Torillian said:
Scoobes said:
fillet said:
Marriage is a Christian ceremony that the bible explicitly states is for two people of the opposite sex to participate in. The bible explicitly forbids homosexuality so therefore same sex marriage is ridiculous and wrong.
I have no problem with same sex relationships and a civil ceremony of course I have no problem against either. I also have no problem with people in same sex relationships participating in a civil ceremony benefiting from state benefits that people who are married enjoy.
People who don't believe in god also should not be allowed to get married, by adding that into law and creating a recognized civil partnership for those people that gives the same benefits as married people then everything is balanced out.
I challenge anyone to explain to me why this simple explanation is wrong, it is not prejudiced, it is simply against the teaching of said religion.
|
Well for starters it's not a Christian ceremony. You can have a Christian ceremony, but it was never solely a Christian affair. Marriage has been around longer than Christianity.
|
Yeah I don't really see how you could possibly make such a system work since there are so many kinds of religious ceremonies for marriage. If people go have a Hindi wedding does this mean we wouldn't recognize them or do they just have to be having a religious marriage of some kind and believe in some god to be admitted? And why then would you allow other religious marriages but not non-religious marriages? Not to mention that I really don't ever want the government deciding or allowing something based on religious preferences, that's a whole other issue. Religion really isn't a religious institution anymore, and I'm afraid that the religious are just going to have to get used to the idea. We could have a religious wedding and a legal wedding as many already do, but there's no reason that the government should defer marriage to religions.
|
Nothing wrong with that, but if things are to move forward and so nobody is offended a distinction should be made between religous marriages and straight up civil ones.
I'm not preaching some "this is wrong!!!" message. It's wrong from the Christian/Bible perspective and they will never be satisfied until the distinction is made.
It's a fact that many people see marriage as a religous event and god is mentioned in pretty much all marriages these days, even if the people getting married don't believe and marriages usually take place in a church in the UK and are conducted by a local vicar etc. Detach those things from it and you're left with a civil parternship and why should anyone who doesn't believe in god etc give a damn that the marriage takes place in a church? Has god mentioned? Is conducted by a vicard?
Surely most people wouldn't give a damn.
Can't have ya cake and eat it, and that's the reason that we have this problem with religious elements making a big fuss because people do want their cake and to eat it, it's just not compatible. Just like I kind take a dump in a female only toilet, "just because I feel like it". There's rules there for a reason and if gay marriages are going to be allowed then those marriages shouldn't be religous ones - by law, because they aren't part of the said religion.
I'm just talking about modernizing things so all get along really, I'm no faschist!
