Gay marriage in churches

martyh · 13-02-2011, 09:42

Quote:

Ministers will publish plans to change the law to enable same-sex couples to "marry" in church, the BBC has learned.
Equalities Minister Lynne Featherstone is to propose lifting the ban on civil partnerships taking place in religious settings in England and Wales.
But churches will not be compelled to hold ceremonies if individual clergy are opposed on religious grounds.
The legislation would also cover synagogues and mosques although homosexuality is forbidden under Islam.
Currently same-sex marriages are banned from using hymns or even readings from the Bible.

Should the government be getting involved with this ?or is it a matter for the different churches in Britain to sort out ? Is the government trying to force change on the churches ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12442375

Thoughts anyone ?

papa smurf · 13-02-2011, 10:16

the religions are not going to sort this out without being forced to by law , preaching tolerance is one thing but delivering it is a very bitter pill to swallow imo.

Digital Fanatic · 13-02-2011, 10:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

Should the government be getting involved with this ?or is it a matter for the different churches in Britain to sort out ? Is the government trying to force change on the churches ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12442375

Thoughts anyone ?

Live and let live. I see no problem with this. The clergy will still have the last say if they are homophobic and will out these dinosaurs.

Plenty of gay people are christians, so why should they be excluded? Good to see it will extend to synagogues and mosques .

martyh · 13-02-2011, 10:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf

the religions are not going to sort this out without being forced to by law , preaching tolerance is one thing but delivering it is a very bitter pill to swallow imo.

I don't think the government should have anything to do with it .Forcing change on a religious issue using legislation is wrong and will never work .It will lead to double standards and confusion within the church as some churches refuse to hold a religious ceremony based on their own religious beliefs

rogerdraig · 13-02-2011, 10:43

for my religion the answer be "well we wont do any weddings" its not a big deal really they are not required in the sense of being a religious ceremony the bible really only requires that you abide by the local laws on registering that you are and that you dont get divorced except for adultery.

papa smurf · 13-02-2011, 10:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

I don't think the government should have anything to do with it .Forcing change on a religious issue using legislation is wrong and will never work .It will lead to double standards and confusion within the church as some churches refuse to hold a religious ceremony based on their own religious beliefs

if its right to discriminate against someone because you think its gods will ,then surely it must be ok to discriminate if you think you are superior or of a higher social standing etc etc etc ....

martyh · 13-02-2011, 10:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf

if its right to discriminate against someone because you think its gods will ,then surely it must be ok to discriminate if you think you are superior or of a higher social standing etc etc etc ....

The point i'm making is that change in religion to suit modern society should be natural not enforced by law ,we shouldn't force religious institutions to change their beliefs ,it's the same as making a law forcing you to go church every sunday

edit

just to add i don't think it should be classed as discrimination either

**Kymmy** · 13-02-2011, 11:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

I don't think the government should have anything to do with it .Forcing change on a religious issue using legislation is wrong and will never work .It will lead to double standards and confusion within the church as some churches refuse to hold a religious ceremony based on their own religious beliefs

Yet religion greatly influenced the government for over a thousand years

If you let religion have the freedom of setting it's own rules of discrimination then you'd have to give the same power to every other group that wanted it.. including groups like the recently discussed events in luton.. The line has to be drawn somewhere..

We are all resident of this country and until the anglican church create their own state and hide behind it like the rc church does then they are beholding to our laws which includes non-discrimination.. and even then they can only do what they like within their own hiding place

Before anyone says it I am not an athiest!!!

papa smurf · 13-02-2011, 11:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by martyh

The point i'm making is that change in religion to suit modern society should be natural not enforced by law ,we shouldn't force religious institutions to change their beliefs ,it's the same as making a law forcing you to go church every sunday

edit

just to add i don't think it should be classed as discrimination either

but it clearly is discrimination neatly packaged as gods will ,the great get out clause of the worlds intolerant bigots .

**Kymmy** · 13-02-2011, 11:11

You have to remember though that under current laws there is no such thing as a gay marriage

so in the end this thread according to the title is a non-event

The story is actually concerning Civil Partnerships which currently happen in lots of churches anyway..

Scary · 13-02-2011, 11:29

i dont get what all the fuss is about let the gay community get married to each other, let them have equality i mean whats the problem they have every right to be as misserable as the rest of us married people

Ignitionnet · 13-02-2011, 12:13

Nothing wrong at all with leaving it up to individual churches and clergy at all. Leaves them a choice to either appear 'backwards' or put their religion into a bad light if its holy book speaks out clearly against homosexuality.

Backwards in apostrophes as it's not really backwards, they should have every right to decide who they do and do not marry / join in civil union at their sole discretion.

papa smurf · 13-02-2011, 12:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Nothing wrong at all with leaving it up to individual churches and clergy at all. Leaves them a choice to either appear 'backwards' or put their religion into a bad light if its holy book speaks out clearly against homosexuality.

Backwards in apostrophes as it's not really backwards, they should have every right to decide who they do and do not marry / join in civil union at their sole discretion.

so a special dispensation to discriminate against certain members of society ??

danielf · 13-02-2011, 12:40

The Times had an interesting take on it. It was claimed that some churches (The Quakers for instance) support gay marriage. Under current legislation a religious gay marriage is not allowed. Thus, from that perspective this is a move towards freedom of religious expression.

martyh · 13-02-2011, 12:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by papa smurf

[/COLOR]

so a special dispensation to discriminate against certain members of society ??

Religion is all about discrimination ,christians discriminate against jews,ect ,ect .It is all about a set belief that does discriminate against others .All the churches do at the moment is allow a ceremony for gay people but not a religious one ,no hymns ,prayers ect ,this idea is to force (via legislation) a church to have a religious service for people that in the eyes of the church are not religious