Gay marriage

by eddie Fri Feb 07, 2014 7:58 am

First topic message reminder :

Same sex marriage is not gay privilege, it's equal rights.
Privilege, would be something like gay people not paying taxes.
Like churches don't.

- Ricky Gervais

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:19 am

Anyway, time nearly for Footie, so bye

by veya_victaous Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:22 am

Well to fair 'Lying with a man as you would a woman' is only equal level sin as 'planting two seeds in one hole' and 'eating shellfish' according to the bible.

So there are lots of other people you should be banning as well on biblical principals. No one that has eaten lobster should be allowed to get married in a church.

If your gonna have a book a rule you cant pick and choose which you follow ::%::

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:22 am

it may be equal rights but not in a church that would not want to do it...

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:24 am

veya_victaous wrote:Well to fair 'Lying with a man as you would a woman' is only equal level sin as 'planting two seeds in one hole' and 'eating shellfish' according to the bible.

So there are lots of other people you should be banning as well on biblical principals. No one that has eaten lobster should be allowed to get married in a church.

If your gonna have a book a rule you cant pick and choose which you follow ::%::

the food laws were for that time peter was given a vision, he was told not not call anything unclean that God created...

I think thats why many churches make you attend the church for a while, you should be interviewed too.

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:24 am

Some religious gay couples do want their marriage recognised by the Church and why shouldn't they?

The Telegraph wrote:

Barrie Drewitt-Barlow, 44, said he and his partner Tony, 49, believe the “only way forward” for them may be to challenge the Church in court for denying them the right to marry.
The couple, who have been in a civil partnership for seven years and have five children through surrogacy, describe themselves as practising Christians who regularly attend their local parish in Danbury, Essex.
Mr Drewitt-Barlow said that while he welcomed the passing of legislation for same-sex marriage, provisions exempting churches from performing the weddings meant they still felt discriminated against.
He told the Essex Chronicle: “It is a shame that we are forced to take Christians into a court to get them to recognise us.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/10219802/First-couple-consider-legal-challenge-to-Churchs-gay-marriage-opt-out.html

by veya_victaous Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:26 am

heavenly father wrote:it may be equal rights but not in a church that would not want to do it...

Agree 100%
If there is that much demand for gay marriages in a Church (or at least looks like/was a church) a secular business can build/buy one. Lots of profit to be made from marriages. ::happ:: ::happ:: ::happ:: ::happ:: ::happ::

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:26 am

that's my point precisely, these gays will challenge the church and of course as ever the rights of gays will supercede the right of the church to refuse..how is that equal rights...

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:27 am

veya_victaous wrote:
heavenly father wrote:it may be equal rights but not in a church that would not want to do it...

Agree 100%
If there is that much demand for gay marriages in a Church (or at least looks like/was a church) a secular business can build/buy one. Lots of profit to be made from marriages. ::happ:: ::happ:: ::happ:: ::happ:: ::happ::

I certainly agree with that, let them marry if they want but why bother the church..

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:32 am

veya_victaous wrote:Well to fair 'Lying with a man as you would a woman' is only equal level sin as 'planting two seeds in one hole' and 'eating shellfish' according to the bible.

So there are lots of other people you should be banning as well on biblical principals. No one that has eaten lobster should be allowed to get married in a church.

If your gonna have a book a rule you cant pick and choose which you follow ::%::

All irrelevant, as the Church adapted marriage with creating a documented ceremony, still used today, of which for years since the birth of Christianity, you did not need a church to marry in, nor have you for sometime. What you are overlooking is the ability to marry, not marry in a church

The Church did not invent marriage, nor can it say who can makes the rules on this.

Bye till later

by veya_victaous Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:37 am

I may be anti-monotheist but I try to be fair. and it is true the church has a right not marry gay couples. it has a right not to marry anyone it doesn't see fit. BUT legally a church marriage shouldn't mean anything more or less than a civil marriage.

I think as much as I would like to convince everyone to forget the magic skygiant, they have as much right to be stupid as everyone else. Rolling Eyes

@phil
I said that already. But Christians shouldn't be forced to have the ceremony in their building. But they should have no right to deny in a public building/park etc.

Even Father has conceded that gays should have the right to be legally married just not in church grounds... and I conceded that in return

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:42 am

Veya, sorry but nobody is forcing them to do so, so again a moot point, as there is Churches that accept homosexuality and will marry gay couples and nobody forced them, they chose to do this themselves.
Thus this notion that what homosexuals are asking for is so far off what they wanted to have? The ability to marry, that is it.
The fact is there are now Christian churches willing to marry, and nobody forced their hand

Right, footie time soon

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:48 am

PhilDidge wrote:Veya, sorry but nobody is forcing them to do so, so again a moot point, as there is Churches that accept homosexuality and will marry gay couples and nobody forced them, they chose to do this themselves.
Thus this notion that what homosexuals are asking for is so far off what they wanted to have? The ability to marry, that is it.
The fact is there are now Christian churches willing to marry, and nobody forced their hand

Right, footie time soon

there was a post put up moments ago showing a gay couple who said they will challenge the church, so the fight has already begun..

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:50 am

heavenly father wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:Veya, sorry but nobody is forcing them to do so, so again a moot point, as there is Churches that accept homosexuality and will marry gay couples and nobody forced them, they chose to do this themselves.
Thus this notion that what homosexuals are asking for is so far off what they wanted to have? The ability to marry, that is it.
The fact is there are now Christian churches willing to marry, and nobody forced their hand

Right, footie time soon

there was a post put up moments ago showing a gay couple who said they will challenge the church, so the fight has already begun..

Wow a couple, I hope they fail, as they rightly should as what they want is not hardly supported, where to be able to marry was.
So again this was brought about for them to have equality with being able to marry, one or even a few couples will not change the Church and neither should it, something which is not being backed either

by veya_victaous Sat Feb 08, 2014 11:53 am

@phil
good to see we agree Smile

, I was confused by your objection. But I see you just missed FTLs post

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 12:01 pm

veya_victaous wrote:@phil
good to see we agree , I was confused by your objection. But I see you just missed FTLs post

I thought you all had :D

I can understand if you are not regular worshipers and just want a church wedding but this couple regularly attend church and would like their marriage to be recognised.

by Eilzel Sat Feb 08, 2014 1:36 pm

HF, could you clarify your position then, do you agree gay couples should LEGALLY be allowed to marry, just not in a church- or do you think they ahould not be allowed to marry at all?

For the record I oppose the ONE couple that have said they will legally challenge the church over marriage; like didge I think they will fail in any case- IF the CofE changes its doctrine however that is their perogative; they DO marry divorcees so Biblical dogma is apparently not unshakable.

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 1:48 pm

Eilzel wrote:HF, could you clarify your position then, do you agree gay couples should LEGALLY be allowed to marry, just not in a church- or do you think they ahould not be allowed to marry at all?

For the record I oppose the ONE couple that have said they will legally challenge the church over marriage; like didge I think they will fail in any case- IF the CofE changes its doctrine however that is their perogative; they DO marry divorcees so Biblical dogma is apparently not unshakable.

from a purpose of rights, yes they should be allowed to marry if they want to, if one couple challenge they all will its how it has gone so far, Th cofe will cave because they always do and that in turn will create greater pressure on those who do not want to, militant gays are more trouble than the are worth to everyone.

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 2:46 pm

heavenly father wrote:
Eilzel wrote:HF, could you clarify your position then, do you agree gay couples should LEGALLY be allowed to marry, just not in a church- or do you think they ahould not be allowed to marry at all?

For the record I oppose the ONE couple that have said they will legally challenge the church over marriage; like didge I think they will fail in any case- IF the CofE changes its doctrine however that is their perogative; they DO marry divorcees so Biblical dogma is apparently not unshakable.

from a purpose of rights, yes they should be allowed to marry if they want to, if one couple challenge they all will its how it has gone so far, Th cofe will cave because they always do and that in turn will create greater pressure on those who do not want to, militant gays are more trouble than the are worth to everyone.

It's my understanding that they would be unlikely to be successful unless they pursue this as far as the European Court of Human Rights Heavenly Father. I would have thought as regular church goers perhaps their own church will marry them :D

by Eilzel Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:00 pm

heavenly father wrote:
Eilzel wrote:HF, could you clarify your position then, do you agree gay couples should LEGALLY be allowed to marry, just not in a church- or do you think they ahould not be allowed to marry at all?

For the record I oppose the ONE couple that have said they will legally challenge the church over marriage; like didge I think they will fail in any case- IF the CofE changes its doctrine however that is their perogative; they DO marry divorcees so Biblical dogma is apparently not unshakable.

from a purpose of rights, yes they should be allowed to marry if they want to, if one couple challenge they all will its how it has gone so far, Th cofe will cave because they always do and that in turn will create greater pressure on those who do not want to, militant gays are more trouble than the are worth to everyone.

The first sentence here is all I needed, and I'm glad to hear it Smile

As to the rest 'we' all wont do any such thing. Believe it or not 'our' relationships are about love not political point scoring (an obsession with you reactionaries). I wouldn't want to marry in a church, I'd feel I was violating my own union with my partner in doing so Smile

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:01 pm

feelthelove wrote:
heavenly father wrote:

from a purpose of rights, yes they should be allowed to marry if they want to, if one couple challenge they all will its how it has gone so far, Th cofe will cave because they always do and that in turn will create greater pressure on those who do not want to, militant gays are more trouble than the are worth to everyone.

It's my understanding that they would be unlikely to be successful unless they pursue this as far as the European Court of Human Rights Heavenly Father. I would have thought as regular church goers perhaps their own church will marry them :D

they will push and push as that is what they do, they do not want equal rights they seem to want more rights, which is usually the cases with minorities...
If there own church wishes to marry them good luck to them but the time will come when churches will have no choice...Sometimes i hope islam does get a grip and see how far they get then wiht their militant tactics.

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:02 pm

Eilzel wrote:
heavenly father wrote:

from a purpose of rights, yes they should be allowed to marry if they want to, if one couple challenge they all will its how it has gone so far, Th cofe will cave because they always do and that in turn will create greater pressure on those who do not want to, militant gays are more trouble than the are worth to everyone.

The first sentence here is all I needed, and I'm glad to hear it

As to the rest 'we' all wont do any such thing. Believe it or not 'our' relationships are about love not political point scoring (an obsession with you reactionaries). I wouldn't want to marry in a church, I'd feel I was violating my own union with my partner in doing so

bull the two gays went to that b&b knowing exactly what they were doing and that will always be the way...

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:06 pm

heavenly father wrote:
Eilzel wrote:

The first sentence here is all I needed, and I'm glad to hear it

As to the rest 'we' all wont do any such thing. Believe it or not 'our' relationships are about love not political point scoring (an obsession with you reactionaries). I wouldn't want to marry in a church, I'd feel I was violating my own union with my partner in doing so

bull the two gays went to that b&b knowing exactly what they were doing and that will always be the way...

Really? A claim believes this, the law claimed otherwise

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:27 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
heavenly father wrote:

bull the two gays went to that b&b knowing exactly what they were doing and that will always be the way...

Really? A claim believes this, the law claimed otherwise

of course the gays knew what they were doing and where they were going, they targeted the couple to make a point, they don't want equally rights they want their own rights to supercede that of others, the fcat that the courts ruled otherwise is irrelevant it is so clearly obvious what happened.

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:30 pm

heavenly father wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

Really? A claim believes this, the law claimed otherwise

of course the gays knew what they were doing and where they were going, they targeted the couple to make a point, they don't want equally rights they want their own rights to supercede that of others, the fcat that the courts ruled otherwise is irrelevant it is so clearly obvious what happened.

The law states otherwise, that means your claim does not hold validity, as why was this not proposed in the courts?

You see you again place more belief in faith

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:31 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
heavenly father wrote:

of course the gays knew what they were doing and where they were going, they targeted the couple to make a point, they don't want equally rights they want their own rights to supercede that of others, the fcat that the courts ruled otherwise is irrelevant it is so clearly obvious what happened.

The law states otherwise, that means your claim does not hold validity, as why was this not proposed in the courts?

You see you again place more belief in faith

do you think OJ simpson murdered his wife??

lol courts are as political as anything else..

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:34 pm

heavenly father wrote:
PhilDidge wrote:

The law states otherwise, that means your claim does not hold validity, as why was this not proposed in the courts?

You see you again place more belief in faith

do you think OJ simpson murdered his wife??

lol courts are as political as anything else..

Oh my, so what your argument now is that even though this was never brought up as a claim in the courts, you bring up where there a trial was conducted poorly

Epic fail

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:37 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
heavenly father wrote:

do you think OJ simpson murdered his wife??

lol courts are as political as anything else..

Oh my, so what your argument now is that even though this was never brought up as a claim in the courts, you bring up where there a trial was conducted poorly

Epic fail

time and time again courts have gone against the obvious proof what makes you think the case involving two gays wouldn't go the same way..of course courts are political pawns they tow the line the govt. wishes to enforce within the law normally but not always.

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:39 pm

Yes and no where in these court cases and appeals was a notion submitted that they deliberately contrived to do this, something you keep missing

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:43 pm

PhilDidge wrote:Yes and no where in these court cases and appeals was a notion submitted that they deliberately contrived to do this, something you keep missing

well they went on the defence that they made it clear that only married couples were allowed to stay there, they probably thought if they added that the gay couple did it on purpose that some how their sexuality was an issue when it wasn't.

some people are honest something militant gays are clearly incapable of being.

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:46 pm

Again your argument is moot, not once did the B&B couple present such a claim in any of the trials, you base your view on the fact you are anti-homosexual and nothing more

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:50 pm

PhilDidge wrote:Again your argument is moot, not once did the B&B couple present such a claim in any of the trials, you base your view on the fact you are anti-homosexual and nothing more

probably for the very reason i said, to them it was not a question of the gays sexuality, i wonder what names the gays used, that would be interesting to know..

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:51 pm

Another poor assumption you make, again because you are anti-homosexual

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:52 pm

Have to go, laters

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 3:54 pm

PhilDidge wrote:Have to go, laters

no worries later.. :D

by Eilzel Sat Feb 08, 2014 4:52 pm

heavenly father wrote:
feelthelove wrote:

It's my understanding that they would be unlikely to be successful unless they pursue this as far as the European Court of Human Rights Heavenly Father. I would have thought as regular church goers perhaps their own church will marry them :D

they will push and push as that is what they do, they do not want equal rights they seem to want more rights, which is usually the cases with minorities...
If there own church wishes to marry them good luck to them but the time will come when churches will have no choice...Sometimes i hope islam does get a grip and see how far they get then wiht their militant tactics.

Are you being deliberately ignorant? 'I' am one of 'them' gays you waffle on about as though we are some single-minded unit, and I do not, nor have I ever wanted 'more' rights than anybody else. Nor do other gay people. So stop talking about this like gays are a sinister army and start living in the real world.

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 5:47 pm

Eilzel wrote:
heavenly father wrote:

they will push and push as that is what they do, they do not want equal rights they seem to want more rights, which is usually the cases with minorities...
If there own church wishes to marry them good luck to them but the time will come when churches will have no choice...Sometimes i hope islam does get a grip and see how far they get then wiht their militant tactics.

Are you being deliberately ignorant? 'I' am one of 'them' gays you waffle on about as though we are some single-minded unit, and I do not, nor have I ever wanted 'more' rights than anybody else. Nor do other gay people. So stop talking about this like gays are a sinister army and start living in the real world.

the fact is these gays picked out a place they could attack it was an easy target and they just wanted to make a point, they ended up with more rights than the b&b owners, despite the owners being honest and forthright, it is there for all to see that the majority of gays not only want equal right s but they need everyone to agree that what they do is normal and the truth is it isn't and never will be..

by Eilzel Sat Feb 08, 2014 7:56 pm

Stop diverting, we are talking about marriage.

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 7:59 pm

who's diverting..

by Eilzel Sat Feb 08, 2014 8:15 pm

We were talking about marriage and the church; you are diverting, if you feel you have lost the debate on those grounds I understand.

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 8:17 pm

Eilzel wrote:We were talking about marriage and the church; you are diverting, if you feel you have lost the debate on those grounds I understand.

Even the thread on the 7 year old can grasp that point on equality with the right to marry for homosexuals, is weird how others cannot.

by Guest Sat Feb 08, 2014 9:11 pm

PhilDidge wrote:
Eilzel wrote:We were talking about marriage and the church; you are diverting, if you feel you have lost the debate on those grounds I understand.

Even the thread on the 7 year old can grasp that point on equality with the right to marry for homosexuals, is weird how others cannot.

I doubt that very much somehow ..

by veya_victaous Sun Feb 09, 2014 2:16 am

@HF
I think your point is not really valid, you cant claim 'they' as in homosexuals will, because as Eilzel said he wouldn't.

While there are some selfish/stupid gays that might try, you would find people like that in any group. I also think you would find even a reasonable portion of the gay community would actually support the churches right to have it's exclusive club if it allowed marriage outside of church grounds.

by Ben Reilly Sun Feb 09, 2014 4:38 am

I'm just glad that not all right-wingers lump those who aren't like them into falsely homogeneous groups.

(See what I did there?)

by Sponsored content