[MERGED] Poll: Same Sex civil marriages, yes or no.

[Kymmy]

A religious marriage though is not legally a marriage.. It's only the signing of the civil register at the end that makes it legally binding.. So I think that the churches would win their case..

As I said though a couple of times in this thread there's enough gay friendly churches out there to get past any restrictions that the synods put on their individual faiths

---------- Post added at 10:14 ---------- Previous post was at 10:12 ----------

Originally Posted by richard1960

Judges also said that if same-sex unions became lawful, any church that refuses to marry gay couples could be charged with discrimination.

All churches have to do at that point is to further separate their religious ceremonies and civil ceremonies thus allowing marriage within the church at a civil level but restricting the religious side.. Remember that a civil marriage isn't a marriage under the eyes of god so I doubt if they'd be any qualms about that if forced into that situation.

[Dude111]

I think Churches should FORGET WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS!!!!! (Who knows if and how accurate it is)

Why is everyone so willing to BLINDLY listen to whats written in this book w/o any proof of WHO REALLY WROTE IT?

Regardless: It doesnt say anywhere in the bible that jesus said man cannot love another man. IT SAYS MAN SHOULDNT HAVE SEX WITH ANOTHER MAN (Meaning the human animal (ANYONE (Even man/woman))) I think anyway!


If ya wanna go by the BIBLE,everyone is having incest EVERYDAY!! (As according to it,we are all related)

[PeteTheMusicGuy]

Yes ! If two people love each other what exactly is the problem

[Alan Fry]

Really, I don't see what the problem is, if god DID create us, then he create people to be gay in the first place!

[Damien]

One Tory MP seems rather confused on what gay marriage is:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...id-Davies.html

Mr Davies made the claim as he spoke out against David Cameron’s plans to allow same-sex couples to marry, including in some churches.

Mr Davies, the MP for Monmouth, said the plan was “barking mad” and would cost the Conservative Party many of its traditional supporters.

In an interview with BBC Wales, he went on to say that “most parents” would prefer their children not to be homosexual.

Ok....Still maybe they would want their children to be able to married if they did happen to be gay? I don't understand why he made the comparison, does he think gay marriage will means lot of gay children everywhere?

[Pierre]

I'm confused about this whole Gay marriage thing, can someone enlighten me.

As far as I was aware, same sex civil partnerships are aready in place and legally in the UK have the same rights etc as a hetrosexual Civil partnership in a registry office , or elsewhere.

So that should be all well and good.


But now the argument is that some gay people may wish to be "married" in a church.

However, there's nothing the govenment can do about that as, correct me if I'm wrong, they can't direct a religious body to fundementally go against their beliefs and order them to allow gay marriages.

So therefore the government are saying that it's OK, if the church wants to allow it.

But I don't see what it's got to do with the government. They've done their bit by allowing the civil registry bit, haven't they?

[Damien]

Originally Posted by Pierre

I'm confused about this whole Gay marriage thing, can someone enlighten me.

As far as I was aware, same sex civil partnerships are aready in place and legally in the UK have the same rights etc as a hetrosexual Civil partnership in a registry office , or elsewhere.

So that should be all well and good.


But now the argument is that some gay people may wish to be "married" in a church.

However, there's nothing the govenment can do about that as, correct me if I'm wrong, they can't direct a religious body to fundementally go against their beliefs and order them to allow gay marriages.

So therefore the government are saying that it's OK, if the church wants to allow it.

But I don't see what it's got to do with the government. They've done their bit by allowing the civil registry bit, haven't they?

No, they want their union to be called a marriage. It doesn't have to take place in a church. It will still be the case that a church won't have to conduct the marriage.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Damien

No, they want their union to be called a marriage. It doesn't have to take place in a church. It will still be the case that a church won't have to conduct the marriage.

Ok, so call it a marriage, the situation remains the same - from a legal perspective?

[Damien]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Ok, so call it a marriage, the situation remains the same - from a legal perspective?

I think so, bar a couple of bizarre differences to do with awards honours by the Queen. It's more about the perception that a couple's union is somehow less than, different, to marriage. For a couple to be told that their partnership is not a normal marriage.

[danielf]

And some religious institutions object to a civil partnerhsip being called marriage because they feel a union can only be called a marriage when it conforms to their rules.

[martyh]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Ok, so call it a marriage, the situation remains the same - from a legal perspective?

Not from a spiritual perspective it's not and that is what the argument is all about .Two devout christian men can celebrate their religion in church but the church and God will not recognize a union between the two as a marriage ,it's nothing to do with legality

[robson689]

Not going to read all the posts, just going to post my opinion. Marriage is between a man and woman. All of the gay people I have spoken to in regards to this have no problem with a civil partnership and don't even want to be married. Religion should not be disturbed.

[martyh]

Originally Posted by Pierre

However, there's nothing the govenment can do about that as, correct me if I'm wrong, they can't direct a religious body to fundementally go against their beliefs and order them to allow gay marriages.

So therefore the government are saying that it's OK, if the church wants to allow it.

But I don't see what it's got to do with the government. They've done their bit by allowing the civil registry bit, haven't they?

That's the crux of the argument ,any change in the C of E must be approved by both houses of parliament .Also the crown (otherwise known as parliament) can instigate changes

---------- Post added at 18:45 ---------- Previous post was at 18:36 ----------

Should point out that i voted no in the poll ,i think this is a rather cynical attempt by Cameron to garner favour with voters .If such a decision was made or contemplated it should be done by the church and the church alone as it is an important part of christianity.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by martyh

Should point out that i voted no in the poll ,i think this is a rather cynical attempt by Cameron to garner favour with voters .If such a decision was made or contemplated it should be done by the church and the church alone as it is an important part of christianity.

In which case I should point out that you appear to have misunderstood the poll (which is about a year old). It specifically states Same Sex civil marriages. This is not about forcing religious institutions to marry same sex couples. It's about same sex couples getting the right to call their civil partnership marriage.

[Damien]

Originally Posted by martyh

Should point out that i voted no in the poll ,i think this is a rather cynical attempt by Cameron to garner favour with voters .If such a decision was made or contemplated it should be done by the church and the church alone as it is an important part of christianity.

Why should the church get to decide how everyone else lives? They are free to refuse to marry same sex couples as the Government reminded us today, but they shouldn't have the right to tell others who do not share their faith who they can marry.