Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[Kondor3]

Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

The ignorance and stupidity of the premise of this thread is truly multifaceted.

For example, who, and by what ‘authority,’ would ‘force’ churches to accommodate same-sex couples, even if there were a 'consensus' to do so.

That would be the authority of the state. The force would be to deny the church tax exempt status. Close them as an unlawful assembly. Use zoning laws to seize Church property. Arrest and prosecute every clergyman for hate speech. Then move on to the individual congregants.

This is not going to happen.

Mostly because if such a thing began, the country would collapse into civil war, for the second time in 200+ years.

Secular Statists on one side, Religious Freedom types on the other side.

And, I'm guessing, that Statists would be in the minority.

Temporarily in control of The State (they would have to be, in order for such church-smashing to get underway)...

Losing control as much of the Armed Forces and Law Enforcement went over to the Rebels; protecting the Constitution and The People rather than the Government.

Frankly, 999 out of 1000 scenarios for civil war in the United States are simply unrealistic and unlikely.

Smashing the churches like that is one of those rare one-in-a-thousand scenarios that would trigger civil war.

In the words of that old humorist and TV Cajun chef, Justin Wilson...

"I garrrrrree--rrrrroonnnnn--ttteeeeeeeee!!!"

 

[Katzndogz]

The ignorance and stupidity of the premise of this thread is truly multifaceted.

For example, who, and by what ‘authority,’ would ‘force’ churches to accommodate same-sex couples, even if there were a 'consensus' to do so.

That would be the authority of the state. The force would be to deny the church tax exempt status. Close them as an unlawful assembly. Use zoning laws to seize Church property. Arrest and prosecute every clergyman for hate speech. Then move on to the individual congregants.

This is not going to happen.

Mostly because if such a thing began, the country would collapse into civil war, for the second time in 200+ years.

Secular Statists on one side, Religious Freedom types on the other side.

And, I'm guessing, that Statists would be in the minority.

Temporarily in control of The State (in order to effect such radical church targeting).

Losing control as much of the Armed Forces and Law Enforcement went over to the Rebels.

999 out of 1000 scenarios for civil war in the United States are simply unrealistic and unlikely.

Smashing the churches like that is the 1 out of 1000 scenario that would trigger civil war.

In the words of that old TV cajun chef, Justin Wilson...

"I garrrrrree--rrrrroonnnnn--ttteeeeeeeee!!!"

Liberal secularists believe they have an overwhelming majority and religious freedom types are just a few, a fringe. A civil war, if it happened at all, would be quickly put down by both military means and the acquiescent public. The "haters" must be dragged along whether they like it or not. There wasn't any protest when individual businesspeople have been punished for their religious beliefs. There's no reason to believe that Churches who become the new Melissa's Sweetcakes would get any more protest than she did.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's every woman's right to make a choice on pregnancy.

That wasn't the question.

Sex for purposes other than reproduction is NORMAL in humans. That makes homosexuality NORMAL.

Homo sapiens are heterosexual by nature, so heterosexual behavior would be NORMAL.

Homo sapiens are not exclusively heterosexual by nature. That is nonsensical.

 

[Misty]

Why would homosexuals want to be married by any religion that believes what they are doing is wrong?

There are plenty of non demoniational ministers or civil servants that will marry homosexuals without judgement.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's every woman's right to make a choice on pregnancy.

That wasn't the question.

Sex for purposes other than reproduction is NORMAL in humans. That makes homosexuality NORMAL.

Uhhh, no. heterosexual sex for pleasure does not make homosexual sex normal.

Of course it does. Within the realm of human sexual activity for pleasure homosexuality is a naturally occurring subset.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Jesus wouldn't turn them away from his person..but he might turn them away from the steps of the church, if he believed they were there for some other purpose than to glorify God. He wasn't very accommodating to people who exploited the church

He turned away the money lenders, but accepted the prostitute, remember?

....go and sin no more. Jesus never accepted sin.

How many churches don't accept sinners?

 

[Kondor3]

Liberal secularists believe they have an overwhelming majority and religious freedom types are just a few, a fringe. A civil war, if it happened at all, would be quickly put down by both military means and the acquiescent public. The "haters" must be dragged along whether they like it or not. There wasn't any protest when individual businesspeople have been punished for their religious beliefs. There's no reason to believe that Churches who become the new Melissa's Sweetcakes would get any more protest than she did.

We see this differently.

You are talking about a relative silence as various court rulings, etc., slowly overturn older laws and practices, in connection with the servicing of customers.

That's simply not enough to get to most of the American People at the gut-level.

Smash their churches, however, as was suggested as a possibility, above, by one of our colleagues, and you've got a hornet's nest on your hands.

That WILL hit the American People at the gut-level.

Keep in mind that the people who comprise our Armed Forces and Law Enforcement are part of We The People, and that they are all sworn to defend the Constitution and, either implicitly or explicitly, The People themselves.

Any armed force can be co-opted, given the appropriate provocation.

Civil war without the backing of the Armed Forces and Law Enforcement is always a long-shot and possesses poor prospects for success, here or anywhere else.

Civil war WITH the backing of the Armed Forces and Law Enforcement carries with it a FAR more likely prospect for success, here or anywhere else.

So, the question would be...

"Would a smashing of the churches in the United States, and a persecution of believers, be sufficient to drive the membership of the Armed Forces and Law Enforcement over the edge, to foment or join a rebellion?"

Personally, I believe that the answer is 'yes', which is why the Government will not dare to attempt such, for many years to come, if ever.

Your mileage may vary.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Churches tend to teach that sex outside of marriage is a sin, but marriage removes the sin from the sex.

Common sense would suggest that if churches logically applied that thinking to gay sex,

then gay sex would be a sin outside of marriage, but gay marriage would remove the sin from the sex.

 

[Kondor3]

He turned away the money lenders, but accepted the prostitute, remember?

....go and sin no more. Jesus never accepted sin.

How many churches don't accept sinners?

Sinners who repent, or who want to repent.

Sinners who consciously insist upon continuing to sin?

Not so much.

 

[Katzndogz]

All churches accept sinners even if the object of religious instruction is to guide people away from sin. Not celebrate it.

 

[Katzndogz]

Liberal secularists believe they have an overwhelming majority and religious freedom types are just a few, a fringe. A civil war, if it happened at all, would be quickly put down by both military means and the acquiescent public. The "haters" must be dragged along whether they like it or not. There wasn't any protest when individual businesspeople have been punished for their religious beliefs. There's no reason to believe that Churches who become the new Melissa's Sweetcakes would get any more protest than she did.

We see this differently.

You are talking about a relative silence as various court rulings, etc., slowly overturn older laws and practices, in connection with the servicing of customers.

That's simply not enough to get to most of the American People at the gut-level.

Smash their churches, however, as was suggested as a possibility, above, by one of our colleagues, and you've got a hornet's nest on your hands.

That WILL hit the American People at the gut-level.

Keep in mind that the people who comprise our Armed Forces and Law Enforcement are part of We The People, and that they are all sworn to defend the Constitution and, either implicitly or explicitly, The People themselves.

Any armed force can be co-opted, given the appropriate provocation.

Civil war without the backing of the Armed Forces and Law Enforcement is always a long-shot and possesses poor prospects for success, here or anywhere else.

Civil war WITH the backing of the Armed Forces and Law Enforcement carries with it a FAR more likely prospect for success, here or anywhere else.

So, the question would be...

"Would a smashing of the churches in the United States, and a persecution of believers, be sufficient to drive the membership of the Armed Forces and Law Enforcement over the edge, to foment or join a rebellion?"

Personally, I believe that the answer is 'yes', which is why the Government will not dare to attempt such, for many years to come, if ever.

Your mileage may vary.

Yet religion has been pretty much scrubbed from the military. How much protest has there been? Bibles are not allowed in military hospitals. Chaplains may not say the word Jesus. Whether or not you are correct, assume that you are, the course of past circumstances at least would give the government the opinion that ending the existence of Churches that do not conform to the normalcy of homosexuality would be acceptable.

 

[Kondor3]

Churches tend to teach that sex outside of marriage is a sin, but marriage removes the sin from the sex.

Common sense would suggest that if churches logically applied that thinking to gay sex,

then gay sex would be a sin outside of marriage, but gay marriage would remove the sin from the sex.

The trouble is, most religions, and their various branches and sects, have a multi-millennia -long tradition of teaching that homosexuality is a grievous sin far more onerous than adultery.

 

[Kondor3]

Yet religion has been pretty much scrubbed from the military. How much protest has there been? Bibles are not allowed in military hospitals. Chaplains may not say the word Jesus. Whether or not you are correct, assume that you are, the course of past circumstances at least would give the government the opinion that ending the existence of Churches that do not conform to the normalcy of homosexuality would be acceptable.

Agreed. And therein lies the danger, and the Realism Factor, when computing the odds on such a scenario materializing.

 

[koshergrl]

Churches tend to teach that sex outside of marriage is a sin, but marriage removes the sin from the sex.

Common sense would suggest that if churches logically applied that thinking to gay sex,

then gay sex would be a sin outside of marriage, but gay marriage would remove the sin from the sex.

Well even God and primitive man knew that homosexuality spreads disease and social dysfunction.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

Churches should burn in Hell because religion is the single greatest lie in all of human history.

Amen!

 

[NYcarbineer]

Churches tend to teach that sex outside of marriage is a sin, but marriage removes the sin from the sex.

Common sense would suggest that if churches logically applied that thinking to gay sex,

then gay sex would be a sin outside of marriage, but gay marriage would remove the sin from the sex.

Well even God and primitive man knew that homosexuality spreads disease and social dysfunction.

I'm not sure how two married gay persons would be spreading either disease or social dysfunction.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Churches tend to teach that sex outside of marriage is a sin, but marriage removes the sin from the sex.

Common sense would suggest that if churches logically applied that thinking to gay sex,

then gay sex would be a sin outside of marriage, but gay marriage would remove the sin from the sex.

Well even God and primitive man knew that homosexuality spreads disease and social dysfunction.

Syphilis has killed more heterosexuals in history than AIDs has killed gays.

 

[koshergrl]

Syphillis is spread between homos as well.

And one of the distinguishing characteristics of homo love is infidelity. Within or outside marriage. As I'm sure you're aware.
Deadliest diseases:
Syphillis is #10
Aids is #2

http://crunkish.com/top-ten-deadliest-diseases-in-the-world/

 

[Kondor3]

Churches should burn in Hell because religion is the single greatest lie in all of human history.

Amen!

A lie, or merely perceiving Existence differently?

 

[onecut39]

The First Amendment forbids public law from forcing anything on religious institutions, just as it forbids religious institutions from imposing their will on the public.

So churches should have the right to discriminate against homosexuals?

How about against racial minorities as well?

Churches, and indeed any organization not serving the general public, are free to discriminate as they will. You don't expect a christian church to perform muslim services do you?

They can even become paid political organizations, if they give up their tax exempt status.