What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Gay Marriage Revisited

DGS49

Platinum Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
11,032
Reaction score
6,002
Points
1,065
Location
Pittsburgh
I know it's been discussed before here, but with the USSC getting ready to weigh in I though it might be entertaining to take another whack at it.

Throughout the time while this subject has been in the public consciousness, I have never heard anyone else express views that are the same as mine, so here goes.

The "institution of marriage" that is created by any Church is NOT THE SAME as the "institution of marriage" that is created by the State.

Examples:

(1) I get married by a Roman Catholic priest, then get divorced by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Under the laws of the Church I am still married. Under the laws of Pennsylvania I am divorced. If I remarry, the Church condemns me for bigamy.

(2) I get married by a justice of the peace. The Catholic Church does not recognize that marriage. My kids are illegitimate. Under the rules of the Church, I am free to divorce and re-marry, if I like.

(3) I get married by a priest. Six weeks later I realize that my wife and I had totally different views on marriage, family, procreation, etc. I go to the Church and have my marriage annulled. According to the Church, I was NEVER MARRIED. According to Pennsylvania I am still married.

The point being...

These are two different institutions, and it shouldn't really matter to the Church what the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania thinks, and vice versa.

The perversity that should be addressed is this: Church priests, ministers, and rabbis should NOT HAVE THE POWER to marry someone in the eyes of the State. Two separate ceremonies should be required, because the couple is entering into two different types of commitments and two different institutions.

Bottom line...
It should not matter to the Church if the State decides to recognize other types of relationships as "marriages." It is none of their business or concern.

The State takes no notice of the SEXUAL ACTIVITY of people who marry (except to the extent that living children come out of it), and the forms and frequency of the sexual activity of married people is totally irrelevant to the State, while it may have grave moral consequence in the Church. But it doesn't matter, does it?
 

Luddly Neddite

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
63,904
Reaction score
9,941
Points
2,040
First, there is no such thing as "gay marriage". There is marriage. Period.

There is no marriage in any church/religion. There is only state marriage. You can marry in a church, if you wish, but it means nothing until the state recognizes it.

If you choose to give a church/religion some sort of power over you, that's all it is - your choice.

IMO, government has no place in deciding who can marry. OTOH, marriage is a contract, with legal power and implications.
 

JakeStarkey

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
168,037
Reaction score
16,470
Points
2,165
This is a matter of public marriage and the requirements of the 14th Amendment.

Any institution or non-institution representative can marry any people without public ratification and sanction.
 

Syriusly

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 15, 2014
Messages
54,852
Reaction score
7,133
Points
1,840
First, there is no such thing as "gay marriage". There is marriage. Period.

There is no marriage in any church/religion. There is only state marriage. You can marry in a church, if you wish, but it means nothing until the state recognizes it.

If you choose to give a church/religion some sort of power over you, that's all it is - your choice.

IMO, government has no place in deciding who can marry. OTOH, marriage is a contract, with legal power and implications.

I disagree- the OP raised a very valid point- the rules for marriage within a church are often disconnected from civil marriage law.

The only one that we should be concerned about though is civil marriage- I think his point is that the issue of what religions consider to be valid marriages is not a valid concern for civil marriage. Civil marriage is the only marriage that legally is relevant.
 

Luddly Neddite

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2011
Messages
63,904
Reaction score
9,941
Points
2,040
First, there is no such thing as "gay marriage". There is marriage. Period.

There is no marriage in any church/religion. There is only state marriage. You can marry in a church, if you wish, but it means nothing until the state recognizes it.

If you choose to give a church/religion some sort of power over you, that's all it is - your choice.

IMO, government has no place in deciding who can marry. OTOH, marriage is a contract, with legal power and implications.

I disagree- the OP raised a very valid point- the rules for marriage within a church are often disconnected from civil marriage law.

The only one that we should be concerned about though is civil marriage- I think his point is that the issue of what religions consider to be valid marriages is not a valid concern for civil marriage. Civil marriage is the only marriage that legally is relevant.

That's more or less the point I was making.

But, from the only pov that matters - legal - religion counts for nothing. A religious ceremony is a matter of choice. Civil sanction is not.
 

PratchettFan

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
7,238
Reaction score
746
Points
190
I know it's been discussed before here, but with the USSC getting ready to weigh in I though it might be entertaining to take another whack at it.

Throughout the time while this subject has been in the public consciousness, I have never heard anyone else express views that are the same as mine, so here goes.

The "institution of marriage" that is created by any Church is NOT THE SAME as the "institution of marriage" that is created by the State.

Examples:

(1) I get married by a Roman Catholic priest, then get divorced by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Under the laws of the Church I am still married. Under the laws of Pennsylvania I am divorced. If I remarry, the Church condemns me for bigamy.

(2) I get married by a justice of the peace. The Catholic Church does not recognize that marriage. My kids are illegitimate. Under the rules of the Church, I am free to divorce and re-marry, if I like.

(3) I get married by a priest. Six weeks later I realize that my wife and I had totally different views on marriage, family, procreation, etc. I go to the Church and have my marriage annulled. According to the Church, I was NEVER MARRIED. According to Pennsylvania I am still married.

The point being...

These are two different institutions, and it shouldn't really matter to the Church what the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania thinks, and vice versa.

The perversity that should be addressed is this: Church priests, ministers, and rabbis should NOT HAVE THE POWER to marry someone in the eyes of the State. Two separate ceremonies should be required, because the couple is entering into two different types of commitments and two different institutions.

Bottom line...
It should not matter to the Church if the State decides to recognize other types of relationships as "marriages." It is none of their business or concern.

The State takes no notice of the SEXUAL ACTIVITY of people who marry (except to the extent that living children come out of it), and the forms and frequency of the sexual activity of married people is totally irrelevant to the State, while it may have grave moral consequence in the Church. But it doesn't matter, does it?

I can't argue with anything you said.
 

JakeStarkey

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
168,037
Reaction score
16,470
Points
2,165
I know it's been discussed before here, but with the USSC getting ready to weigh in I though it might be entertaining to take another whack at it.

Throughout the time while this subject has been in the public consciousness, I have never heard anyone else express views that are the same as mine, so here goes.

The "institution of marriage" that is created by any Church is NOT THE SAME as the "institution of marriage" that is created by the State.

Examples:

(1) I get married by a Roman Catholic priest, then get divorced by the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Under the laws of the Church I am still married. Under the laws of Pennsylvania I am divorced. If I remarry, the Church condemns me for bigamy.

(2) I get married by a justice of the peace. The Catholic Church does not recognize that marriage. My kids are illegitimate. Under the rules of the Church, I am free to divorce and re-marry, if I like.

(3) I get married by a priest. Six weeks later I realize that my wife and I had totally different views on marriage, family, procreation, etc. I go to the Church and have my marriage annulled. According to the Church, I was NEVER MARRIED. According to Pennsylvania I am still married.

The point being...

These are two different institutions, and it shouldn't really matter to the Church what the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania thinks, and vice versa.

The perversity that should be addressed is this: Church priests, ministers, and rabbis should NOT HAVE THE POWER to marry someone in the eyes of the State. Two separate ceremonies should be required, because the couple is entering into two different types of commitments and two different institutions.

Bottom line...
It should not matter to the Church if the State decides to recognize other types of relationships as "marriages." It is none of their business or concern.

The State takes no notice of the SEXUAL ACTIVITY of people who marry (except to the extent that living children come out of it), and the forms and frequency of the sexual activity of married people is totally irrelevant to the State, while it may have grave moral consequence in the Church. But it doesn't matter, does it?

I can't argue with anything you said.

I agree that the analysis is spot on.
 

Sunni Man

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2008
Messages
57,367
Reaction score
20,076
Points
2,280
Location
Patriotic American Muslim
First, there is no such thing as "gay marriage". There is marriage. Period.
I agree with you.

So called "gay marriage" is an abomination and a sick fraud.

A real marriage is only between a man and a woman. Period. ..... :cool:

.
 

JakeStarkey

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
168,037
Reaction score
16,470
Points
2,165
You are wrong, Sunni Man.

Marriage is the joining together of two people. Their sex is immaterial.

Your opinion does not define the matter, but the actions of SCOTUS and the marriages of the various states do.
 

PratchettFan

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
7,238
Reaction score
746
Points
190
First, there is no such thing as "gay marriage". There is marriage. Period.
I agree with you.

So called "gay marriage" is an abomination and a sick fraud.

A real marriage is only between a man and a woman. Period. ..... :cool:

.

You are certainly free to think that and no one is saying you are required to participate in any marriage you don't think is "real". Which, of course, doesn't change the fact that you are entirely wrong.
 

Sunni Man

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2008
Messages
57,367
Reaction score
20,076
Points
2,280
Location
Patriotic American Muslim
You are wrong, Sunni Man.
Marriage is the joining together of two people. Their sex is immaterial.
Your opinion does not define the matter, but the actions of SCOTUS and the marriages of the various states do.
You claim to be a Christian.

So how can you support homo marriage? .... :dunno:
 

JakeStarkey

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
168,037
Reaction score
16,470
Points
2,165
You are not a Christian, have trouble living a good life as a Muslim, yet you wish to counsel others. Just be at peace.
 

Sunni Man

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2008
Messages
57,367
Reaction score
20,076
Points
2,280
Location
Patriotic American Muslim
You are not a Christian, have trouble living a good life as a Muslim, yet you wish to counsel others. Just be at peace.
I just asked you a very simple and straight forward question.

Surely you should have no difficulty answering it?

I am only here to learn. ...... :cool:
 

JakeStarkey

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
168,037
Reaction score
16,470
Points
2,165
If you are here to learn, follow my advice.
 

Sunni Man

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2008
Messages
57,367
Reaction score
20,076
Points
2,280
Location
Patriotic American Muslim

JakeStarkey

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
168,037
Reaction score
16,470
Points
2,165

Sunni Man

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2008
Messages
57,367
Reaction score
20,076
Points
2,280
Location
Patriotic American Muslim
If you are here to learn, follow my advice.
What advice would that be Fake Jake?? ..... :dunno:
Ask Jesus to forgive your sins in chasing after false idols and return to the Christian faith.
Btw Fake Jake......what Christian church, denomination, or cult, are you a member?

I have asked you this question before. But for some reason you seem reluctant to answer?

Are you ashamed of your religious affiliation? ...... :cool:
 

JakeStarkey

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2009
Messages
168,037
Reaction score
16,470
Points
2,165
No, you don't get "just once more."

Your only hope is repentance and returning to the Christian faith.
 

Sunni Man

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2008
Messages
57,367
Reaction score
20,076
Points
2,280
Location
Patriotic American Muslim
Your only hope is repentance and returning to the Christian faith.
Again, what church, denomination, or cult, are you a member of? .... :cool:
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$166.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top