Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[Katzndogz]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, they should not. Church's are basically business' and should have the right to deny people from marrying in the church. The thing is, they would be stupid not to allow gay marriages. Getting married in a church is not free. In other words if the person in charge of the church says no to gay marriage in they church they are turning down money that would help the church.

That's why so many churches preach against elevating love of money to sin and evil. If a church would sell its Christian principles like that, it has no business being a church.

 

[ron4342]

GOD'S WORD SAYS,"WHAT PROFIT IS IT TO YOU TO GAIN ALL THE GOLD AND RICHES OF THE WORLD BUT LOSE YOUR SOUL"!!! THERE ARE FAR MORE IMPORTANT THINGS THAN $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ Think!

Oh really!!!!! Have you discussed this with your Senators or Representatives. How about your governor, mayor, and city councilmen. How about people like Pat Robertson or some of the other evangelicals?
In case you haven't been keeping track almost every day their is a politician being caught using his office for personal profit. Do you really think the ministers and other religious leaders are above that. Check out some of their private jets and get back to me.

YES!!! GOD LOVES TO BLESS HIS FAMILY WITH MANY GIFTS,HE HAS SURE BLESSED ME!!!and you??

Arn't you still supposed to be in church. Remember, you have Bible school today.

 

[Political Junky]

Wrong. The claim that democracy is the cure - all for the ills of society is the single greatest lie in all of human history.

Democracy gave us the right to vote, not God. God doesn't actually exist.

Not according to our founders.

Who was the last American politician that said they didn't believe in God?

 

[ron4342]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, they should not. Church's are basically business' and should have the right to deny people from marrying in the church. The thing is, they would be stupid not to allow gay marriages. Getting married in a church is not free. In other words if the person in charge of the church says no to gay marriage in they church they are turning down money that would help the church.

That's why so many churches preach against elevating love of money to sin and evil. If a church would sell its Christian principles like that, it has no business being a church.

Does your church take up collections? How about if you offered it a $1000 donation. Do you think they would accept it?

 

[GISMYS]

No, they should not. Church's are basically business' and should have the right to deny people from marrying in the church. The thing is, they would be stupid not to allow gay marriages. Getting married in a church is not free. In other words if the person in charge of the church says no to gay marriage in they church they are turning down money that would help the church.

That's why so many churches preach against elevating love of money to sin and evil. If a church would sell its Christian principles like that, it has no business being a church.

Does your church take up collections? How about if you offered it a $1000 donation. Do you think they would accept it?

need and use are not the same as love. THE LOVE OF MONEY IS EVIL,IF YOU LOVE MONEY AND PUT YOUR TRUST IN WEALTH YOU WILL NOT LOVE AND TRUST GOD!!!

 

[bripat9643]

I disagree, I think marriage is between a man and a woman. Marriage licenses should be issued by the state with incentives to promote procreation and family formation to support the continuity, stability, and the strengthening of the fabric of society going forward. This blind egalitarianism you are pushing serves no purpose outside of itself and is irrational.

Why is marriage between a man and a woman? Is it a religious dictate? If so which religion? I seem to recall other cultures (native american?) allowed same sex marriage, shouldn't their traditions be respected?

If marriage is for procreation we should NOT allow marriage to anyone infertile or anyone past the age of child-bearing. Right?

If you dislike egalitarianism I think it falls on you to show why it should not be allowed.

They can't. No one has ever made a good argument against marriage equality because there is none.

De facto same sex marriage has always existed. The fact that legal or religious systems have not recognized them, or outlawed them, or persecuted them,

is irrelevant.

Plenty of good arguments against the oxymoron known as "gay marriage" have been made. You simply label any argument against "gay marriage" as "not good."

What the hell is "de facto gay marriage?"

 

[koshergrl]

I think he means queers who live together.

 

[Ibentoken]

Here's a man who gets it.
Abstinent gay man: Gay ?marriage? is really about ?incremental totalitarianism? | News | LifeSite

 

[Gracie]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No. Religion, faiths, beliefs are individual. If gays wish to be married then they need to go to a church that believes the same thing they do. Same with businesses that have no desire to serve gay customers. There are plenty of gay business that need the client base...they can go there but forcing someone paying taxes, the overhead of a business, etc is wrong.

 

[Ibentoken]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No. Religion, faiths, beliefs are individual. If gays wish to be married then they need to go to a church that believes the same thing they do. Same with businesses that have no desire to serve gay customers. There are plenty of gay business that need the client base...they can go there but forcing someone paying taxes, the overhead of a business, etc is wrong.

Of course it's wrong. That's why they do it. They're pawns for totalitarianism. This is about submission.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Any wedding performed by a religious institution should not be recognized by the state.

There should be a required civil ceremony to make a marriage legal.

I'm pretty sure that the laws of most jurisdictions, world-wide, disagree with you.

Not in the united states.

A minister or priest ends the ceremony with "By the power vested in me by the state of _____, I now pronounce......."

No state should be giving the clergy any legal power.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Any wedding performed by a religious institution should not be recognized by the state.

There should be a required civil ceremony to make a marriage legal.

They don't need a ceremony, just getting a license and having it signed by a judge should be sufficent.

Yeah I'll give you that.

 

[JakeStarkey]

States have the authority do pass such laws. The federal government doesn't. I think most state laws were passed under threat by the federal government if they didn't.

Of course the federal government has such a role enforcing nondiscr
imination in accordance with the 14th amendment.

Bull. Shove your federal government enforcement up your lying faggot ass.

Sexual flaming by the far right means they know they have lost once again.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Of course the federal government has such a role enforcing nondiscrimination in accordance with the 14th amendment.

Nope. The 14th amendment only mandates equal protection of the laws. It prevents the government from discriminating, not private citizens.

Unless they are involved in Interstate Commerce, or run public businesses. Of course churches are not businesses, and cannot be forced to violate their faith, a moot point.

The 14th does prevent citizens in public business from discriminating.

Tough that, bripat.

 

[Jarlaxle]

You say that as if you think, "Ah hah, but RACE!" is some sort of universal trump card to play, a boundary over which nothing can EVER be allowed to cross and the defense of which is sacrosanct.

Let me advance what is probably a radical notion to you. It is completely legal for someone to be an asshole, and even a racist asshole, and while it is repugnant and immoral behavior for one to be such, it is far more repugnant and immoral for someone to try to impose by law their own preferred behaviors onto said racist asshole.

I would rather live in a society where people have the freedom to be ignorant bigots than one where everyone is a well-behaved slave.

You would rather live in the segregated south than modern day America.

No surprise there. You're an excellent representative of modern day conservatism.

Speaking of segregation........Tell us all about the inner city black ghettos in big northern democrat run cities.

Note that one city is still under court-ordered school integration. That city is Boston!

 

[JakeStarkey]

Fun to watch the pitiful creatures demand equality and rights while trampling and abusing constitutional rights of others.

I know, Iben, it is pitiful for the far right to cry and fart.

Yes, the cons will fail in discriminating against those they don't like.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Why is it that so many people cannot differentiate between "That is bad behavior" and "Therefore, it should be illegal"?

That's the libturd modus operandi. "We don't like that" or "we don't approve of that" automatically translates into "we must outlaw that" in their minds.

Actually that is the American way: all of us, including bripatty, want to tell everyone else how to live.

However the responsible right to responsible left have the Constitution on this one.

See, you're projecting again!

 

[JakeStarkey]

This question can apply to all places of worship, so mosques, synagogues, hindu temples etc.

Should places or worship be forced to accommodate for gay weddings?

No, they should not. Church's are basically business' and should have the right to deny people from marrying in the church. The thing is, they would be stupid not to allow gay marriages. Getting married in a church is not free. In other words if the person in charge of the church says no to gay marriage in they church they are turning down money that would help the church.

Churches are NOT businesses. They are non-profit charitable organizations, and as such, making money is not on their list of priorities. If it was, I don't believe I would care to attend that church.

Churches exist to promote spiritual well-being among their adherents according to their individual definitions of what constitutes "spiritual well-being". It's a little hard to do that if you're contradicting those definitions in order to make money.

Far right silliness.

If a church sells its facilities for weddings, then, yes, it is a business.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Plenty of churches offer marriage equality.

Many don't.

If a church makes money from offering its facilities for marriages, that it must follow public accommodation laws.

To you who don't like that: no one of importance cares.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Businesses should be forced to do whatever the American Left says they should be forced to do.

They're all mean and evil and greedy and they didn't build that and that didn't earn that and roads and bridges 'n stuff.

Churches too!

I thought we all already stipulated to that.

.