Gay Marriage

[ll_billym]

How pathetic are the church? They tried to pull The Bible out and now they are referring to a dictionary.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17329902

Why can't they just admit that they are scared that this will diminish their already waning power? The church does not own the word 'marriage', the taxpayer owns this word and most taxpayers rightly do not care a jot about who gets 'married', let alone whether they are the same sex or not.

The only reason I care is that to my mind it is another nail in the coffin of religion. All thoughts welcome!

[Ann]

Thanks Jack - I thought that too, seems silly that they would want their day overshadowed by that. I think all the churches (ours included) are panicking. Thanks for clarifying :)

[andy-hughes]

Hi ummm - I am of course aware that some people have children, and then enter a gay partnership - my wife knew a lady in that situation in her teaching days.

However, my point about adoption does refer to gay people who have never been in a heterosexual relationship which produced children, so I think in that instance, my point is valid.

I reiterate my earlier point - this issue is just one of a long list where homosexuals are condemned to be outsiders, not seen as entitled to rights that heterosexual people are given automatically on reaching adulthood - and that has to be wrong.

[LoftyLottie]

I thought the whole issue was whether gay couples should be able to marry in a civil ceremony, rather than have a civil partnership, which is what I have said before. The church should have no say in this. The Church is does have a say in who gets married in a church and as far as I know any vicar can say no to people who they don't feel has religious views. If a gay couple has religious views I presume that a vicar/priest is governed by the Church rules and regulations on Gay Marriage and the vicar/priest can't do anything about it.

Am I wrong, is the Church now saying that Gay Marriage is wrong even in Civil Ceremonies, and if so why should they have any say on the matter?
I don't believe that the Church should have any rights on government at all. There input should only be on Church matters.

[LoftyLottie]

You weren't there when I started my screed Jack. But thanks - I thought I was right.

[LoftyLottie]

And your posting, Jack, was far more concise and made more sense then my warblings.............. ;o)

[jackthehat]

Lottie - There does seem to be quite a bit of confusion caused by the Churches' stance on this. Who'd a thunk it?!?! ;o)

Essentially once they realised that they wouldn't be forced/compelled to undertake same-sex wedding ceremonies, they then changed their approach and tried to claim ownership of the word 'marriage'.

[Booldawg]

my sister in law is gay so my wife asked our minister how he stands on that. He said she'd be welcome to church but he would ask her to try an abstain from sex with a partner.

bit of a cop out IMO. Being gay is a sexual preference not a lifestyle choice.

[LoftyLottie]

You can marry two things together, but two gays can't marry. Marriage is merely a word which means join together as far as I am concerned.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/marry

[Davethedog]

Given what JTH says, one must ask why the church wish to interfere. If they want to stop it in their churches, as bigoted as it is, OK, however to object to it in society and try to prevent it, is evil.

Makes you think exactly who are the devils disciples (I know I nicked it but I thought it was good0

[andy-hughes]

Booldawg - I assume your minister is C of E? If he was Catholic, I would be inclined to tell him that it is courtesy for non-bowlers to stay off the green!!

[LoftyLottie]

About time that we modernised ourselves and the Church was not part of our Constitution. There is no need for it. I am not against religion or people being religious - each to his own, but I cannot see for the life of me why religion should form any part of the law of the land.

[Booldawg]

no Methodist. TBH we've not long accepted alcohol!

[jackthehat]

I certainly have no desire to trouble *any* of the denominations (is there something Freudian about me having to correct my typing from 'demon -inations? LoL) when I get married.

A small Civil Service/Ceremony will suit us fine.

[Davethedog]

JTH I got married in a registry office, trust me you get to the beer quicker :-)

[andy-hughes]

Davethedog - as an atheistI am wary of getting into deep theological waters here, but as i understand it, by definition, the church is everyone, not juist the hierarchy. So why does the hierarchy feel it can make decisions based entirely on its own predjudices.

I am sure that if Jesus existed, and was on earth today, he would not wish for any segregation in his name - he is part of a compassionate and loving God.

The church elders can't have it both ways (pun not intended!)

[LoftyLottie]

We had a small civil ceremony too, as is my Son shortly. Such a shame that some people think that two people who love each other should not get the same rights.

[maggiebee]

The Queen is the head of the church in England. Has anyone asked her opinion?

[Ann]

Bet they haven't maggie - can't see her liking the thought of gay marriage in church one little bit - but sadly although she is Queen I don't think her views would be listened to.

[jackthehat]

Yes.
She says it would have saved a lot of bother over Edward..........

[andy-hughes]

Ann86 - I think the Queen is pragmatic enough to remain unencumbered by the sort of dogma that bedevils old men with beards, housekeepers, and too much time on their hands.