Is Gay Marriage a separation of Church and State?

rcfieldz

VIP Member
Feb 26, 2014
2,535
197
85
U.S.A.
Noticing that in the state I reside in that the state is granting licences but the couples seem to be getting hitched at civic offices and not in/at local congregations. Just an observation from facts gained from news media reports here.
So what is the way your state handles the new meaning of marriage in America?
 
Getting a gay marriage at a church, synagogue, or mosque would be more than slightly hypocritical. All 3 faiths have fixed and irrefutable positions against homosexuality and gay marriage. Even if you found a liberal branch you could be married in, it'd occur you're not really following the religion so much as Man's latter edit of it.

Reform Judaism does gay marriages. Though our state of Missouri forbids them, and doesn't recognize ones from elsewhere, our local Reform synagogue will perform them. Be a 'covenant' sort though not official insofar as the law is concerned. I've had lengthy email discussion with the rabbi about this...As a result I'm not really welcomed there. :) As a bisexual myself I'm all for officially sanctioned gay marriage. But as a Jew I"m also forced to conceed our religion doesn't allow it. And if you begin pick and choosing and 'updating' it it's no longer anything from God but something from Man.
 
Maybe you could be married there. I am searching for my Eve. Sorry to crush your dreams...uh uhuh.
 
The LGBT used the JPs as much as possible before the window shut down, here as they knew it would, sol the legal system could bring marriage equality to fruition throughout the land.
 
Noticing that in the state I reside in that the state is granting licences but the couples seem to be getting hitched at civic offices and not in/at local congregations. Just an observation from facts gained from news media reports here.
So what is the way your state handles the new meaning of marriage in America?
14th Amendment jurisprudence applies only to state and local governments, not private persons, private organizations, or private businesses. Consequently religious entities are not required to perform marriage ceremonies for same-sex couples.


States that recognize the equal protection rights of same-sex couples, in accordance with 14th Amendment jurisprudence, by allowing them access to marriage (contract) law they are eligible to participate in, does not constitute a 'new meaning' of marriage – it acknowledges the same meaning of marriage that applies to opposite-sex couples: two equal partners entering into a contract of respect and commitment recognized by the state, same- or opposite-sex.


With regard to your thread title/question, because the 14th Amendment doesn't apply to private religious organizations, this is not an issue of separation of church and state, where only government is required to respect the due process and equal protection rights of citizens.
 
Noticing that in the state I reside in that the state is granting licences but the couples seem to be getting hitched at civic offices and not in/at local congregations. Just an observation from facts gained from news media reports here.
So what is the way your state handles the new meaning of marriage in America?

Marriage is civil regardless of where the ceremony is done.
 
Marriage is only civil ifit is registered as such.

Marriage, the rite of, is inherently religious.
 
Catechism of the Catholic Church - The sacrament of Matrimony

ARTICLE 7
THE SACRAMENT OF MATRIMONY


1601 "The matrimonial covenant, by which a man and a woman establish between themselves a partnership of the whole of life, is by its nature ordered toward the good of the spouses and the procreation and education of offspring; this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament."


... this covenant between baptized persons has been raised by Christ the Lord to the dignity of a sacrament.



is being a baptized person not an issue for the separation of church and state, and whoever did someone make up a selectivity for marriage as a part of religion.
.
 
Marriage is only civil ifit is registered as such.

Marriage, the rite of, is inherently religious.

Nope. A wedding might well be a religious rite, but marriage is a legal contract. That is why it requires a license from the state and a judge to terminate. Without that piece of paper the Pope could officiate the wedding and you still wouldn't be married as far as the law was concerned.
 
Noticing that in the state I reside in that the state is granting licences but the couples seem to be getting hitched at civic offices and not in/at local congregations. Just an observation from facts gained from news media reports here.
So what is the way your state handles the new meaning of marriage in America?
Most gay people would love to do burn a church with all its members still inside. They deplore religion, except the one religion that would put them to death, they wont say anything bad about muslims. Remember, most gays are stone cold far left lunatics.
 
Noticing that in the state I reside in that the state is granting licences but the couples seem to be getting hitched at civic offices and not in/at local congregations. Just an observation from facts gained from news media reports here.
So what is the way your state handles the new meaning of marriage in America?
Most gay people would love to do burn a church with all its members still inside. They deplore religion, except the one religion that would put them to death, they wont say anything bad about muslims. Remember, most gays are stone cold far left lunatics.

Ridiculous.
 
Marriage is civil regardless of where the ceremony is done.

Yep.

Why would anyone want to attend a church that does not want them? These days, there are "gay churches".

Marriage is not and should not be ONLY between a man and a women. Like it or not, marriage equality is becoming the law of the land.

traditional-marriage-includes-1691-whites-only-1724-blacks-with-permission-of-slave-owner-1769-the-wife-is-property-1899-pol_zpsd97dd227.jpg
 
Marriage is only civil ifit is registered as such.

Marriage, the rite of, is inherently religious.

Nope. A wedding might well be a religious rite, but marriage is a legal contract. That is why it requires a license from the state and a judge to terminate. Without that piece of paper the Pope could officiate the wedding and you still wouldn't be married as far as the law was concerned.

nope, marriage is a ritual, civil union is a legal registration.
 
Marriage is only civil ifit is registered as such.

Marriage, the rite of, is inherently religious.

Nope. A wedding might well be a religious rite, but marriage is a legal contract. That is why it requires a license from the state and a judge to terminate. Without that piece of paper the Pope could officiate the wedding and you still wouldn't be married as far as the law was concerned.

nope, marriage is a ritual, civil union is a legal registration.

Really. So if I get married in a church I don't need a marriage license issued by the state?

Legally, there is no difference between a church wedding and a civil ceremony. They are exactly the same thing.
 
Better question may be is marriage in our lawbooks keeping religion out of the law in the first place?

Marriage as the law defines it is a religious rite since it supposedly only involves a man and a woman like the dominant religion claims. If marriage were just the union of two people it could be claimed to be a secular practice independent of religion but it's not.

Further, other secular laws are adjusted if you're married. Age of consent for one. Here in Missouri you have to be 17 to have sex with anyone 17 and older. Yet with a parent's permission, you may marry at 15 to anyone 18 and older, and once wed have sex. In effect then, the law is making the age to have sex arbitrary and dependent upon whether you're married or not. This is respecting an establishment of religion since only men and women can marry (here in Missouri.)
 
Marriage is only civil ifit is registered as such.

Marriage, the rite of, is inherently religious.

Nope. A wedding might well be a religious rite, but marriage is a legal contract. That is why it requires a license from the state and a judge to terminate. Without that piece of paper the Pope could officiate the wedding and you still wouldn't be married as far as the law was concerned.

nope, marriage is a ritual, civil union is a legal registration.

Really. So if I get married in a church I don't need a marriage license issued by the state?

Legally, there is no difference between a church wedding and a civil ceremony. They are exactly the same thing.

No, you don''t need a state license to marry in a church privately.

You do need a license if you wanted it to be recognized civilly.
 
Marriage is only civil ifit is registered as such.

Marriage, the rite of, is inherently religious.

Nope. A wedding might well be a religious rite, but marriage is a legal contract. That is why it requires a license from the state and a judge to terminate. Without that piece of paper the Pope could officiate the wedding and you still wouldn't be married as far as the law was concerned.

nope, marriage is a ritual, civil union is a legal registration.

Really. So if I get married in a church I don't need a marriage license issued by the state?

Legally, there is no difference between a church wedding and a civil ceremony. They are exactly the same thing.

No, you don''t need a state license to marry in a church privately.

You do need a license if you wanted it to be recognized civilly.

Then, in the eyes of the state and the eyes of society, you would not be married. Perhaps in the eyes of God, but God isn't going to give you a tax break or let you put their name on your insurance. God isn't going to let you into the hospital room when your spouse is dying. God isn't going to allow you to inherit. When we are talking about marriage rights, we are talking about civil rights.
 

Forum List

Back
Top