My contention is that regardless of gays horning in on the civil side of marriage, they will not be able to horn in on the religious side of the fence. They cannot lessen the religious sacrament in any way, because the churches (especially the Catholic church!) would not allow it, and the government cannot force the churches to allow it.
-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
Would you support same-sex marriage in your state?
Page 9 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
My contention is that regardless of gays horning in on the civil side of marriage, they will not be able to horn in on the religious side of the fence. They cannot lessen the religious sacrament in any way, because the churches (especially the Catholic church!) would not allow it, and the government cannot force the churches to allow it.
Now you are contradicting yourself, if love before god is what matters, why would you think that your love proven before god becomes any less of a sacrament to you because others also marry.
It is well known (well, to most people anyway) that the bible does not agree on non believers marrying any more than close family or gays, yet very few are pushing for an abolishment of non believer marriages.
If you are going to pick and choose pieces of the bible, who gets to decide which pieces are correct and which aren't? If it is you, shouldn't those pieces only be valid for you and would that not mean that what others do does not affect your religion or your life unless they do it directly to you?
The benefits associated with two adults signing a marriage CONTRACT with their respective state should be allowed to ANYONE regardless of what gender an individual is naturally attracted to. There's some pretty important rights included with marriage CONTRACTS that I believe any loving, monogamous couple should have access to. And I firmly believe that a binding marriage CONTRACT promotes monogamy and health.
As for the RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION of marriage, that's entirely up to the church(s).
Unless you're a religious zealot that also opposes seperation of church and state, I can't understand why a religious individual would care unless said individual is just plain mean, selfish, or dare I say - homophobic.
CLIFF NOTES: YES
As for the RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION of marriage, that's entirely up to the church(s).
Unless you're a religious zealot that also opposes seperation of church and state, I can't understand why a religious individual would care unless said individual is just plain mean, selfish, or dare I say - homophobic.
CLIFF NOTES: YES
PlatinumGold
Lifer
talk about a HUGE leap in logic.
marriage ONLY has significance as long as you believe that it is ordained and blessed by God. IF you really believe that, then what the govt chooses to do will have NO impact on what marriage is and means.
what the govt is allowing gays to do is have access to all the financial rights and protections as civil unions as sanctioned by the govt (let me repeat this, if you are a true christian than you will recognize that ONLY God can sanction marriages, hence anything the govt chooses to do is really just about civil NOT about religious).
therefore, the only christians that would be offended by this "marriage" are those that really don't believe that it is GOD that ordains and sanctions the sacrament of marriage.
Atomic Rooster
Golden Member
No. :disgust:
I don't care if there are gay couples, but I think that marriage is more of a religious thing, and even if not religious, it's defined as a sacred vow between a man and a woman (as Jumpem said). Also, I don't agree how now priests have to go against their religion, and marry gay couples....I just think it's not right...
btw, I have nothing personal against homosexual people
btw, I have nothing personal against homosexual people
PlatinumGold
Lifer
let's take it a step farther, it should ONLY be granted to the FIRST marriage. shoot, once they divorce then they divorce over and over again. why sanction ANY of that.
DainBramaged
Lifer
True.
Good point...? I can't answer that. Maybe later but I doubt it.
Well, I believe no one religion on earth is the True religion. My beliefs are vast and confusing to most. I have studied theology, philosophy and photography (but I graduated 10 years ago) both personally and in college. I have conflicting beliefs with my own theories. After studying so many different religions that May explain some of my statements. But this subject happens to be one of the Catholic teachings I agree with.
Just to be clear: Gay marriage is okay but not for me or my chosen religion.
GeekDrew
Diamond Member
Agreed, 100%.
I've been told that marriage actually started with the government, instead of religion.
Oh, and gay studies in schools? They're here. They've been here for a couple of years, too.
WRONG. Nearly all of the gay folks that I know are very much pro-gun.
Good. We don't want religion. Just as long as the heterosexuals also have to have unions (even though they could also get married, the unions would be the legal benefits).
Thank you 🙂
OK, so nix the monetarial benefits that happen to come with getting married (or forming a union, etc). That will take care of things nicely.
So why don't straight people do that then?
Again, we don't want the religious aspect - that's up to the church instead of the government anyway. There are many churches around here that are marrying gays when the government won't... religion isn't the issue here.
The restriction isn't that we cannot marry someone of the opposite gender. The restriction is that we cannot marry the person we love - because they are of the same gender.
^ What they said. ^
Get Merriam-Webster on the phone. Definitions change. There are actually 'change' lists printed yearly... some of the english teachers at the high schools get them.
So, to recap, I know that it's not for you, and that you agree w/ the legal part of it (from what I understand (and that's all the gay community wants)), would you support same-sex marriage if/when it comes to a public vote?
There ARE no "true" Christians. That's a meaningless term.
And that's precisely why this attempt to distinguish between the religious and legal component of marriage is pointless. In reality, they ARE intertwined, much like many other parts of the law are, where consensus was relatively strong in the context, and the time, the law was developed.
To say that marriage should stay in the scope of religion, or that gays will never "hone in" on the "religious" concept of marriage -and by this you all implicitly mean the Christian one - is completely naive, after all, religion has no absolute rule-making authority and enforcement branch by which to actually bind someone to any supposed edict. I could make a church RIGHT now, call myself a Christian, and vow (pun intended) to marry gays. Whose to say otherwise? Whose to say that I'm any less of a Christian, and that my marriages are any less "valid" than the ones done by your homophobic houses of worship? The Pope is gonna arrest me?
When will Christians finally understand that the absolute they see - the views their pastor professes, or even the books they worship - has NO bearing on others, or even upon those that claim to be their religious brethren. It only has, and should have, meaning to each believer. I mean, when you think about it, what is a Christian beyond a belief in God and Jesus Christ as one's savior? It all gets murky, contradictory, and hazy past that point. Throw a 100 Christians in a room, give 'em a multiple choice test of possible actions to possible situations, and you'll get a 100 different results. So much for "true" Christianity.
What homosexuals seek is to enjoy a status like heterosexuals do. Just as with heterosexuals, some homosexuals will get married for nonreligious reasons -- to demonstrate a bond of love and commitment and to enjoy the financial rights that have grown up around it. Religious homosexuals will get married acording to their belief that their Christian (or whoever) God has given them divine approval. If they are wrong, let God deal with that. Not you.
Just face it, you don't like homosexuals because they are different than you, and you don't want what you have to be given to them. It's not much more than a childhood sandbox sentiment. Don't mask it religious this and that, because religious reasons are no more well thought-out than a kid-like "because..!"
it's worth mentioning... gays aren't banging down the doors of churches to try and get married "under god." we just want the same status and benefits under the law that straight married couples have (shared property, shared insurance, visitation rights in hospitals, the ability to adopt children, etc).
the shared insurance bit is most applicable to lesbians, who seem inclined to bear children.
the shared insurance bit is most applicable to lesbians, who seem inclined to bear children.
I think your arguments would be much better accepted and respected (by Christians and Homosexuals) if you were not to belittle anyone for their beliefs. Your emotional assault on Christianity and the followers of that religion is likened to your sandbox statement. However, digging through your barrage of insults you do speak some truth.
First addressing your Christian comments; I think you will find that your 100 Christians will have similar answers. Maybe not all the same but those who actually practice know the basics of the religion and try to live their lives by those teachings. And the "laws" of the Christian church are meant to be just that, teachings, guidelines on how to live a good life. While some teachings and some Christians may be too literal and taken inappropriately, they are meant for the good of the individual and the good of everyone.
There are already branches of the Christian church that allow and recognize homosexuals and once passed will perform gay marriages. That's fine, as long as in their beliefs they are true. But as you put it, I too can make a church RIGHT now and say that anyone with no left foot is a sinner and no left foot people can not be married. Or take it further even to the extreme. Anyone who doesn't look like me can not be part of my church and will be beaten. Who's to say I'm wrong then? Okay that's a bit of a stretch but the logic holds up. Please don't put down the Pope, he is a very nice man who has done a lot of good for this world (even leaving religion out).
Religious teachings are far more thought out then what you understand (this is not an attack). Taking the time to read some of the stories and analyzing them for their meanings might prove to be enjoyable for you. I mean do it for you by yourself. Get your own meaning not the rants of a priest or pastor. They do tend to go on and on; in one incredibly unbroken sentence moving from topic to topic -it's really quite hypnotic... (sorry it couldn't help it!) This is not meant to try to convert you in anyway just so you can see that there is a lot of good in the Christian (Catholic) faith.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
