The tolerant Catholic Church

Fran said:
Religion tends not to change because it still has to be guided by whatever book it considers represents it.
If the Bible ever ran to a second edition then that would be a good time to make your petition
Click to expand...

I am not asking religion to change, though, as an aside, it does change. Gay marriage has nothing to do with religion because in the UK marriage is just as much (if not more if you actually look at the stats) a civil thing than a religious thing.

Fran said:
What a marriage represents is pretty universal, otherwise nobody would bother.
Click to expand...

Which is what exactly? Ask a dozen people and you will probably get a dozen different answers. Marriage has no religious meaning to a very large number of people that get married.

Fran said:
Non related issues are irrelevant, credibility is not being discussed.
Click to expand...

Aren't you the one that bought up credibility?

Fran said:
Yes it has, witness the mass decampment of Anglicans to Catholicism for evidence.
Click to expand...

Due to an non related issue... Is credability back on the agenda? Mass decampment is possibly a little hyperbolic don't you think?


Fran said:
Nothing much in the Bible about mixed race marriages though is there, so again not relevant.
Click to expand...

It is very relevant if marriage is not a religious institution, which in this country it isn't.

Fran said:
This isn't one minority group addressing baseless bigotry, this is one minority group undermining another groups basic beliefs. That in itself is bigotry against Christians.
Click to expand...

But no one is forcing Christians to marry gay people and no one is forcing Christian churches to officiate over gay marriages. I would be happy for that sort of protection to be enshrined in law too.

Fran said:
Which is more important, Christian rights to follow their core beliefs unhindered by the State, or the 1% who don't feel special enough and want a name badge.
Click to expand...

But how would Christians be forced to do anything against their core beliefs?

Fran said:
I'll assume the fecundity issue was known before hand ?
A somewhat pointless arrangement then.
Click to expand...

Right, so the sign of commitment to each other is pointless? The legal rights and responsibilities over each other are pointless? Marriage is considerably more than just an avenue to have children.

Fran said:
It's not about you though, it's the wider issue.

Removing one groups rights for the benefit of another isn't exactly advancing the cause.
Click to expand...

Noones rights are being removed.

Fran said:
So you get to call some people bigots without allowing them the right to reply ?
How about quoting the people you consider thus so they can defend themselves.
Click to expand...

I did quote someone...

However if you feel the label possibly applies to you then feel free to reply to it.
 
bam0 said:
Tradition is no reason perpetuate discrimination.
Click to expand...
It's not discrimination if you are not Christian already. Nobody is forcing gays to be Christian and to follow a set of beliefs, it is the gay activists that have come along and said "we like the name of your ceremony, we also like the status it confers but we don't want to have anything to do with the core beliefs behind it, and if you object we are going to whine loudly until the government tramples over your beliefs and let's us borrow your ceremony for ourselves"

Nothing is being imposed on the church
Click to expand...
As above.


Christianity hadn't come to Europe who says we wouldn't be happy polytheists following Norse/Celtic traditions?
Click to expand...
Not a hope, we would have either been overrun by the Mongols or the Muslims.
 
Fran said:
It's not discrimination if you are not Christian already. Nobody is forcing gays to be Christian and to follow a set of beliefs, it is the gay activists that have come along and said "we like the name of your ceremony, we also like the status it confers but we don't want to have anything to do with the core beliefs behind it, and if you object we are going to whine loudly until the government tramples over your beliefs and let's us borrow your ceremony for ourselves"
Click to expand...

Which is only true if marriage is a religious ceremony. It isn't. The majority of UK marriages involve no religion. Marriage is not a Christian thing, Christians do not own it.
 
RDM said:
Which is only true if marriage is a religious ceremony. It isn't. The majority of UK marriages involve no religion. Marriage is not a Christian thing, Christians do not own it.
Click to expand...

Correct.

Atheists can get married, why not gay people?
 
Fran said:
It's not discrimination if you are not Christian already. Nobody is forcing gays to be Christian and to follow a set of beliefs, it is the gay activists that have come along and said "we like the name of your ceremony, we also like the status it confers but we don't want to have anything to do with the core beliefs behind it, and if you object we are going to whine loudly until the government tramples over your beliefs and let's us borrow your ceremony for ourselves"
Click to expand...
You see, your whole argument hinges on the premise that Christianity "owns" marriage, but it doesn't. There has been non religious civil marriage in the UK for a long time and I don't see why the church should get to dictate how it operates.
 
The church should have a say in who it marries. I know my local priest is very strict indeed and wont marry anyone who has not been attending church regularly. It would be hypocritical for some to use the church just to get married and then disappear! I know this happens a lot but not in my local church!! lol

Getting married in church, for a true christian, is more than just the fact that they got married in a church!
 
thedoc46 said:
If gays want to be gay, so be it.. But don't allow them to become parents. I couldn't care about religion but he does have a point.
Click to expand...

This. Gay people being parents is just wrong. Unnatural. Procreation shouldn't be fixed, for the convenience of people whose natural inclinations take them away from parenthood. A child is naturally born with a mother and a father, to alter that is a bit sick in my opinion.
 
koolpc said:
The church should have a say in who it marries. I know my local priest is very strict indeed and wont marry anyone who has not been attending church regularly. It would be hypocritical for some to use the church just to get married and then disappear! I know this happens a lot but not in my local church!! lol

Getting married in church, for a true christian, is more than just the fact that they got married in a church!
Click to expand...

What about people who don't get married in a church?

Vespasian777 said:
This. Gay people being parents is just wrong. Unnatural. Procreation shouldn't be fixed, for the convenience of people whose natural inclinations take them away from parenthood. A child is naturally born with a mother and a father, to alter that is a bit sick in my opinion.
Click to expand...

So we should outlaw adoption then, because the child's not being brought up by it's "natural" parents?
 
Let's just clarify a couple of points for people who don't seem to get it...

  1. There is a petition to change the law so that gay couples can be married.
  2. This does not mean that churches of any denomination will be forced to conduct the ceremony - it is separate from the church.
  3. Civil marriage does not equal Christian marriage, they are separate entities (hence why couples need to sign a legal document after they have been married by the church).
  4. The church is seeking to prevent the change in law.
Now the crux of it, WHY IS THE CHURCH SEEKING TO INTERFERE IN THE LAW???

Fran seems to believe that because the Church took on responsibility for performing ceremonies, that it should decide who is legally allowed to be married. To you, I ask if it is ok for atheists to get married? (thank you Tunney) And is it ok for a couple to say they are married if the ceremony was performed by a druid for instance, or if there was no ceremony at all, or infact, as a catchall, if the Church was not involved in the marriage? If you answer 'yes' then you are admitting that the Church doesn't hold the sole rights to marriage (well done). If you answer 'no', then you're now arguing against the majority of marriages!

Perhaps you would also like to argue that gays aren't allowed to drink red wine anymore? ;):D

Koolpc is just worried about gays being married by his vicar, well don't worry pal, the change in law does not force any member of the clergy to carry out a gay wedding ceremony.

Craterloads thinks that gay couples need a special label to show that they are unable to procreate... Don't know what to say really. Essentially you believe that gays shouldn't be allowed to marry because they are gay. You're argument isn't even based in religion, just in your own prejudiced mind :rolleyes:
 
spudbynight said:
People keep saying that Christianity doesn't own marriage.

Well, neither does the government. Who are they to change it?
Click to expand...

Err yes they do. The government is looking to change the law... This is something that the government looks after. It is not trying to change "Christian marriage", which is upto the Church.
 
growse said:
What about people who don't get married in a church?



So we should outlaw adoption then, because the child's not being brought up by it's "natural" parents?
Click to expand...

No. We should keep adoption for parents who had the right make up for parenthood. i.e a penis and a vagina between them.
 
spudbynight said:
People keep saying that Christianity doesn't own marriage.

Well, neither does the government. Who are they to change it?
Click to expand...
The legal responsibilities and tax benefits of marriage are set by Parliament, so I'd say the legal definition of marriage is entirely a matter for them.
 
spudbynight said:
People keep saying that Christianity doesn't own marriage.

Well, neither does the government. Who are they to change it?
Click to expand...
Then, surely the solution would be for the government to allow anyone to get married, and allow individuals to decide how they want to define marriage themselves? :)
 
dodgem said:
Err yes they do. The government is looking to change the law... This is something that the government looks after. It is not trying to change "Christian marriage", which is upto the Church.
Click to expand...

The government isn't just trying to change the law - it is proposing the complete redefinition of what marriage is.

I personally don't think they have the mandate to do this.

Just an aside on this. Would people be happier with a referendum being held on this issue instead of the government trying to push it through?
 
dodgem said:
Now the crux of it, WHY IS THE CHURCH SEEKING TO INTERFERE IN THE LAW???
Click to expand...

If marriage was changed to be open to homosexuals do you really think it would end at that? Do you really not think the "gay rights" brigade wouldn't then seek to force religious bodies to hold 'gay weddings'?

How different would a Church not wanting to marry two homosexuals be from a Christian B&B not wanting to allow two men to share a bed?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom