Gay Marriage

Kizzume · Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:27 pm Post subject: Gay Marriage

I believe strongly that gay people should be able to get married. If gay people can't get married, then I think that nobody else should be able to either. All or nothing.

Kizzume · Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:27 pm Post subject:

The only argument I have been able to understand is the one that suggests that churches would eventually be forced by the people attending it to do do gay marriage ceremonies, and that's a slippery slope too.

jq · Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 1124

Hey Kizzume. I am sorry I don't have much time these past couple to respond everywhere. I will probably be able to tonight or tomorrow! Been a very busy couple days.

Anyway, to answer your question from my perspective, you know I am a firm supporter of gay marriage. No church would be forced to hold ceremonies. The way they would do it is that any church that WANTS to can, but really it is the legal certificate that matters, since the ceremony is only symbolic to the law. A lot of people don't even go to a church to get married. They just go see a judge who makes it official. (One of my friends did it that way.) Everyone has to buy a marriage certificate anyway, its just that some churches may go through that process for you.

Another option is you could simply google churches in your area that do it (which I am sure some definitely will if it becomes legal) and have them do it. If it goes into law, there will be churches that do it, no doubt. Another option if you wanted, is you could have a friend you trust go online and get 'ordained' which takes about 15 minutes, (I am legally ordained to marry people) and everyone can do it, and you could have a friend marry you with whatever ceremony you want.

But nobody is getting forced to do anything. The churches won't lose their right to marry who they please based on their religious practices. Ceremonies are symbolic-- they have nothing to do with the law. It is the certificate that matters. The fear that churches will be forced to go against their practices is just another right-wing spin intended to make church goers fear you and keep voting against your rights. Just like they do with gun control ('OH NOES, THEY'RE TAKING AWAY OUR RIGHT TO OWN GUNS!!111111) and everything else.

jq · Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 1124

PS, if they were forced 'by the people,' meaning their goers, I don't see that as wrong. A church, should represent the beliefs of its followers, right? They would still have the legal right to refuse that sort of ceremony based on principle, and I am sure there will always be enough homophobes that there will be churches that still don't do it.

Kizzume · Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:28 pm Post subject:

I'm totally with you there. I really can't see any TRULY valid arguments against gay marriage.

Hackfest · Joined: 04 Dec 2007 Posts: 413

I don't know that a church should necessarily represent the beliefs of their followers. If a church is following a structured, organized religion, the members shouldn't be able to shake the structure. If they could, how stable is the religion's particular belief system anyway?

Kizzume · Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:29 pm Post subject:

True, but it would still be that way if gay marriage was legalized. The pressure just might be greater.

I think that churches that in the past have rigidly stuck to a particular structure are going to continue to stick to that structure regardless.

You definitely make a good point though.

Hackfest · Joined: 04 Dec 2007 Posts: 413

Well, look at the Catholic church as of late. They seem pretty flimsy to me. It just makes them look like they don't have any core beliefs. Who wants anything to do with that? They've been around a while, no?

Kizzume · Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:29 pm Post subject:

Well, you've got me thinking again. That's good. Smile

jq · Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 1124

Hackfest · Joined: 04 Dec 2007 Posts: 413

I didn't say that a church shouldn't support it's followers. Nor should it represent the followers. It is a place to gather for the purpose of like-minded people coming together in unity. Church, at least in the context you use it, has to use a system of checks and balances derived from the Bible to be healthy, since the church you mention was established because the Bible said to. Remember, the church was God's idea, and when you let man determine the course, the course gets twisted. As far as the conclusion you draw, the most powerful, anointed churches I've ever been to have very small congregations. Generally this is because people leave when the church requires it's members to be accountable to the Bible. Churches of 5,000 people that I've been to are watered down in short because they "represent" the members. Just my take.

jq · Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 1124

I don't know man. It seems like those huge black baptist churches from the south would be the coolest to be a part of. I mean they really get down and praise Jesus!

Kizzume · Posted: Thu Dec 06, 2007 7:31 pm Post subject:

If I was to go to a church again, I would probably go to either a really tiny one, or a black baptist church where people put so much feeling and physical energy into their praises.

But I'm kind-of going off subject....

Many churches will bend and allow gay marriage. Many will not. Those that don't will start to be called names. Eventually those that don't will be basically demonized by media and a whole bunch of others. I think this is what people fear.

jq · Joined: 02 Dec 2007 Posts: 1124

Hackfest · Joined: 04 Dec 2007 Posts: 413

I think that they shouldn't bend to that if they claim that it's wrong according to their beliefs. No matter what the media does. You're absolutely correct though.