What are your thoughts on Chruch's refusing to wed gays?

[sojourner]

Really?
I've never heard of that happening. Any links to a report of this?
Tom

Unfortunately, no.

 

[columbus]

Unfortunately, no.

I don't think it has ever happened myself. The USA is utterly dominated by religious people who would never allow a threat to their dominance stand without a major court battle.
That is why they feel free to become PACs.
Tom

 

[Smart_Guy]

I have a confusion in this subject; does marriage have to be in a Church? I heard some views that marriage is not originally a religious practice, so why does it have to be in a Church for those believing so, or with the opinion that gay marriage is not acceptable by religion, and Churches are build based on religion?!

I'm confused!

 

[Shad]

I have a confusion in this subject; does marriage have to be in a Church? I heard some views that marriage is not originally a religious practice, so why does it have to be in a Church for those believing so, or with the opinion that gay marriage is not acceptable by religion, and Churches are build based on religion?!

I'm confused!

It does not have to be in a Church as a national law. Marriage ceremonies are performed in Churches due to religious traditions. However since marriage is regulated by the government no amount of "I do" makes their marriage legal. Both civil and religious marriages need to meet a few requirements made by the government. The only difference in a legal standing is the person doing the ceremony, priest vs a judge for example. Some religions accept same-sex marriage, some do not. This is an internal issue within a religious and it's organization which the government should not become involved in.

 

[Smart_Guy]

It does not have to be in a Church as a national law. Marriage ceremonies are performed in Churches due to religious traditions. However since marriage is regulated by the government no amount of "I do" makes their marriage legal. Both civil and religious marriages need to meet a few requirements made by the government. The only difference in a legal standing is the person doing the ceremony, priest vs a judge for example. Some religions accept same-sex marriage, some do not. This is an internal issue within a religious and it's organization which the government should not become involved in.

Hmm...

Do you believe it is okay for the govt. to force a church of a religion that does not accept same sex marriage to perform it? I heard this happened lately.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

It does not have to be in a Church as a national law. Marriage ceremonies are performed in Churches due to religious traditions. However since marriage is regulated by the government no amount of "I do" makes their marriage legal. Both civil and religious marriages need to meet a few requirements made by the government. The only difference in a legal standing is the person doing the ceremony, priest vs a judge for example. Some religions accept same-sex marriage, some do not. This is an internal issue within a religious and it's organization which the government should not become involved in.

I think this is where there is some common ground between many political/religious positions. That the government should not be involved in marriage anyway. Granting various benefits depending on whether or not you engaged in a particular religious ceremony? that's a clear violation of separation of church and state and the basis of the whole gay marriage political movement

. So instead of also violating religious freedom to try to re-balance the original violation- just fix the original mistake and get the government out of marriage. But that would entail either removing tax benefits for married people, or granting everybody the same tax cuts.... both politically contentious... the very reason we were supposed to have separation in the first place.

 

[Shad]

I think this is where there is some common ground between many political/religious positions. That the government should not be involved in marriage anyway. Granting various benefits depending on whether or not you engaged in a particular religious ceremony? that's a clear violation of separation of church and state and the basis of the whole gay marriage political movement

. So instead of also violating religious freedom to try to re-balance the original violation- just fix the original mistake and get the government out of marriage. But that would entail either removing tax benefits for married people, or granting everybody the same tax cuts.... both politically contentious... the very reason we were supposed to have separation in the first place.

I disagree. Marriage is part of the tax system, medical system, school system, etc government must be involved. I am against the government forcing churches to conduct marriages they are against. The government must provide a civil options so those that wish to be married are not restricted due to different religions views they do not follow. How can an atheist get married without a civil option. Atheism is not a religion. You would be forcing people to go to a church of a religion they do not believe in in order to be married.

The original mistake is attempting to carter to religious views as the only option.

 

[Shad]

Hmm...

Do you believe it is okay for the govt. to force a church of a religion that does not accept same sex marriage to perform it? I heard this happened lately.

No. Hence why civil marriage is a viable option. If you heard about this it was probably fear mongering and not an actual event. Churches are exempt from many laws including same-sex marriage.

 

[columbus]

Hmm...

Do you believe it is okay for the govt. to force a church of a religion that does not accept same sex marriage to perform it? I heard this happened lately.

It might have happened in Europe or somewhere like that. There, the church is part of the government and gets tax money directly from the public treasury.

It has never happened in the USA and it won't any time in the foreseeable future. We have a solid wall between the church and the state. Any USA Church can refuse to celebrate any marriage for any reason, and they don't even have to say what the reason is.
Tom

 

[Twilight Hue]

I know of Christian Churches that won't even marry outside of the denomination. For example, before the Catholic Church that my niece was married at would marry she and her husband (he was raised a Catholic), my niece had to be baptized into the faith (I am not sure if this is true in all Catholic Churches). Some preachers won't wed those outside of their faith. Some won't marry people who aren't a member of his or her Church.
Are they wrong? I just don't think so.

I had to take pre cana before the Catholics would marry me and my wife who was Catholic.

 

[Sand Dancer]

There are enough that do, which is good.

 

[Smart_Guy]

No. Hence why civil marriage is a viable option. If you heard about this it was probably fear mongering and not an actual event. Churches are exempt from many laws including same-sex marriage.

It might have happened in Europe or somewhere like that. There, the church is part of the government and gets tax money directly from the public treasury.
It has never happened in the USA and it won't any time in the foreseeable future. We have a solid wall between the church and the state. Any USA Church can refuse to celebrate any marriage for any reason, and they don't even have to say what the reason is.
Tom

Thank you for your input, gentlemen.
Yes, it was probably a gossip I heard somewhere around the crazy internet.

 

[psychoslice]

Most churches live in the dark-ages, so its just a matter of finding one that lives today in the light, and why have a church to marry you in the first place, its nothing to do with church, its between two people and their friends,

 

[Curious George]

Why should private clubs which discriminate at will get taxpayer funded benefits?
Like tax exempt status?
Tom

Because all private clubs that discriminate at will can get tax exempt status.

Church members just get to write off donations. And there is a parsonage tax, and a couple other benefits. But just tax exempt, lots of clubs have that

 

[Curious George]

Wouldn't a tax break based on religious affiliation amount to federal funding? Or is there no such animal?

Depends on the "break" But in this case, no.

 

[BenTheBeliever]

Most churches live in the dark-ages, so its just a matter of finding one that lives today in the light, and why have a church to marry you in the first place, its nothing to do with church, its between two people and their friends,

For some it is a tradition. When I got married three years ago to my wife one of our pastor at our church married us at a place called Holy Joe's. A christian coffee house that we used to go to. We had about 50 people at your wedding. Mostly our families

 

[psychoslice]

Who really gives a stuff about churches, what good have they ever none, all they are god at is stuffing up everyone's life.

 

[psychoslice]

For some it is a tradition. When I got married three years ago to my wife one of our pastor at our church married us at a place called Holy Joe's. A christian coffee house that we used to go to. We had about 50 people at your wedding. Mostly our families

Yes but that's your story, don't take away others stories, and how they want to be married, its just not right.

 

[BenTheBeliever]

Yes but that's your story, don't take away others stories, and how they want to be married, its just not right.

Funny how you you assume I am trying to take away others rights when I don't even believe like that. Yet you assume I do cause I am a Christian

 

[psychoslice]

Funny how you you assume I am trying to take away others rights when I don't even believe like that. Yet you assume I do cause I am a Christian

Well yes, like most Christians they are simply wrong, and backward in their thinking.