Here's my problem. How many years have members of the clergy been allowed to perform legally binding marriages? Awhile right? Like a couple centuries.
Ok so they didn't decide to pack up their bags and want to separate themselves right up until gay people started being treated the same as straight people.
The government has allowed lots of things churches don't agree with. But it's the queers that put them over the edge.
I've learned the hard way in the past not too discuss same sex marriage and religion on TK.
It seems like maybe you haven't quite yet.
I didn't realize I hit submit on that before I finished. Oops. What I was going to say is that I think the worst argument a Christian can make against same sex marriage is to quote Leviticus. The setting of that book in the Bible was to establish laws for different people at different times. That's all I was going to say.
Here's my problem. How many years have members of the clergy been allowed to perform legally binding marriages? Awhile right? Like a couple centuries.
Ok so they didn't decide to pack up their bags and want to separate themselves right up until gay people started being treated the same as straight people.
The government has allowed lots of things churches don't agree with. But it's the queers that put them over the edge.
Well, y'all are scary. (Jk)
And yet you continue to post about it?
I started another thought and was trying to edit that, but it submitted my post anyway.
Fwiw, this article was shared by a religion scholar who is an agnostic lesbian. She made the comment that ministers / priests should not be administering the state's work anyway. I'm not so bold to think that everyone would share her beliefs, but she shares a lot of beliefs y'all espouse, so I thought the community would appreciate it. Thanks for the perspective.
If churches really wanted to get out of state business, they'd all stop performing marriages altogether. But they don't want to do that, they just want to provide some people a more marriagey marriage than other people.
If the government wanted to take religion out of marriage, they would require a civil ceremony, and then people could choose to add a religious blessing on top of that which the government would, in turn, butt out of. That would be a true government-driven separation of church and state. That's not what's happening here.
The thing is, though, for many faiths (not just Christian), marriage is a covenant and not just a legal contact. IF this were to happen, then there would still be a need for many people to hanger their marriage recognized in their faith.
@holyguacamole79 do you honestly not see what a bad decision this would be for churches? Church attendance is at an all time low across the country. People are leaving religious organizations in record numbers. Three Christian schools in my area have had to close in the past two years because of low enrollment and they couldn't afford to keep there doors open. I am in freaking Kentucky and enrollment of Christian schools is low. If it is that low heere imagine how it must be in the rest of the country. If religion in this country wants to survive it needs to be more inclusive not less.
I went to New Years Mass at a church where the seating capacity was 2400. It was standing room only. There have been 2 new Catholic high schools here in Houston in the past 5 years. We had a youth day at our church and had 750+ students from grades 6-12 show up. From where I sit, the church is doing fine.
You live in Texas.
I'm sure living in Texas does make a difference. Where I am churches are barely staying open.
Do you live in Texas too? My point was there are a lot of immigrants from Catholic countries going to Texas, and that could be a reason for a higher number of Catholic churches being full. Across the nation, the Catholic church is losing members at a higher rate than any other religion.
@huskypuppy14, from my observations, it's not really that. For example, I tried to go to confession today in the DFW area. When I got there, there were 15-20 people in line. I didn't exactly ask for their immigration status, but most of them did not appear to be immigrants.
@holyguacamole79 do you honestly not see what a bad decision this would be for churches? Church attendance is at an all time low across the country. People are leaving religious organizations in record numbers. Three Christian schools in my area have had to close in the past two years because of low enrollment and they couldn't afford to keep there doors open. I am in freaking Kentucky and enrollment of Christian schools is low. If it is that low heere imagine how it must be in the rest of the country. If religion in this country wants to survive it needs to be more inclusive not less.
I went to New Years Mass at a church where the seating capacity was 2400. It was standing room only. There have been 2 new Catholic high schools here in Houston in the past 5 years. We had a youth day at our church and had 750+ students from grades 6-12 show up. From where I sit, the church is doing fine.
You live in Texas.
I'm sure living in Texas does make a difference. Where I am churches are barely staying open.
Do you live in Texas too? My point was there are a lot of immigrants from Catholic countries going to Texas, and that could be a reason for a higher number of Catholic churches being full. Across the nation, the Catholic church is losing members at a higher rate than any other religion.
@huskypuppy14, from my observations, it's not really that. For example, I tried to go to confession today in the DFW area. When I got there, there were 15-20 people in line. I didn't exactly ask for their immigration status, but most of them did not appear to be immigrants.
It's also a new year, so people may be starting a new year with confessing their sins of last year. Whatever the reason for your area having a lot of people going to church; it's not the case across the country.
Fwiw, this article was shared by a religion scholar who is an agnostic lesbian. She made the comment that ministers / priests should not be administering the state's work anyway. I'm not so bold to think that everyone would share her beliefs, but she shares a lot of beliefs y'all espouse, so I thought the community would appreciate it. Thanks for the perspective.
If churches really wanted to get out of state business, they'd all stop performing marriages altogether. But they don't want to do that, they just want to provide some people a more marriagey marriage than other people.
If the government wanted to take religion out of marriage, they would require a civil ceremony, and then people could choose to add a religious blessing on top of that which the government would, in turn, butt out of. That would be a true government-driven separation of church and state. That's not what's happening here.
Hooooo child. They'd have to pay me to go camping.
What? You mean you don't want to fork over that kind of money to be split into gender-divided cabins with army-style bunkers and a 10pm lights out set by an old church member and sit around a camp fire making s'mores and being warned of the dangers of premarrital sex in the form of a corny ghost story? Having to hear everyone's story of how they met before being served breakfast at the crack of dawn doesn't sound like a good time?
-yeah, my friend and her husband did not enjoy themselves. But it was pony up and endure or no church wedding.
Fwiw, this article was shared by a religion scholar who is an agnostic lesbian. She made the comment that ministers / priests should not be administering the state's work anyway. I'm not so bold to think that everyone would share her beliefs, but she shares a lot of beliefs y'all espouse, so I thought the community would appreciate it. Thanks for the perspective.
If churches really wanted to get out of state business, they'd all stop performing marriages altogether. But they don't want to do that, they just want to provide some people a more marriagey marriage than other people.
If the government wanted to take religion out of marriage, they would require a civil ceremony, and then people could choose to add a religious blessing on top of that which the government would, in turn, butt out of. That would be a true government-driven separation of church and state. That's not what's happening here.
The thing is, though, for many faiths (not just Christian), marriage is a covenant and not just a legal contact. IF this were to happen, then there would still be a need for many people to hanger their marriage recognized in their faith.
I didn't say that it should or would happen. I'm just refuting the bullshit claim that the church is trying to just be ever so kind by bowing out of government matters.
@holyguacamole79 do you honestly not see what a bad decision this would be for churches? Church attendance is at an all time low across the country. People are leaving religious organizations in record numbers. Three Christian schools in my area have had to close in the past two years because of low enrollment and they couldn't afford to keep there doors open. I am in freaking Kentucky and enrollment of Christian schools is low. If it is that low heere imagine how it must be in the rest of the country. If religion in this country wants to survive it needs to be more inclusive not less.
I went to New Years Mass at a church where the seating capacity was 2400. It was standing room only. There have been 2 new Catholic high schools here in Houston in the past 5 years. We had a youth day at our church and had 750+ students from grades 6-12 show up. From where I sit, the church is doing fine.
You live in Texas.
I'm sure living in Texas does make a difference. Where I am churches are barely staying open.
Do you live in Texas too? My point was there are a lot of immigrants from Catholic countries going to Texas, and that could be a reason for a higher number of Catholic churches being full. Across the nation, the Catholic church is losing members at a higher rate than any other religion.
@huskypuppy14, from my observations, it's not really that. For example, I tried to go to confession today in the DFW area. When I got there, there were 15-20 people in line. I didn't exactly ask for their immigration status, but most of them did not appear to be immigrants.
It's also a new year, so people may be starting a new year with confessing their sins of last year. Whatever the reason for your area having a lot of people going to church; it's not the case across the country.
'--------- I'm not arguing that. I'm just saying that my experience has not been that the influx of people at church in Texas is not due to immigration.
Fwiw, this article was shared by a religion scholar who is an agnostic lesbian. She made the comment that ministers / priests should not be administering the state's work anyway. I'm not so bold to think that everyone would share her beliefs, but she shares a lot of beliefs y'all espouse, so I thought the community would appreciate it. Thanks for the perspective.
If churches really wanted to get out of state business, they'd all stop performing marriages altogether. But they don't want to do that, they just want to provide some people a more marriagey marriage than other people.
If the government wanted to take religion out of marriage, they would require a civil ceremony, and then people could choose to add a religious blessing on top of that which the government would, in turn, butt out of. That would be a true government-driven separation of church and state. That's not what's happening here.
The thing is, though, for many faiths (not just Christian), marriage is a covenant and not just a legal contact. IF this were to happen, then there would still be a need for many people to hanger their marriage recognized in their faith.
I didn't say that it should or would happen. I'm just refuting the bullshit claim that the church is trying to just be ever so kind by bowing out of government matters.
You said "If churches really wanted to get out of state business, they'd all stop performing marriages altogether.", to which I disagree. There is still a religious reason for them to have weddings.
Raised Pentecostal, the final straw with me (after years of sexist and homophobic bullshit) was the youth pastor, saying to the youth group, that women who get raped are sluts who ask for it. Never went back.
Fwiw, this article was shared by a religion scholar who is an agnostic lesbian. She made the comment that ministers / priests should not be administering the state's work anyway. I'm not so bold to think that everyone would share her beliefs, but she shares a lot of beliefs y'all espouse, so I thought the community would appreciate it. Thanks for the perspective.
If churches really wanted to get out of state business, they'd all stop performing marriages altogether. But they don't want to do that, they just want to provide some people a more marriagey marriage than other people.
If the government wanted to take religion out of marriage, they would require a civil ceremony, and then people could choose to add a religious blessing on top of that which the government would, in turn, butt out of. That would be a true government-driven separation of church and state. That's not what's happening here.
The thing is, though, for many faiths (not just Christian), marriage is a covenant and not just a legal contact. IF this were to happen, then there would still be a need for many people to hanger their marriage recognized in their faith.
I didn't say that it should or would happen. I'm just refuting the bullshit claim that the church is trying to just be ever so kind by bowing out of government matters.
You said "If churches really wanted to get out of state business, they'd all stop performing marriages altogether.", to which I disagree. There is still a religious reason for them to have weddings.
Yeah, key word being "IF" they wanted to. They don't want to, so it's a moot point. Claiming they're doing this to stay out of matters better left to government is laughable, because a) they'll never want to do that and b) if they did, this wouldn't be how to go about it.
This is all a bunch of fucking bullshit. Ugh. IF this goes through I'd look into seeing if my marriage can just be legal . Not fair that my brother, uncle, good friends, and any other human beings aren't being treated the same as hetero people. Again, fucking bullshit!
Raised Pentecostal, the final straw with me (after years of sexist and homophobic bullshit) was the youth pastor, saying to the youth group, that women who get raped are sluts who ask for it. Never went back.
Fwiw, this article was shared by a religion scholar who is an agnostic lesbian. She made the comment that ministers / priests should not be administering the state's work anyway. I'm not so bold to think that everyone would share her beliefs, but she shares a lot of beliefs y'all espouse, so I thought the community would appreciate it. Thanks for the perspective.
If churches really wanted to get out of state business, they'd all stop performing marriages altogether. But they don't want to do that, they just want to provide some people a more marriagey marriage than other people.
If the government wanted to take religion out of marriage, they would require a civil ceremony, and then people could choose to add a religious blessing on top of that which the government would, in turn, butt out of. That would be a true government-driven separation of church and state. That's not what's happening here.
The thing is, though, for many faiths (not just Christian), marriage is a covenant and not just a legal contact. IF this were to happen, then there would still be a need for many people to hanger their marriage recognized in their faith.
I didn't say that it should or would happen. I'm just refuting the bullshit claim that the church is trying to just be ever so kind by bowing out of government matters.
You said "If churches really wanted to get out of state business, they'd all stop performing marriages altogether.", to which I disagree. There is still a religious reason for them to have weddings.
Yeah, key word being "IF" they wanted to. They don't want to, so it's a moot point. Claiming they're doing this to stay out of matters better left to government is laughable, because a) they'll never want to do that and b) if they did, this wouldn't be how to go about it.
They don't want to do what? I'm not being dense, I just want to make sure I understand you.
Fwiw, this article was shared by a religion scholar who is an agnostic lesbian. She made the comment that ministers / priests should not be administering the state's work anyway. I'm not so bold to think that everyone would share her beliefs, but she shares a lot of beliefs y'all espouse, so I thought the community would appreciate it. Thanks for the perspective.
If churches really wanted to get out of state business, they'd all stop performing marriages altogether. But they don't want to do that, they just want to provide some people a more marriagey marriage than other people.
If the government wanted to take religion out of marriage, they would require a civil ceremony, and then people could choose to add a religious blessing on top of that which the government would, in turn, butt out of. That would be a true government-driven separation of church and state. That's not what's happening here.
The thing is, though, for many faiths (not just Christian), marriage is a covenant and not just a legal contact. IF this were to happen, then there would still be a need for many people to hanger their marriage recognized in their faith.
I didn't say that it should or would happen. I'm just refuting the bullshit claim that the church is trying to just be ever so kind by bowing out of government matters.
You said "If churches really wanted to get out of state business, they'd all stop performing marriages altogether.", to which I disagree. There is still a religious reason for them to have weddings.
Yeah, key word being "IF" they wanted to. They don't want to, so it's a moot point. Claiming they're doing this to stay out of matters better left to government is laughable, because a) they'll never want to do that and b) if they did, this wouldn't be how to go about it.
They don't want to do what? I'm not being dense, I just want to make sure I understand you.
"Get out of state business," i.e. marriages. Hell, you're the one who quoted me. How many margaritas have you had?
Fwiw, this article was shared by a religion scholar who is an agnostic lesbian. She made the comment that ministers / priests should not be administering the state's work anyway. I'm not so bold to think that everyone would share her beliefs, but she shares a lot of beliefs y'all espouse, so I thought the community would appreciate it. Thanks for the perspective.
If churches really wanted to get out of state business, they'd all stop performing marriages altogether. But they don't want to do that, they just want to provide some people a more marriagey marriage than other people.
If the government wanted to take religion out of marriage, they would require a civil ceremony, and then people could choose to add a religious blessing on top of that which the government would, in turn, butt out of. That would be a true government-driven separation of church and state. That's not what's happening here.
The thing is, though, for many faiths (not just Christian), marriage is a covenant and not just a legal contact. IF this were to happen, then there would still be a need for many people to hanger their marriage recognized in their faith.
I didn't say that it should or would happen. I'm just refuting the bullshit claim that the church is trying to just be ever so kind by bowing out of government matters.
You said "If churches really wanted to get out of state business, they'd all stop performing marriages altogether.", to which I disagree. There is still a religious reason for them to have weddings.
Yeah, key word being "IF" they wanted to. They don't want to, so it's a moot point. Claiming they're doing this to stay out of matters better left to government is laughable, because a) they'll never want to do that and b) if they did, this wouldn't be how to go about it.
They don't want to do what? I'm not being dense, I just want to make sure I understand you.
"Get out of state business," i.e. marriages. Hell, you're the one who quoted me. How many margaritas have you had?
I only had 2. Considering the day I had (and, no, I am not referring to TK), I wish I had more! I separate "state business" from marriage. And I now see you are seeing them as the same. I think that's where the disconnect lies.
I, for one, think it's interesting. I'd be sad, but I really do believe in separation of church and state, so I'd be up for it. I'm glad it'll be easier at this point to have my Christian wedding recognized by the government, but I get why it's a messy mess in a lot of ways. Making my personal, anglo-saxon Christian life easy is really not the point of the government I'd like to have.
That said, I do find it interesting that the article points out that Catholic priests aren't really free to just "decide" this kind of thing. I'm sure individual churches and priests can turn down couples based on not meeting the various hoop-jumping or somesuch, but to not sign anything altogether? I don't think that's really their call.
So I'm wondering if this is coming less from the Church than from the Pentecostal/Southern Evangelical groups? There are a ton of Protestant sects that are even more socially conservative than the Church. (Just seems like the article and this thread is focusing pretty heavily on the Church, that's all)
Raised Pentecostal, the final straw with me (after years of sexist and homophobic bullshit) was the youth pastor, saying to the youth group, that women who get raped are sluts who ask for it. Never went back.
Holy shit. Both as a response and an accurate description of the youth pastor.
Just how fast do you go to Hell if you punch a holy man in the throat? Are we talking Japanese bullet train fast or warp speed fast?
Somehow I doubt I would go to hell for throat punching that waste of oxygen. I was 14 at the time with no spine so I didn't say anything. The woman I am today would have ripped him more assholes than a Promise Keepers convention.
Marriage is a legal contract in most of the world. It is only the Catholic church that has the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony. Protestant marriages are legal marriages that ask for the blessing of God, but they are not one of the three sacraments recognized by protestant churches. Many churches are moving towards blessing same sex marriages. I think this will happen with some churches, and not with others. A courthouse marriage is no different than a protestant church marriage. Both are legal, and God is in the courthouse, too! @wrigleyville, you sound bitter. What church were you affiliated with and why did you leave? I am so sorry.
To the bolded: Wow, is it really that distressing for you to grasp that there are people in the world who have different opinions about religion than you, that you have to resort to passive aggressive, condescending pity remarks that they don't need? This was so unnecessary and just gross.
BACK OFF! I am allowed to express genuine concern. What is your problem today? Your posts are very aggressive towards almost everyone. Who the hell are you to judge other people? You obviously haven't read many of my posts if you have decided that I am a rigid religious person.
I thought the original article was more on the various "make strict Catholics look like Universal Unitarians" conservative Protestant cults, I mean churches.
If they'd like to remove themselves from all government dealing, I'm all for it. Alas, they aren't, they're busy trying to legalize discrimination and hate with such bull shit as the Family Research Council.
But I'd rather like having the legal marriage separate from religious. Any legal, consenting adults can have their state recognized marriage. If Church BSC says we only allow whoever, then those who aren't whoever can go out the door to Church Rational and worship/get married/etc. A church can do as they please, I am not required or obligated to support any church.
But if one more hyper conservative wants to promote legal discrimination based strictly on religion AND claim how they strictly follow the US Constitution, I'm going to start beating people with bricks. Your high and mighty Constitution has separation of church and state plus the small feature of freedom of religion which includes freedom FROM religion. You can not legalize discrimination based on religion and proclaim support of Constitution. They negate each other.
Marriage is a legal contract in most of the world. It is only the Catholic church that has the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony. Protestant marriages are legal marriages that ask for the blessing of God, but they are not one of the three sacraments recognized by protestant churches. Many churches are moving towards blessing same sex marriages. I think this will happen with some churches, and not with others. A courthouse marriage is no different than a protestant church marriage. Both are legal, and God is in the courthouse, too! @wrigleyville, you sound bitter. What church were you affiliated with and why did you leave? I am so sorry.
To the bolded: Wow, is it really that distressing for you to grasp that there are people in the world who have different opinions about religion than you, that you have to resort to passive aggressive, condescending pity remarks that they don't need? This was so unnecessary and just gross.
BACK OFF! I am allowed to express genuine concern. What is your problem today? Your posts are very aggressive towards almost everyone. Who the hell are you to judge other people? You obviously haven't read many of my posts if you have decided that I am a rigid religious person.
Only aggressive to people with condescending attitudes. I stand by my opinions.
Marriage is a legal contract in most of the world. It is only the Catholic church that has the Sacrament of Holy Matrimony. Protestant marriages are legal marriages that ask for the blessing of God, but they are not one of the three sacraments recognized by protestant churches. Many churches are moving towards blessing same sex marriages. I think this will happen with some churches, and not with others. A courthouse marriage is no different than a protestant church marriage. Both are legal, and God is in the courthouse, too! @wrigleyville, you sound bitter. What church were you affiliated with and why did you leave? I am so sorry.
To the bolded: Wow, is it really that distressing for you to grasp that there are people in the world who have different opinions about religion than you, that you have to resort to passive aggressive, condescending pity remarks that they don't need? This was so unnecessary and just gross.
BACK OFF! I am allowed to express genuine concern. What is your problem today? Your posts are very aggressive towards almost everyone. Who the hell are you to judge other people? You obviously haven't read many of my posts if you have decided that I am a rigid religious person.
Only aggressive to people with condescending attitudes. I stand by my opinions.
You have certainly made an impression on me. I won't forget.
Re: Interesting Read Regarding Marriage, Religion, and Government
Formerly martha1818
I started another thought and was trying to edit that, but it submitted my post anyway.
I'm sure living in Texas does make a difference. Where I am churches are barely staying open.
Do you live in Texas too? My point was there are a lot of immigrants from Catholic countries going to Texas, and that could be a reason for a higher number of Catholic churches being full. Across the nation, the Catholic church is losing members at a higher rate than any other religion.
@huskypuppy14, from my observations, it's not really that. For example, I tried to go to confession today in the DFW area. When I got there, there were 15-20 people in line. I didn't exactly ask for their immigration status, but most of them did not appear to be immigrants.
@huskypuppy14, from my observations, it's not really that. For example, I tried to go to confession today in the DFW area. When I got there, there were 15-20 people in line. I didn't exactly ask for their immigration status, but most of them did not appear to be immigrants.
It's also a new year, so people may be starting a new year with confessing their sins of last year. Whatever the reason for your area having a lot of people going to church; it's not the case across the country.
'---------
I'm not arguing that. I'm just saying that my experience has not been that the influx of people at church in Texas is not due to immigration.
I only had 2. Considering the day I had (and, no, I am not referring to TK), I wish I had more! I separate "state business" from marriage. And I now see you are seeing them as the same. I think that's where the disconnect lies.
Just how fast do you go to Hell if you punch a holy man in the throat? Are we talking Japanese bullet train fast or warp speed fast?
Somehow I doubt I would go to hell for throat punching that waste of oxygen. I was 14 at the time with no spine so I didn't say anything. The woman I am today would have ripped him more assholes than a Promise Keepers convention.
Formerly martha1818
If they'd like to remove themselves from all government dealing, I'm all for it. Alas, they aren't, they're busy trying to legalize discrimination and hate with such bull shit as the Family Research Council.
But I'd rather like having the legal marriage separate from religious. Any legal, consenting adults can have their state recognized marriage. If Church BSC says we only allow whoever, then those who aren't whoever can go out the door to Church Rational and worship/get married/etc. A church can do as they please, I am not required or obligated to support any church.
But if one more hyper conservative wants to promote legal discrimination based strictly on religion AND claim how they strictly follow the US Constitution, I'm going to start beating people with bricks. Your high and mighty Constitution has separation of church and state plus the small feature of freedom of religion which includes freedom FROM religion. You can not legalize discrimination based on religion and proclaim support of Constitution. They negate each other.
Formerly martha1818