status and what you get to call it, that should not matter.
More importantly. Any homosexual couple wishing to belong to particular branch of the religion represented by such a church would be expected to hold roughly the same views and would not want to get married to someone of the same sex and have happy, sinful sex sanctioned by ritual (yes, I am simplifying).
And as long as the religious ritual of the particular church does not have any effect on legal status and what you get to call it, that should not matter.
The point is that many individuals are married in spite of their sins, yet homosexuality is condemned and refused on such a higher level. The church would sooner marry to murderers than two homosexuals.
You must unlearn what you have learned.
Gay Marriage
- 12/08/2010 10:23:19 AM
2138 Views
I disagree on the latter part
- 12/08/2010 12:04:15 PM
1469 Views
I follow your point...
- 12/08/2010 12:14:17 PM
1465 Views
Suspect you would find plenty of denominations that would argue with you rather strenuously.
- 12/08/2010 12:24:55 PM
1505 Views
See, that's what I'm saying...
- 12/08/2010 07:37:26 PM
1416 Views
You didn't read my post.
- 12/08/2010 09:10:21 PM
1346 Views
Actually, you didn't read my post
- 12/08/2010 09:23:54 PM
1430 Views
Um, you're wrong.
- 12/08/2010 09:37:13 PM
1367 Views
- 12/08/2010 09:37:13 PM
1367 Views
Re: Um, you're wrong.
- 12/08/2010 09:44:17 PM
1328 Views
- 12/08/2010 09:44:17 PM
1328 Views
Boy Scouts of America v. Dale. And no, he described it accurately. *NM*
- 12/08/2010 09:53:31 PM
689 Views
You're still wrong.
- 12/08/2010 09:54:55 PM
1474 Views
- 12/08/2010 09:54:55 PM
1474 Views
Re: You're still wrong.
- 12/08/2010 09:58:26 PM
1323 Views
- 12/08/2010 09:58:26 PM
1323 Views
Again, you are still wrong.
- 12/08/2010 10:04:42 PM
1398 Views
- 12/08/2010 10:04:42 PM
1398 Views
Re: Again, you are still wrong.
- 12/08/2010 10:17:13 PM
1224 Views
- 12/08/2010 10:17:13 PM
1224 Views
Wrong definition of "club"
- 12/08/2010 10:30:52 PM
1495 Views
Re: Wrong definition of "club"
- 12/08/2010 10:40:55 PM
1414 Views
Also
- 12/08/2010 10:02:44 PM
1445 Views
And wrong again.
- 12/08/2010 10:08:24 PM
1456 Views
- 12/08/2010 10:08:24 PM
1456 Views
Not so quick!
- 12/08/2010 10:21:31 PM
1288 Views
- 12/08/2010 10:21:31 PM
1288 Views
Yes, so quick!
- 12/08/2010 10:32:13 PM
1236 Views
Let's be reasonable here
- 12/08/2010 10:41:53 PM
1345 Views
Why do you get to judge?
- 12/08/2010 10:48:57 PM
1381 Views
I don't
- 12/08/2010 10:53:21 PM
1281 Views
OK.
- 12/08/2010 10:58:22 PM
1378 Views
Re: OK.
- 12/08/2010 11:03:50 PM
1345 Views
Here's the thing: your opinion seems to be informed by the Roman Catholic Faith.
- 12/08/2010 11:14:03 PM
1290 Views
Re: Here's the thing: your opinion seems to be informed by the Roman Catholic Faith.
- 12/08/2010 11:23:35 PM
1402 Views
Then please stop.
- 12/08/2010 11:01:05 PM
1352 Views
- 12/08/2010 11:01:05 PM
1352 Views
What's wrong with discussion?
- 12/08/2010 11:05:48 PM
1305 Views
Discussion? Nothing. Your assertions about other people's views, something.
- 12/08/2010 11:09:48 PM
1312 Views
What, because the expressive message of scouting is anti-gay?
- 12/08/2010 10:12:54 PM
1200 Views
Re: What, because the expressive message of scouting is anti-gay?
- 12/08/2010 10:23:36 PM
1326 Views
Well then that brings us back to my question, which you have yet to answer.
- 12/08/2010 10:36:48 PM
1321 Views
Re: Well then that brings us back to my question, which you have yet to answer.
- 12/08/2010 10:46:22 PM
1423 Views
Not entirely true either... or, well, true as far as Brown goes.
- 12/08/2010 10:08:42 PM
1296 Views
Actually, I did. And since everyone else told you you're wrong about that I didn't see any need
- 12/08/2010 09:38:33 PM
1396 Views
Re: Actually, I did. And since everyone else told you you're wrong about that I didn't see any need
- 12/08/2010 09:55:05 PM
1296 Views
Gah.
- 12/08/2010 09:59:45 PM
1248 Views
What a mature response.
- 12/08/2010 10:11:00 PM
1468 Views
I can't speak for Rebekah, but I don't think the issue is that your points are invalid per se.
- 12/08/2010 10:22:30 PM
1261 Views
Um
- 12/08/2010 09:46:43 PM
1417 Views
That's a very good question. *NM*
- 12/08/2010 09:49:05 PM
663 Views
It makes no sense
- 12/08/2010 04:29:24 PM
1251 Views
Re: It makes no sense
- 12/08/2010 07:39:25 PM
1314 Views
Re: It makes no sense
- 12/08/2010 07:41:02 PM
1415 Views
Yes, but while marrying two murderers does not ensure that they will continue to murder...
- 12/08/2010 09:08:53 PM
1237 Views
Re: Yes, but while marrying two murderers does not ensure that they will continue to murder...
- 12/08/2010 09:42:21 PM
1367 Views
What other church sanctioned circumstances encourage continued sin?
- 12/08/2010 09:45:33 PM
1402 Views
Re: What other church sanctioned circumstances encourage continued sin?
- 13/08/2010 11:04:02 AM
1400 Views
Wow, it's almost like an entire denomination believes that!
*NM*
- 13/08/2010 03:41:07 PM
655 Views
- 13/08/2010 03:43:26 PM
1146 Views
*NM*
- 13/08/2010 03:41:07 PM
655 Views
- 13/08/2010 03:43:26 PM
1146 Views
Yeah, that's the Roman Catholic basis against masturbation and contraception. *NM*
- 13/08/2010 04:12:00 PM
623 Views
Yes
- 13/08/2010 04:22:58 PM
1205 Views
Dude....please at least have a working knowledge of the Bible before you spout off.
- 12/08/2010 10:47:13 PM
1217 Views
secular marriage is decoupled from religious marriage
- 12/08/2010 02:50:43 PM
1438 Views
Simple, require the legal and religious marriage to be performed separately.
- 12/08/2010 02:58:43 PM
1268 Views
And they are, in fact, separate right now in the US. They're just called the same thing.
- 12/08/2010 03:29:26 PM
1310 Views
It's not the same name that's confusing so much as the single ceremony. Or so it seems to me.
- 12/08/2010 03:37:20 PM
1296 Views
I disagree. I think giving the legal institution the same name as the sacrament is the problem.
- 12/08/2010 03:59:43 PM
1296 Views
What in the world would that accomplish?
- 12/08/2010 03:44:32 PM
1346 Views
Provide some much-needed clarity, evidently.
- 12/08/2010 03:49:33 PM
1175 Views
the problem is it would be changing a centuries old tradition..
- 12/08/2010 04:26:47 PM
1221 Views
heheheheheheheHAHAHAHEHEHehehehehahheeh*cough*
- 12/08/2010 04:55:09 PM
1232 Views
thats OK I am sure you will get over it
- 12/08/2010 05:22:08 PM
1247 Views
Just guessing, but I think it was the "centuries old tradition" that set off the giggle fit.
- 12/08/2010 07:25:38 PM
1346 Views
Really? I was hoping for something better
- 12/08/2010 10:06:00 PM
1293 Views
So government recognition makes your religion meaningful?
- 12/08/2010 10:11:54 PM
1408 Views
not my religion I'm agnostic
- 12/08/2010 10:34:40 PM
1238 Views
I'm not far left, thank you very much. *NM*
- 12/08/2010 10:20:31 PM
720 Views
no but your are European and that slants your views
*NM*
- 12/08/2010 10:36:01 PM
700 Views
*NM*
- 12/08/2010 10:36:01 PM
700 Views
Simples
- 12/08/2010 09:30:31 PM
1327 Views
there are about 140 post ranging from boyscouts to infant babtism
- 12/08/2010 10:57:46 PM
1290 Views
So.
- 14/08/2010 01:27:59 AM
1169 Views
sorry I responded I forgot what a tool you are. my bad
- 14/08/2010 02:48:57 AM
1687 Views
You spout some utter gibberish then dish out insults when called on it? Very funny
- 15/08/2010 12:47:04 PM
1522 Views
- 15/08/2010 12:47:04 PM
1522 Views
Agreed *NM*
- 12/08/2010 03:45:04 PM
579 Views
I love you, Camilla
- 12/08/2010 04:02:15 PM
1119 Views
Re: I love you, Camilla
- 12/08/2010 04:04:10 PM
1313 Views
A couple of things
- 12/08/2010 12:58:09 PM
1307 Views
there is major flaw in your argument
- 12/08/2010 03:31:45 PM
1441 Views
Re: there is major flaw in your argument
- 12/08/2010 04:01:32 PM
1318 Views
I should clarify that I support gay marriage
- 12/08/2010 05:20:36 PM
1263 Views
One point about Prop. 8
- 12/08/2010 07:38:55 PM
1280 Views
I know that is the commonl;y held belief but I thinkit is wrong
- 12/08/2010 10:32:58 PM
1210 Views
Religious institutions, though, pushed hard to pass it.
- 12/08/2010 10:42:33 PM
1304 Views
that doesn’t translate into people voting for religious reasons
- 12/08/2010 11:19:48 PM
1117 Views
Bigotry and Fear that are supported and encouraged by religious institutions.
- 12/08/2010 11:32:30 PM
1284 Views
there are major flaws in your argument
- 12/08/2010 07:51:52 PM
1449 Views
Women can't be priests in the Catholic church.
- 12/08/2010 08:00:24 PM
1066 Views
Forcing religious institutions to marry gay couples is hideously unconstitutional.
- 12/08/2010 04:18:59 PM
1383 Views
You are absolutely wrong
- 12/08/2010 07:57:19 PM
1353 Views
Your arguments are so specious and stupid I don't know where to begin.
- 13/08/2010 05:04:17 AM
1247 Views
Why do people equate....
- 12/08/2010 07:11:15 PM
1306 Views
Because "homophobic", like "xenophobic", has shifted a bit in meaning...
- 12/08/2010 07:33:56 PM
1329 Views
Because your reasons for being against gay marriage are so specious *NM*
- 12/08/2010 07:59:42 PM
725 Views
I particularly enjoy the implied assumption that your a good enough judge of my motivations. *NM*
- 12/08/2010 09:24:14 PM
680 Views
Re: Why do people equate....
- 12/08/2010 08:04:24 PM
1500 Views
+1
- 12/08/2010 08:06:19 PM
1446 Views
Stop with the pile on Camilla.
- 12/08/2010 09:22:35 PM
1372 Views
You would have said nothing if I had just said "agreed"
- 12/08/2010 09:27:33 PM
1194 Views
Which speaks highly of you....
- 12/08/2010 09:36:30 PM
1392 Views
This is being very petty. *NM*
- 12/08/2010 09:41:26 PM
691 Views
As opposed to a snarky +1 comment? *NM*
- 12/08/2010 09:45:02 PM
706 Views
It's not snarky.
- 12/08/2010 09:47:47 PM
1355 Views
Its a +1 shorthand comment...
- 12/08/2010 09:52:04 PM
1611 Views
Wow. Those two characters allowed you to read Camilla's motivations?
- 12/08/2010 09:54:25 PM
1234 Views
Re: Why do people equate....
- 12/08/2010 09:13:07 PM
1443 Views
you are exactly why the state needs to make a clear seperation between the secular and religious
- 12/08/2010 09:33:22 PM
1289 Views
Ok, so if the state does then...
- 12/08/2010 09:44:31 PM
1211 Views
No, marriage started because of property.
- 12/08/2010 09:59:14 PM
1326 Views
So then two things come to mind...
- 12/08/2010 10:04:39 PM
1290 Views
Only two?
- 12/08/2010 10:27:08 PM
1296 Views
- 12/08/2010 10:27:08 PM
1296 Views
That's a little difficult to do
- 13/08/2010 03:19:32 PM
1507 Views
Re: That's a little difficult to do
- 13/08/2010 03:30:14 PM
1360 Views
yes but about half of the old testament deals with protecting those rights
- 13/08/2010 05:16:09 PM
1291 Views
The relationship between religion and rain go even farther back...
- 13/08/2010 06:15:32 PM
1287 Views
Actually, I agree with that
- 12/08/2010 10:01:37 PM
1182 Views
See, what I don't get is why gay people care about
- 12/08/2010 08:18:45 PM
1284 Views
It's mostly about getting married in the eyes of the state.
- 12/08/2010 08:42:52 PM
1392 Views
I'm fairly sure Jonte was referring only to the "churches have to accept gay marriages" bit. *NM*
- 12/08/2010 08:44:52 PM
717 Views
Starting again
- 12/08/2010 08:23:08 PM
1406 Views
Not at all
- 12/08/2010 10:58:45 PM
1332 Views
Re: Not at all
- 13/08/2010 09:14:48 AM
1102 Views
Agreed *NM*
- 13/08/2010 10:21:06 AM
580 Views
Oh dear
- 13/08/2010 10:30:45 AM
1203 Views
I suppose you also think that religious Pacifists should be eligible for the draft?
- 12/08/2010 08:42:21 PM
1365 Views

*NM*
*NM*
*NM*