Gay Marriage?

[keshka]

Hi all,

This is a really hot topic here in the UK at the moment. The current Prime Minister (and church-going Christian) David Cameron is proposing changing the law to allow same-sex marriage.

For those that don't know, the current UK law is that same-sex couples can only enter into 'civil partnerships', rather than full marriage.

In response, many important clergymen across the UK (inlcuding the Archbishop of York) have argued against the proposed change in the law, saying that same-sex couples should NOT be allowed to marry.

My own personal view is that same-sex couples SHOULD be allowed the same rights as heterosexual couples, and be allowed to marry.

I think that, even though Christians (generally) believe that homosexuality is a sin, that does not mean we should be forcing everybody else to abide by our own rules.

For example, we all agree that worshipping other gods is a sin, and yet no-one bats an eyelid when Muslims get married, or Jews, or Sikhs, or atheists.

So if these other, non-Christian 'sinners' are allowed to marry, then why not same-sex couples?

Just to be clear, I'm not advocating that the church be forced into allowing same-sex marriages occur in church property - I still think the church should be allowed to pick and choose who gets married within Christian churches.

But if same-sex couples want to get married in a registry office or some other building, then legally I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed to do so.

Are the church out of date? Should the church have the right to interfere in matters of state?

Or are they the last bastion of morality in an increasingly immoral society?

I'd love to hear your thoughts.

K x

 

[Kyouken]

I am for the law that denies same-sex couples the right to marry.
I understand that God doesn't want that. However, I also think that we shouldn't force it on people, but because of the understanding God has given me, I am for the law that denies same-sex couples the right to marry.

The law is there for a reason, too. I don't think that it was made out of hatred for people who are homosexuals.

 

[NazariteVow]

What church is David Cameron going to? Church of Jesus Christ or church of satan?

The FACT is that the world belongs to God we're put on here for a reason, we all have a purpose and we all are given many chances to come to Jesus Christ. It doesn't matter where we are on the earth, what citites, countries, and great kingdoms we build and Time doesn't matter either because God >> Jesus Christ is timeless. It doesn't matter whether you're atheist, pagan, muslim, jew or even if you just call yourself christian like Mr. Cameron....we all live by God's law. Christians and non-christians.

At judgement day the books will be opened and we'll all be judged and those who rejected God will have no excuses. The law we'll be judged by is God's Word the Bible, God is His Word and He is Timeless, eternal this also means that His Word is too. So it doesn't matter what age we live in, how modern this world gets, God's word still stands and will always stand, "heaven and earth will pass away but my words will not pass away" Matt 24:35 and His Word says that homsexuality is an abomination; it is wrong and will always be wrong.

Marriage belongs to the Lord. He gave Adam, Eve and that's how I believe marriage should be like God Himself giving you a spouse, that the two of you would unite as one in holy matrimony. God blesses marriage as it is His provided way for two people engaging in sexual activitites together. My only question to you is who would be actually blessing a homosexual marriage?

Homosexuality is satan's way of destroying souls and now he wants to destroy marriage with it.

As christians and non-christians we all live together on the same earth, everything affects ALL of us in some way. We are apart of the same countries and cities and we share the same governments wherever or in whatever countries we may be living in. So when the government wants to do something that is against OUR christian beliefs. What do you think we would do? Sit down and say "go ahead, we're all jelly back christians here we won't stand for Jesus". I don't view christians as interfering in state matters. We're just standing up for what we believe in. Accepting homosexuality and accepting gay marriage will only change our societyt for the worse. And it's already bad, just watch tv, there's guy on guy, girls on girls on shows that children watch. God said it would wax this worse. God's Word proving itself.

Before any government had the law against murder inducted as one of its laws IT WAS APART OF GOD'S TEN COMMANDMENTS, "THOU SHALT NOT KILL">> God made that law. Before any government had the law that homosexuality was illegal GOD SAID IT WAS AN ABOMINATION and it was apart of His law that no man should lie with man as with womankind. Connect the lines and you'd see that the morality of our state's laws has always been based on and influenced by God's Word.

In biblical days God was always acknowledged by the rulers of the land, especially in Israel as He is the God of Israel. But many rulers of that time would have the fear of God and Israel due to the great and fearful Works of the Lord wrought for His people. Even now some nations still have in there anthemn "and may God Bless our nation." I believe that God blesses nations that still acknowledge Him.

I'm not trying to force anyone to live as a christian, because that would go against the freewill God gave all of us to choose what we want to do. However, it doesn't matter if a homosexual is getting married in a registry building or in any building... my belief out of love for their good is that they shouldn't get married. Because the consequence of that is hell AND the second death. But I get it its their choice.

Further more I think if any leader or politiican of today would like to be a great leader, and have a bleassed nation that he should pattern Himself as David was. How David had a great Love & relationship with God and he kept His commandments and statutes (evnthough he fell with bath-sheab God still loved him. He was a man after God's own heart. I think it's ironic Mr. Cameron's name is David.
God Bless.

 

[jimmydiggs]

inb4 "god is love, therefor we can re-define sin"

 

[keshka]

So all the answers I've had so far are against the change in law.

Let me ask you this: why should some sinners be allowed to marry and others not?

Let's look at a list of those people who may be allowed to marry by law:

Unrepentant murderers
Unrepentant rapists
Atheists
Those who believe in religious other than Christianity

Now, what I'm saying is this, in the interests of fairness, why are we allowing unrepentant murderers to marry and not homosexual couples?

Why single out the act of homosexuality as more of a sin than (say) being a rapist or an atheist, both of whom are allowed to wed?

 

[FrankensteinGirls]

I completely support marriage equality, however I have no problem with religious figures being able to decide they do not want to participate in the marriage ceremony.

 

[Jullianna]

Civil union is not marriage. They are not the interchangeable terms society desires we accept. Civil union is a legally binding earthly agreement. Marriage is a God thing - holy matrimony between man/woman/God.

As far as I can see, only those who are of God and do it His way actually enter into marriage, no matter what one chooses to call it and no matter who changes what earthly laws. We don't have the power to change as much on this planet as most folks believe we do...fortunately.

 

[keshka]

Civil union is not marriage. They are not the interchangeable terms society desires we accept. Civil union is a legally binding earthly agreement. Marriage is a God thing - holy matrimony between man/woman/God.

As far as I can see, only those who are of God and do it His way actually enter into marriage, no matter what one chooses to call it and no matter who changes what earthly laws. We don't have the power to change as much on this planet as most folks believe we do...fortunately.

I absolutely disagree with this. The concept of marriage pre-dates the birth of Christianity - who are we to claim ownership of the concept of marriage? That strikes me as sheer arrogance.

I dare you to approach a Jewish couple and explain to them that they are not really 'married', due to the fact that do not share our religious beliefs!

For us Christians, I completely agree that God has a pivotal part to play in the wedding ceremony itself, and throughout the marriage.

But why should couples of other faiths and persuasions not also be allowed to engage in their own chosen form of union?

The only arguments I'm hearing against the change in law are:

1) Homosexuality is a sin, therefore sinners should not be married - yet I've already demonstrated above that other sinners can get married all the time, so it's a bit unfair to single out homosexuals.

2) Marriage is specificially a Christian construct, and as such we as Christians should determine who can marry - again, this is refuted above.

Are there any other points of contention people can come up with?

 

[keshka]

I completely support marriage equality, however I have no problem with religious figures being able to decide they do not want to participate in the marriage ceremony.

Sums up my own views perfectly.

 

[Jullianna]

I absolutely disagree with this. The concept of marriage pre-dates the birth of Christianity - who are we to claim ownership of the concept of marriage? That strikes me as sheer arrogance.

I dare you to approach a Jewish couple and explain to them that they are not really 'married', due to the fact that do not share our religious beliefs!

For us Christians, I completely agree that God has a pivotal part to play in the wedding ceremony itself, and throughout the marriage.

But why should couples of other faiths and persuasions not also be allowed to engage in their own chosen form of union?

The only arguments I'm hearing against the change in law are:

1) Homosexuality is a sin, therefore sinners should not be married - yet I've already demonstrated above that other sinners can get married all the time, so it's a bit unfair to single out homosexuals.

2) Marriage is specificially a Christian construct, and as such we as Christians should determine who can marry - again, this is refuted above.

Are there any other points of contention people can come up with?

I said nothing of christianity. I said God. Man does not pre-date God. Please read carefully.

 

[keshka]

I said nothing of christianity. I said God. Man does not pre-date God. Please read carefully.

Right, my apologies.

Okay, so your saying that God Himself invented marriage, yes? Just as He created the Universe and everything else?

That may be, but it hasn't stopped people of other cultures and religions pairing up and calling it 'marriage'. Legally (and it's a legal point I'm making here), a married Muslim couple in the UK have the same rights as a married Christian couple.

So regardless of whether 'marriage' is a God thing or not, it's undeniable that the word and concept has now come to mean ANY official union between two non-blood-related, consenting adults.

In the current English language we use 'married' to refer to a Jewish husband-and-wife, a Muslim husband-and-wife, an atheist husband-and-wife.

So, given the current definition of the word 'marriage', (which, whatever its origins in God, is now just a generic term for such official unions), why are we not allowed to use this word to refer to same sex couples, when it's perfectly fine to use it in other, non-Christian contexts?

 

[SkinnyGuy]

I am all for marriage equality, whether it be in the UK or here in the United States. I actually can't wait for the day that all 50 states allow same sex marriage.

 

[Jullianna]

Right, my apologies.

Okay, so your saying that God Himself invented marriage, yes? Just as He created the Universe and everything else?

That may be, but it hasn't stopped people of other cultures and religions pairing up and calling it 'marriage'. Legally (and it's a legal point I'm making here), a married Muslim couple in the UK have the same rights as a married Christian couple.

So regardless of whether 'marriage' is a God thing or not, it's undeniable that the word and concept has now come to mean ANY official union between two non-blood-related, consenting adults.

In the current English language we use 'married' to refer to a Jewish husband-and-wife, a Muslim husband-and-wife, an atheist husband-and-wife.

So, given the current definition of the word 'marriage', (which, whatever its origins in God, is now just a generic term for such official unions), why are we not allowed to use this word to refer to same sex couples, when it's perfectly fine to use it in other, non-Christian contexts?

Your premise is faulty. Therefore, your arguments are also askew. I don't see any of the faiths you have named above that deny the existence of God or that approve of marriage other than as I set out above, which is exactly why I chose the specific wording I chose.

If I choose to call something by an improper monicker, does that make it legitimate? Can I be a man just by saying so? Can a dog be a cat simply by calling it that?

Current definitions, as you say, are limited and re-defined periodically by man's understanding of them. Dangerous business. Who gave us this power and authority? There are many "concepts" as you put it that man has, indeed, tarnished. Marriage is one of them.

 

[Jullianna]

Jesus said to them, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s.” (Mark 12:17)

Caesar's = things man-made/earthly ruler conceived, such as civil unions

Marriage belongs to God.

Be blessed.

 

[Ritter]

Is marriage even a right?

 

[GOD_IS_LOVE]

If we talk about marriage we should first see what marriage is. The concept of marriage originated from God: "A man leaves his father and mother and is united to his wife, and they become one flesh." (Genesis 4:24) THIS IS MARRIAGE BY DEFINITION AND IT'S WHAT IT HAS BEEN FOR THOUSANDS OF YEARS. Anything else falls under whatever other category but not that of marriage.

 

[GOD_IS_LOVE]

In other words, the expression "gay marriage" is a contradiction in terms.

 

[keshka]

Okay, I get it now: people are advocating that 'marriage' only refers to a union blessed by God, and that any redefinition is inherently wrong. 'Same sex marriage' is therefore an oxymoron, as it is not blessed by any god.

So my point remains: if atheists are entitled to these godless 'faux-marriages' and enjoy all the legal rights and privileges of a proper religious marriage, they why shouldn't same-sex couples also have that option?

And if a new religion were to be founded, one whose adherents worshipped a god who approved of same-sex marriage, would that count as a non-Christian godly 'marriage' equal to a Jewish or Jehovah's Witness marriage?

 

[Dogma]

Historians will one day look back on our society and say "What a bunch of intolerant bigots". Conservatives Christians against marriage equality (who tend to be detriments to other civil liberties as well) are marking their place in the textbooks on the wrong side of history. They will be viewed no differently than sexists, racists, or anti-abolishonists.

 

[Jullianna]

Okay, I get it now: people are advocating that 'marriage' only refers to a union blessed by God, and that any redefinition is inherently wrong. 'Same sex marriage' is therefore an oxymoron, as it is not blessed by any god.

So my point remains: if atheists are entitled to these godless 'faux-marriages' and enjoy all the legal rights and privileges of a proper religious marriage, they why shouldn't same-sex couples also have that option?

And if a new religion were to be founded, one whose adherents worshipped a god who approved of same-sex marriage, would that count as a non-Christian godly 'marriage' equal to a Jewish or Jehovah's Witness marriage?

Would you mind answering the questions of others before continuing with your own?