"Liberal-minded Americans should like this proposed arrangement because everyone gets treated the same, and the state deprives no one of his or her rights based upon sexual orientation. If a gay couple is denied the right to marry, it would only be because their religious community denied it, in which case they could turn to a church or synagogue that would consecrate their marriage."
Glo said.....
"I also have a question for you, what happends when a minister, priest, bishop, or rabbi refuses to preform the marrage cerimony and the homosexual couple deside to play the bigatry card?"
Right now, it depends on the denomination. The Catholic Church is fine. The evangellical church could get bankrupted by lawsuits when same-sex marriage becomes legal. I know that the Wesleyan Church has no legal protection built into the discipline (a lawyer friend and I looked it up for fun one night). If you got sued for denying to marry a same sex couple, you would loose. If we don't have anything to do with the civil side of marriage, than that stops all law suits cold. This would be the BEST thing for us, on several levels, legal being only the first.
Dobson thinks that gay marriage can be compared to "Our D-Day or battle of Stalingrad".
Seriously? How warped must Christiantity be in his mind of our #1 priority is an American church is to make sure only the "right" kind of people get married. This makes me naucious. Lets ignore all the people dying to focus on national policy. Lets ignore the direct commandments of Christ (even stand in the way of them, lets be honest about that) in favor of an something that Christ never once mentioned! I think that the issue has poisioned the Church- distracted us from the real issues, and pushing people away over an issue that DOSN'T REALLY MATTER!
Why I do I think that same sex couples should be afforded the same rights as straight couples?
There are some situations that same sex couples find themselves in because of the current laws. It costs thousands of dollars in lawyers fees to set up next of kin with someone who you have no legal relationship with- like your same sex partner of 30 years. What happens if one ends up in the hospital? If the biological mother dies and the kids are taken away from their other parent and relocated. Cross-adoption is possible, but illegal in many states and very very expensive, which leads me right too.....
Dena said.....
"Many would say that a same-sex couple does not bring the kind of stability that a hetero couple does. Also, this would open adoption to gay couples, since it would be harder to deny them the right if they are legally married. Not sure where I stand on that one yet, just bringing up a thought."
There are no statistics avaliable about whether or not the divorce rates of homosexual couples would be higher or lower than the current national average. I think that people are people and the rates will be the same, but that's just my opinion. There is nothing about the structure of same-sex partnerships that would set couples up for failure, or guarantee success.
The adoption issue is a big one. I don't really have a problem with it personally, but I can understand why other people do. One thing I think needs to be protected is allowing both parents to still parent in the event of a death of parent or divorce. Loosing a parent is much more trumatic than being raised with two mommies. Looking at children of divorced straight parents is enough.
This is all I have for now. Feel free to comment- I'm really enjoying this discussion.
6 comments:
I do agree that IF the same-sex couple is allowed to adopt the child they should also be afforded protection in the event of the death of one parent. You wouldn't take an adopted child away from a hetero parent that just lost their spouse, so why do it to the child of same-sex parents. It is such a confusing and complicated issue.
Thank you for answering my comment. I am glad that you are willing to talk about this issue because it is one that is not going away. I agree that dobson is overreacting a bit. not because it isn't importaint but more because in this era Christians need to chose thier battles carful.
I'm appalled that there's even a question to this issue but again that's mho. God HAS spoken on this issue in his Word and if we follow Christ and His Word, we have to stand by that. My two cents.
No one is questioning the morality of homosexuality in general. Things get a little more complicated when trying to come up with a Godly response to a specific legal status.
The Bible actually dosn't say anything about Gay marriage, unless you have access to some books the rest of us don't.
I came across your blog and thought I would comment on your aside regarding lawsuits. I didn't have time to actually read your original post or try to address some of your other ideas which appear to be quite thoughtful. Consider this a minor tangent.
Although the Wesleyan Discipline does not provide "legal protection" for pastors not wanting to perform same-sex unions, I would disagree with you and your lawyer friend on the outcome of any resulting lawsuit. There is both a religious and contractual reason.
1) If a pastor holds a genuine religious conviction that it would be immoral to perform a marriage ceremony, he or she is not obligated to perform regardless any phrasing or lack thereof in the church Discipline or other doctrinal manual. A church doctrinal statement does not place a fence around the full-scope of legitimately held religious beliefs. Therefore there would be a legitimate First Amendment free exercise defense to any lawsuit. Under the circumstances, sections like Para. 222 of the actual Wesleyan Discipline provide ample basis for a pastor to refuse to participate in any kind of same-sex ceremony.
Wesleyan Discipline
This is especially so since a pastor refusing to perform a same-sex ceremony does not prevent the couple from seeking other authorized individuals to perform it.
2) Which leads to the contractual defense. A pastor has no legal duty to perform a marriage ceremony at all. Just because a pastor has the legal authority to officiate, he or she is not obligated to use that for anyone and everyone that walks into the church asking to be married.
Therefore, there is little chance that evangelical churches will be bankrupted by lawsuits against pastors refusing to marry homosexual couples.
A more likely scenario is that a lawsuit will be brought against the state, say the state of California, arguing that it is an establishment of religioun to allow religious organizations to determine (through ordination) who can and who cannot perform marriages, thus leading to a revocation of the general authority of ordained ministers to perform legal marriages. Marriage would then become a matter of obtaining the license through an appropriately licensed state official (notary, judge, court clerk, etc...) and nothing legal would happen at any ceremony that might take place in a church with a pastor.
Dury-
Hey- Welcome to my blog. Thanks for the comment. Hopefully you are right. I don't want to see any Churches sued and terrorized by ACLU type orgs.
Post a Comment