Religions ongoing war on the left

AZ Jim said:
Ok Romeo, let get my thread back on subject, K??
Click to expand...
Right! Okay, then. As I was saying before SHE walked in, I DEFINITELY believe with all my heart the extremist religious are, indeed, waging a heretofore unmatched war on the left. While I'm not privy to information on your original premise, it certainly sounds like something they would do. Only religious marriages legal?! This level of pomposity can truly ONLY be found among the devout. What's next, restricting the right to vote to the religious?
 
truespock said:
Right! Okay, then. As I was saying before SHE walked in, I DEFINITELY believe with all my heart the extremist religious are, indeed, waging a heretofore unmatched war on the left. While I'm not privy to information on your original premise, it certainly sounds like something they would do. Only religious marriages legal?! This level of pomposity can truly ONLY be found among the devout. What's next, restricting the right to vote to the religious?
Click to expand...


What is really funny is that marriage didn't start out to be a religious thing... it was a legal contract...starting when women were married off for a few goats and a cow.. Marriage is STILL a legal contract. You can be legally married without a religious ceremony.. but you cannot be legally married without obtaining a license from the State.
 
AZ Jim said:
Dame Warrigal said:
Jim, based on your link, the evidence is very thin that religion is waging an ongoing war on the left. Can you name the churches/denominations/religions that have made representations in support of a bill to only allow marriages performed by a religious leader?

Over here a lot of Christian ministers are saying the opposite - that all marriages should be civil marriages to be legal and people may have a second marriage according to their religious beliefs if they so desire.
Click to expand...

Once again geography seems to be the missing bridge to understanding. If you are asking me to do a full scale search to show you the evidence of my claim, I choose not to. You, on the other hand, have every right to suggest I am unable to support my charge.
Click to expand...

I'll do more than suggest. I'll offer counter evidence to the title of this thread. From Michigan.

Episcopal bishop in Michigan backs same-sex marriage

Niraj Warikoo, Detroit Free Press 1:05 p.m. EDT March 19, 2014

DETROIT — The head of the Episcopal Church in southeastern Michigan announced that he strongly supports same-sex marriage, indicating to more than 80 churches that marrying people of the same in gender is in line with their denomination's beliefs. But the Rt. Rev. Wendell Gibbs stopped short of saying gay marriages could be performed immediately in churches here because the Episcopal Church technically still doesn't formally approve of them, and they are illegal under Michigan law. Noting that public opinion is shifting rapidly on the issue, Gibbs, the bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Michigan, said that "picking and choosing whose rights should be protected or which civil rights the church will support is neither American 'justice for all' nor supported by the God of salvation history."

Gibbs' statement is the second from an Episcopal leader in Michigan in the past week to favor same-sex marriage as the public awaits U.S. District Judge Bernard Friedman's ruling in a federal lawsuit in Detroit on whether same-sex marriage should be allowed in the Great Lakes State.

On Thursday, Bishop Todd Ousley of the Episcopal Diocese of Eastern Michigan, which includes Saginaw and Flint, said that "extending justice and equality to all of God's children will not only serve the common good but also further the advance of God's reign marked by respect for the justice and dignity for every person."

The moves could have the potential to alienate religious conservatives, some of whom have left the church in recent years over the denomination's direction. From 2000 to 2010, membership dropped 30% in the Episcopal Diocese of Michigan and about a dozen churches have closed.

But church officials said it's important to do the right thing, regardless of the consequences.

"We are who we are," said Rick Schulte, director of communications for the Episcopal Diocese of Michigan. "We're not going to base who we are on how many people show up at our church on Sunday. It's just a matter of doing what's right." Schulte noted an initial resistance to having women as priests, but that was overcome.
Gibbs was not available for comment but said in his statement that allowing same-sex marriages is in line with the church's history of supporting just causes.

STORY: Methodist bishop follows conscience, changes gay marriage views
STORY: Churches debate whether clergy can marry gays

"Justice has been elusive in too many segments of our society," Gibbs said. "Often, those 'in power' who make declarations about what is just seem unable to set aside their personal biases in the interest of impartiality. The result: segregation, dehumanization and irrational fear that promotes bullying and other forms of violence."
Schulte said the church intends to follow the law. Even if Friedman rules in favor of gay marriage, the decision probably will be appealed, and so the church is not rushing into anything, Schulte said.

Also, the Episcopal Church said that priests take their time with all marriages — whether they involve straight or gay couples. A couple can't just walk into a church and expect to get married quickly. The church has a process involving meetings, being familiar with the church history and other rules.

"We treat marriage very seriously," Schulte said. "No minister, priest, can be forced to marry someone they don't feel comfortable marrying," said Jim Naughton, editor of Episcopal Cafe, which deals with issues in the church. "They have a lot of discretion. No one is trying to find a way to corner people."

Other Episcopal dioceses across the U.S. have been wrestling with the issue in recent years with some bishops coming out in favor of same-sex marriage, Naughton said. "People are looking for ways to come to an accommodation" that respects various viewpoints within the church, he said.

At least 70 Episcopal dioceses across the USA allow same-sex blessings, according to the Episcopal gay rights group Integrity USA, which has a map with the policies. Since 2009, other Episcopal bishops — including ones in San Diego, the District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey and New York — have allowed priests in their dioceses to officiate at same-sex marriages.

"I stand in support of marriage equality and pray that our justice system will work to break down the walls of segregation, promote the humanity of all and calm our irrational fears," Gibbs said Tuesday in a statement from the Episcopal Diocese of Michigan, which covers 11 counties in southeast Michigan.
Yet Episcopal officials stressed that no priests would be forced to conduct same-sex ceremonies if they feel uncomfortable with it.

STORY: National Cathedral to perform same-sex weddings
STORY: Episcopal Church approves same-sex blessing rite

In 2012, the Episcopal Church approved a ceremony that blesses the unions of same-sex couples. While the church nationally falls short of supporting gay marriage, the ceremony has been used to approximate marriages in states where gay marriage is legal. The Episcopal priest can be a witness at the civil marriage ceremony and then later bless the gay couple with the ceremony.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...higan-episcopal-diocese-gay-marriage/6606131/
Click to expand...
 
What I don't get is that the right seems to act like any law making gay marriage legal will FORCE their clergy to perform gay marriages. I don't see how that would be the case -- now, clergy do refuse to perform certain marriages (for instance, some refuse to marry couples one of whom has been divorced, etc., or neither of whom is of their faith, or one of whom is another faith, etc. The right to be married doesn't mean you have the right to have particular clergy marry you. Church and state . . . .
 
In OZ the clergy only have authority to marry couples where at least one of them is an adherent of that faith. If they overstep the mark, the marriage could be declared invalid. For example a couple cannot be married by an Anglican priest if both are Buddhists. This is why priests and ministers ask questions about baptism/church attendance. It is not for their own narrow reasons but to make sure that they are able to officiate.

Over and above the legal restrictions the celebrants may have other requirements. A catholic priest would hesitate to marry a couple who declared that they are not open to the possibility of having children because openness to children is integral to the catholic concept of marriage as a sacrament. Other Christian denominations would not have the same objection because they don't see marriage as sacramental.

As people post on Facebook, it's complicated.
 
In Canada, it is up to individual congregations whether or not they feel comfortable marrying gay couples in their church. Even among denominations uncomfortable with gay marriage, the language is, for the most part conciliatory. Of course, in Canuckistan, same sex marriages have been legal for almost a decade, even with a conservative gov't in power for quite some time.
 
Shalimar said:
In Canada, it is up to individual congregations whether or not they feel comfortable marrying gay couples in their church. Even among denominations uncomfortable with gay marriage, the language is, for the most part conciliatory. Of course, in Canuckistan, same sex marriages have been legal for almost a decade, even with a conservative gov't in power for quite some time.
Click to expand...
Shalimar, I've been back for two days and you still haven't welcomed me home. Memory problems, darlin'?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top