Should Churches be forced to accomodate for homosexual weddings?

[jillian]

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. Churches and other religious institutions are autonomous and protected by the first amendment. that doesn't mean they have the right to interfere with the constitutional rights of the LGBT community to be married.

 

[jillian]

When the state seeks to impose its will upon the churches of the land, bloodshed is a heartbeat away.

No. In our country, the state does not have the authority to dictate what the church must *allow*.

So if churches should be allowed refuse to marry homosexuals couples, should they be allowed to refuse to marry mixed race couples if it goes against their doctrine?

Yes. Separation of church and state. Right?

that one makes you happy, huh?

And since when do rightwingnuts care about the separation of church and state?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Stop bumping this old thread you stupid trolls

 

[Avorysuds]

Church's should not be tax exempt, period. Then who cares what they do as long as they don't break the law. Currently our Government has created laws that favor religion, in direct conflict with the constitution.

 

[RKMBrown]

Church's should not be tax exempt, period. Then who cares what they do as long as they don't break the law. Currently our Government has created laws that favor religion, in direct conflict with the constitution.

Where does it say the feds can't favor religion?

 

[jillian]

Church's should not be tax exempt, period. Then who cares what they do as long as they don't break the law. Currently our Government has created laws that favor religion, in direct conflict with the constitution.

the power to tax has always been considered the power to destroy. that is why religious institutions are exempt. it is not FAVORING religion, it is staying AWAY from religion... which is exactly what government should do.

that said, there is no justification for profit-making centers like real estate to be exempt from taxation simply because the owner is a religious institution.

 

[koshergrl]

When the state seeks to impose its will upon the churches of the land, bloodshed is a heartbeat away.

No. In our country, the state does not have the authority to dictate what the church must *allow*.

So if churches should be allowed refuse to marry homosexuals couples, should they be allowed to refuse to marry mixed race couples if it goes against their doctrine?

Yes. Separation of church and state. Right?

that one makes you happy, huh?

And since when do rightwingnuts care about the separation of church and state?

Baptists are the ones who proposed it, leftwingnut.

 

[Silhouette]

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. Churches and other religious institutions are autonomous and protected by the first amendment. that doesn't mean they have the right to interfere with the constitutional rights of the LGBT community to be married.

Except the fact that a CHURCH is the outward growth of the BIBLE, which is the outward growth of the NEW TESTAMENT which is the seed of CHRISTIANITY.

And in that Bible, in the New Testament, it is told to the faithful of that CHURCH that if they aide or abet the spread of a homosexual culture [see: Jude 1], they will be damned to hell for eternity.

However, in that same passage they are told to extend compassion to INDIVIDUAL homosexuals and their mental sufferings/compulsions. It's just that the spread of a homosexual culture into the mainstream is what will get you eternity in the Big Slammer down below.

And what better way to insure your fate than by participating in granting homosexuals the right to marry? Marriage is the seat, the hub, the kernel the nexus of human culture. So if you promote gay marriage, you are promoting your own doom in the christian world, their CHURCH.

So....*drum roll* [I love the smooth progression of logical thinking]....if you force a church to participate in gay marriages, you have simply, totally, completely and effectively removed christians' rights to practice the religion of their choice. To PRACTICE the religion of their choice, not just give it lip service and bend every which way with the latest winds of strange and heretical subcultural fads....

 

[hadit]

The freedom of religion, as well as the freedom from religion, mandates that individuals be free to politely excuse themselves from activities in which they do not wish to participate. An individual should no more be coerced to celebrate two gay people getting "married" (by being forced, for example, to bake a cake) than an atheist should be coerced to attend a church service.

 

[Silhouette]

The freedom of religion, as well as the freedom from religion, mandates that individuals be free to politely excuse themselves from activities in which they do not wish to participate. An individual should no more be coerced to celebrate two gay people getting "married" (by being forced, for example, to bake a cake) than an atheist should be coerced to attend a church service.

Very well put.

But in the case of christians, being forced to participate in gay marriages in any way, shape or form is identical to removing their 1st Amendment rights at their core. For all the reasons I pointed out in my last post. For an atheist to be forced into church at least he has no psychological torture of anticipating an eternity of the most unimaginable torturous existence in the pits of hell.

 

[RKMBrown]

The freedom of religion, as well as the freedom from religion, mandates that individuals be free to politely excuse themselves from activities in which they do not wish to participate. An individual should no more be coerced to celebrate two gay people getting "married" (by being forced, for example, to bake a cake) than an atheist should be coerced to attend a church service.

No it does not. Learn to read, get a clue. The bill of rights is actually a list of restrictions on what government can do. There is no Mandate that individuals be free to politely excuse themselves from activities in which they do not wish to participate. You are making shit up.

 

[RKMBrown]

The freedom of religion, as well as the freedom from religion, mandates that individuals be free to politely excuse themselves from activities in which they do not wish to participate. An individual should no more be coerced to celebrate two gay people getting "married" (by being forced, for example, to bake a cake) than an atheist should be coerced to attend a church service.

Very well put.

But in the case of christians, being forced to participate in gay marriages in any way, shape or form is identical to removing their 1st Amendment rights at their core. For all the reasons I pointed out in my last post. For an atheist to be forced into church at least he has no psychological torture of anticipating an eternity of the most unimaginable torturous existence in the pits of hell.

Hey it's the homophobic bigot come back to spit on gays some more!

 

[Silhouette]

The freedom of religion, as well as the freedom from religion, mandates that individuals be free to politely excuse themselves from activities in which they do not wish to participate. An individual should no more be coerced to celebrate two gay people getting "married" (by being forced, for example, to bake a cake) than an atheist should be coerced to attend a church service.

Very well put.

But in the case of christians, being forced to participate in gay marriages in any way, shape or form is identical to removing their 1st Amendment rights at their core. For all the reasons I pointed out in my last post. For an atheist to be forced into church at least he has no psychological torture of anticipating an eternity of the most unimaginable torturous existence in the pits of hell.

Hey it's the homophobic bigot come back to spit on gays some more!

I'd rather be a "homophobic bigot spitting on gays" than a fascist gutting the 1st Amendment freedom to practice the essence [Jude 1] of one's religion any day of the week. You are kicking God's commandments in the crotch by trying to use the courts to force christians to damn themselves for eternity.

 

[RKMBrown]

The freedom of religion, as well as the freedom from religion, mandates that individuals be free to politely excuse themselves from activities in which they do not wish to participate. An individual should no more be coerced to celebrate two gay people getting "married" (by being forced, for example, to bake a cake) than an atheist should be coerced to attend a church service.

Very well put.

But in the case of christians, being forced to participate in gay marriages in any way, shape or form is identical to removing their 1st Amendment rights at their core. For all the reasons I pointed out in my last post. For an atheist to be forced into church at least he has no psychological torture of anticipating an eternity of the most unimaginable torturous existence in the pits of hell.

Hey it's the homophobic bigot come back to spit on gays some more!

I'd rather be a "homophobic bigot spitting on gays" than a fascist gutting the 1st Amendment freedom to practice the essence [Jude 1] of one's religion any day of the week. You are kicking God's commandments in the crotch by trying to use the courts to force christians to damn themselves for eternity.

WTH are you talking about? Are you delusional? Where am I using courts to force myself, a christian, to damn myself for eternity? Who are these facists you are talking about who are gutting the first amendment? Which of god's 10 commandments are in Jude 1? Do you mean exodus, are you talking about this commandment: Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour... Oh wait that's what you are doing.

Are you on something right now?

 

[Gary Anderson]

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?

Only if they are open for business. If they don't charge for their space, then no. If they charge for the space, then yes. They are a business. Businesses should serve the public without discrimination. If they charge money Christ would call them money changers anyway.

 

[Seawytch]

Only if they are open for business. If they don't charge for their space, then no. If they charge for the space, then yes. They are a business. Businesses should serve the public without discrimination. If they charge money Christ would call them money changers anyway.

Which is how courts have ruled to date as well. When bigots bring up the church that was sued, it was because of a space they rented to the public.

 

[Carla_Danger]

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?

Don't they discriminate against both already?

.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

Only if they are open for business. If they don't charge for their space, then no. If they charge for the space, then yes. They are a business. Businesses should serve the public without discrimination. If they charge money Christ would call them money changers anyway.

Which is how courts have ruled to date as well. When bigots bring up the church that was sued, it was because of a space they rented to the public.

why on Earth would you want to rent from a church that wants NOTHING to do with you?

Seriously I think people who think that way should be euthanized for being stupid.
"Im going to spend money with people who hate my guts"

How stupid.

 

[Seawytch]

Don't they discriminate against both already?

.

They can if they choose to, they don't have to.

 

[Seawytch]

why on Earth would you want to rent from a church that wants NOTHING to do with you?

Seriously I think people who think that way should be euthanized for being stupid.
"Im going to spend money with people who hate my guts"

How stupid.

Right, we get it...you think PA laws are stupid...that's not getting rid of them.