Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[koshergrl]

It's a poll. Nobody said that churches were being forced to do anything.

The QUESTION is..should they?

If you want to talk about something else, you should (try to) start your own thread.

 

[koshergrl]

Good grief.

Have some starbucks, loser.

 

[Gadawg73]

So you think they should be forced.

I know you think that by using the term "public opinion" you're somehow hiding the fact that you are saying that you think the churches should be forced, but it's all the same. Public opinion was AOK and 100 percent behind the "forcing" of Jews to get onto train cars, too. Those Jews voluntarily boarded those trains because they thought it was the right thing to do..because public opinion was against them.

This is hyperbolic nonsense and demagoguery.

In its ruling today invalidating Utah's Amendment 3, which violated gay Americans' right to due process and equal protection of the law, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals acknowledged the fact that the decision in no way compels religious institutions to accommodate same-sex couples, thus confirming the idiocy of the OP:

We also emphasize, as did the district court, that today’s decision relates solely to
civil marriage. See Kitchen, 961 F. Supp. 2d at 1214 (“[T]he court notes that its decision
does not mandate any change for religious institutions, which may continue to express
their own moral viewpoints and define their own traditions about marriage.”). Plaintiffs
must be accorded the same legal status presently granted to married couples, but religious
institutions remain as free as they always have been to practice their sacraments and
traditions as they see fit. We respect the views advanced by members of various religious
communities and their discussions of the theological history of marriage. And we
continue to recognize the right of the various religions to define marriage according to
their moral, historical, and ethical precepts. Our opinion does not intrude into that
domain or the exercise of religious principles in this arena.

http://extras.mnginteractive.com/li.../20140625_111714_utah-gay-marriage-ruling.pdf

It is not cliche now to bash black folk so they go with the gays instead.

They are mentally weak and have to find someone to feel superior to.

 

[Gadawg73]

Good grief.

Have some starbucks, loser.

I own a bank and get free coffee.

 

[koshergrl]

Awesome! Start swilling that stuff down..., that's something you're good at I'm sure.

 

[Andylusion]

No church is forced now to marry any heterosexual couples.
No church will ever be forced to marry anyone ever.

You got that right.

By the way, completely off topic, and unrelated to anything on this thread...

About your avatar.... about 5 years back, I had a bunch of Mexicans move in next door to me. Perfectly nice people, but they did exactly that. Between 1 AM and 3 AM, they would start playing Mexican music. They were not obnoxious about it, but I could hear them dancing and singing through the walls.

It must be a cultural thing...

 

[MarcATL]

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.

 

[Indofred]

Nobody said they were. You're late to the party

The question is..do you think they SHOULD be. It's a poll. I know, it's confused all the other fags as well.

Why do you have to promote hate?
Surely you can disagree with an idea without hating those who disagree with you.

 

[Seawytch]

So you think they should be forced.

I know you think that by using the term "public opinion" you're somehow hiding the fact that you are saying that you think the churches should be forced, but it's all the same. Public opinion was AOK and 100 percent behind the "forcing" of Jews to get onto train cars, too. Those Jews voluntarily boarded those trains because they thought it was the right thing to do..because public opinion was against them.

Yes...just as churches were "forced" to perform interracial marriages...by public opinion. Remember the Mormons? They were among the last to be "forced" to accept blacks...by public opinion.

Really? Hitler?

Churches were never forced to marry interracial couples, you nitwit.

You fail..and you keep on failing over and over and over again. I think perhaps you have drug induced brain damage.

Seriously, are you 12? Actually, that's an insult to 12 year olds. I have one and she has better comprehension.

Yes churches were forced to accept interracial couples, but it wasn't by the government, it was by public opinion, you idiotic skank. Even that last little racist church in whatever backwoods state it was caved to public pressure. That is how churches change, public opinion. They will on gays too.

 

[Indofred]

Yes churches were forced to accept interracial couples, but it wasn't by the government, it was by public opinion, you idiotic skank. Even that last little racist church in whatever backwoods state it was caved to public pressure. That is how churches change, public opinion. They will on gays too.

Where in the bible does it mention race based laws regarding marriage?
I don't recall any, perhaps someone could enlighten me.

However, the bible is very clear on sexually active homosexual relationships.

 

[Seawytch]

Yes churches were forced to accept interracial couples, but it wasn't by the government, it was by public opinion, you idiotic skank. Even that last little racist church in whatever backwoods state it was caved to public pressure. That is how churches change, public opinion. They will on gays too.

Where in the bible does it mention race based laws regarding marriage?
I don't recall any, perhaps someone could enlighten me.

However, the bible is very clear on sexually active homosexual relationships.

Well, according to segregationists and those opposed to interracial marriage, there were plenty. They used the bible to justify their bigotry just like some Christians do today with gays.

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. And but for the interference with his arrangement, there would be no cause for such marriages. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix. ~ Leon Bazile, Virginia trial court judge, 1965)​

These folks seemed to be able to find some stuff in the bible about interracial "mixin'"...

Save Your Heritage

When ‘Religious Liberty’ Was Used To Justify Racism Instead Of Homophobia

Bigots don't change, just their targets apparently.

 

[LeftofLeft]

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?

It will be a moot point when sharia law gets here.

 

[Gadawg73]

New poll:

How many times a week do you beat your wife?

A. 2

B. 4

C. 6

D. Felt so good can not remember

 

[koshergrl]

The question isn't "how many churches have been forced to marry queers" it's SHOULD churches be forced to marry queers.

It doesn't beg the question.

But illiterate drunks and ding dongs don't know that, because they apparently have never learned what the word "should" means.

 

[koshergrl]

Nobody said they were. You're late to the party

The question is..do you think they SHOULD be. It's a poll. I know, it's confused all the other fags as well.

Why do you have to promote hate?
Surely you can disagree with an idea without hating those who disagree with you.

I should have said "all the other fags on this site" I suppose.

 

[Gadawg73]

If a church RENTS their facilities for receptions and weddings also then they will be required to take anyone.
But even a dumbass can read The Constitution and know that the church is separate from government, something most of these religious kooks bitch about all the time, and can not require a church to go against their freedom of religion.
The Constitution has a deep rooted history of safeguarding those religious rights which allow them to refuse to perform weddings for gay couples for as long as they choose to.

Now government could step in and punish individual churches by taking away their tax exempt status as we all know religious institutions rely on not paying taxes so this is important to them. I doubt that will ever happen with the ceremony as case law does not support that.

But the government has NEVER used either power to tell religious groups who they have to marry.

And to correct the myth here about interracial marriages, when the court struck down state bans in Loving v. Virginia in 1967 there was NEVER any suggestion that private religious groups that would not perform interracial marriages would be shut down.

 

[Gadawg73]

Read the Constitution you fools.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

What part of "The First Amendment forbids public law from forcing anything on religious institutions" did you not get?

That's not what the first amendment actually says you ignorant moron. Pick up a Constitution, shut your stupid mouth, and try READING for a change.

You don't seem to grasp the heritage of the Christian world view do you?

Actually, I studied Christianity 1 hour a day, 5 days a week, 9 months a year, for 8 years total. However, unlike you - it wasn't the only thing I studied. So go fuck yourself.

Christians were slaughtered, torn apart by lions, thrown into freezing water, all because they were not willing to change their views, just because some arrogant windbags in society thought we had to be like them.

I like how your history of Christianity ends at Constantine! What an ignorant fucktwad you are! If you knew history you'd realize that Christians have quite a long history of murder in the name of God - in fact, they have quite a long history of murdered OTHER CHRISTIANS in the name of God. There's a place, maybe you've heard of it, called "England". You should check out their religious history!

I wouldn't worry one bit about gay weddings at your Church, BTW. Most of the gay people I know don't want to get married in a shit-hole operated by total morons. Its only the Churchs that actually provide a decent place for folks to get married that have to worry about the gays.

 

[Silhouette]

If a church RENTS their facilities for receptions and weddings also then they will be required to take anyone.
But even a dumbass can read The Constitution and know that the church is separate from government, something most of these religious kooks bitch about all the time, and can not require a church to go against their freedom of religion.
The Constitution has a deep rooted history of safeguarding those religious rights which allow them to refuse to perform weddings for gay couples for as long as they choose to.

Now government could step in and punish individual churches by taking away their tax exempt status as we all know religious institutions rely on not paying taxes so this is important to them. I doubt that will ever happen with the ceremony as case law does not support that.

But the government has NEVER used either power to tell religious groups who they have to marry.

And to correct the myth here about interracial marriages, when the court struck down state bans in Loving v. Virginia in 1967 there was NEVER any suggestion that private religious groups that would not perform interracial marriages would be shut down.

I offer that they cannot take away a tax-exempt status of a church refusing to perform gay marriages. Because that too would be an arbitrary favoritism of the government against a religion. And that can be construed as a violation of the 1st. A church may not be at once federally-recognized and at the same time punished for the faith it adheres to..

Also, race has NOTHING to do with this topic and I tire of hearing that false premise inserted time and again on the gay marriage subject. Gays are an incomplete grouping of sexually deviant behaviors. They are NOT a race of people. They are an as-yet unrecognized religion, de facto. A cult. And cults don't get special protections from the 14th or Loving or any of the rest of it.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Stop bumping these stupid liberal hate threads