Scotland has just introduced a bill which will legalise same sex marriages.

Status
Not open for further replies.
T

trencheel303

Messages
4,888
Edit My Images
No
Excellent news.

Now the churches such as Quaker, who have wanted to be able to marry same sex couples - but have not been able to by law - can do as they please now.

The law won't stop the churches who do not wish to marry same sex couples from retaining that right, and their freedom of speech will be protected as well.

So it's a win-win situation then, and one more step on the road to total equality for many deserving humans out there.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-18981287
 
Your opinion, you're entitled to it and I wouldnt stop you from "voicing" it, doesnt necessarily mean I agree with it though.
As far as I am concerned, marriage - as commonly understood, is between opposite sexes, namely between a male and a female, I dont see why same sex unions should be defined legally or any other way you can describe as a "marriage". I fully endorse there being a legal status for same sex unions that give equal rights as any other union but personally I draw the line at the term marriage.

Matt
 
MatBin said:
Your opinion, you're entitled to it and I wouldnt stop you from "voicing" it, doesnt necessarily mean I agree with it though.
As far as I am concerned, marriage - as commonly understood, is between opposite sexes, namely between a male and a female, I dont see why same sex unions should be defined legally or any other way you can describe as a "marriage". I fully endorse there being a legal status for same sex unions that give equal rights as any other union but personally I draw the line at the term marriage.
Click to expand...
Thanks for voicing my opinion so well that I don't need to repeat it.(y)

We'll be letting them have children next :ironic:.....:wacky:
 
That's good, couples (no matter what combination of gender) should have the same rights.

Not sure on the original thought of forcing churches to perform same sex weddings though. Why would you want to get married under a religion that says you'll burn in hell?
 
neil_g said:
That's good, couples (no matter what combination of gender) should have the same rights.

Not sure on the original thought of forcing churches to perform same sex weddings though. Why would you want to get married under a religion that says you'll burn in hell?
Click to expand...

nobody being forced Neil, if a particular church or religious group doesn't want to marry same sex couples they retain that right, no-one will force them.


neil_g said:
Ah the "them" terminology. Good to see we are still in the dark ages.
Click to expand...

Please don't rise to the hateful comments... this thread isn't even about children anyway.
 
trencheel303 said:
nobody being forced Neil, if a particular church or religious group doesn't want to marry same sex couples they retain that right, no-one will force them.

Please don't rise to the hateful comments... this thread isn't even about children anyway.
Click to expand...

I thought I read that was one of the original points the gov were looking at?

Yeah I know, ignore the haters.
 
Dunno - I'm pretty sure a church can refuse to marry anyone though, regardless of background or a specific reason.

Let's also be clear though that marriage and church are not one and the same. You can get married without the involvement of a church :p
 
Can't see this ending well, religion and politics in one thread!
For the record I'm against it on scriptural grounds.
 
neil_g said:
Ah the "them" terminology. Good to see we are still in the dark ages.
Click to expand...
No, we are just in the sensitivity gone haywire age.:wacky:

I use the term 'them' to describe anything I'm talking about. That could be 'Camera Shops', 'Birds', 'Cars', 'Women', 'Men', 'Straights', 'Gays', 'Whites', 'Blacks'...... you name it. In speech and the written word, 'them' is perfectly reasonable and fair.

Unfortunately, people who want to pick a fight and gain moral high ground (which they typically don't hold) try to pick up on any term used in a discussion and turn it against the originator in the same manner that a solicitor will try to discredit a witness.

'Them' is a standard English word used to describe a group of something/anything. It is NOT a derogatory term unless YOU choose to think it is.
 
FourRingCircus said:
No, we are just in the sensitivity gone haywire age.:wacky:

I use the term 'them' to describe anything I'm talking about. That could be 'Camera Shops', 'Birds', 'Cars', 'Women', 'Men', 'Straights', 'Gays', 'Whites', 'Blacks'...... you name it. In speech and the written word, 'them' is perfectly reasonable and fair.

Unfortunately, people who want to pick a fight and gain moral high ground (which they typically don't hold) try to pick up on any term used in a discussion and turn it against the originator in the same manner that a solicitor will try to discredit a witness.

'Them' is a standard English word used to describe a group of something/anything. It is NOT a derogatory term unless YOU choose to think it is.
Click to expand...

Ok.
 
It's a step in the right direction for sure. Hopefully the rest of the UK can follow suit soon and do more to give all relationships, regardless of sexuality, an equal footing.
 
Good. Marriage as a concept predates Christianity, so while the church may have used its power in the middle ages to claim ownership of the concept, it should not be able to dictate policy in a secular society.

The matter of churches performing services or not is to me secondary to the fact it is introducing equal marriage, not the unequal system currently in place.
 
Great news. A step forward for a change.
 
onomatopoeia said:
Good. Marriage as a concept predates Christianity, so while the church may have used its power in the middle ages to claim ownership of the concept, it should not be able to dictate policy in a secular society.
Click to expand...

It pre-dates Christianity only in as much Jesus Christ setup Christianity in the 1st century - the Holy Scriptures start out in Genesis with God introducing the state of marriage and setting its role.
However, as you rightly say, today we live in a mainly secular society and hence little credence is given to anything that God says.
 
gramps said:
It pre-dates Christianity only in as much Jesus Christ setup Christianity in the 1st century - the Holy Scriptures start out in Genesis with God introducing the state of marriage and setting its role.
However, as you rightly say, today we live in a mainly secular society and hence little credence is given to anything that God says.
Click to expand...

Does that mean dinosaurs got married? :thinking:

:p
 
Only if you are an evolutionist.
 
MatBin said:
I fully endorse there being a legal status for same sex unions that give equal rights as any other union but personally I draw the line at the term marriage.

Matt
Click to expand...

So marriage in all but name? What's actually the point in that kind of distinction?

Personally I view marriage as a commitment between two people and all that matters is what is between said people.

Everyone should have the right to make that commitment in law. If the commitment is the same then we should use the same word to describe it.

How does calling it marriage affect/ hurt anyone else? & if doesn't why should anyone else be able to (or want to) stop it?



A question, Religions don't actually actually acknowledge each other as true do they? Don't most follow 'the one true god' & isn't their view of marriage a commitment before said god?

So wouldn't it follow that if marriage was purely religious then no religion would acknowledge another's marriages as valid as they wouldn't consider them as having been performed before the real god?

If so would that mean that the term marriage should only be used among your own religious group?

Maybe we should just add an extra word to the description,

Legal marriage,

Christian marriage,

Muslim marriage,

Etc...
 
Can we please try to refrain from turning this into a religion thread. This is about LGBT equality and the right to same sex marriage...

Marriage goes back a long time before the church even existed anyway so the word "marriage" does not even have to infer religion.

I'd rather this thread didn't get locked because it descended into a religious rant.
 
H2O said:
Don't most follow 'the one true god' & isn't their view of marriage a commitment before said god?
Click to expand...

No and Yes'ish ...

No in that most religions today who call themselves 'Christian' do not follow 'the one true God', as is evidenced by their actions and teachings, they actually use the tag 'God' to give credibility to what they do.

Yes (generally) 'Christian' religions view marriage as a 'commitment before God', however there is an anomaly in as much as, how do you 'commit before God' if you do not accept to live by his standards?
 
trencheel303 said:
Can we please try to refrain from turning this into a religion thread. This is about LGBT equality and the right to same sex marriage...

Marriage goes back a long time before the church even existed anyway so the word "marriage" does not even have to infer religion.

I'd rather this thread didn't get locked because it descended into a religious rant.
Click to expand...

But surely it is a religious issue as has been evidenced by the debate amongst those concerned ... and doesn't "religious rant" smack of intolerance?

However since you are so against one side of the debate I will bow out.
 
trencheel303 said:
Can we please try to refrain from turning this into a religion thread. This is about LGBT equality and the right to same sex marriage...

Marriage goes back a long time before the church even existed anyway so the word "marriage" does not even have to infer religion.

I'd rather this thread didn't get locked because it descended into a religious rant.
Click to expand...

I agree.

There is no need for marriage to involve religion as in my view it's just an expression of a life long commitment between two people.

Unfortunately many people don't see it that way and I think that's where most of the resistance to change comes from.
 
gramps said:
No and Yes'ish ...

No in that most religions today who call themselves 'Christian' do not follow 'the one true God', as is evidenced by their actions and teachings, they actually use the tag 'God' to give credibility to what they do.

Yes (generally) 'Christian' religions view marriage as a 'commitment before God', however there is an anomaly in as much as, how do you 'commit before God' if you do not accept to live by his standards?
Click to expand...


The question i'm asking is if marriage (between a man & woman) is a commitment before god do you acknowledge a marriage as valid where it is not performed before god (as you understand god)?

If yes, why is that rule able to be broken and not others?
 
Last edited:
neil_g said:
ive just looked up the definition of marriage on a few places, a lot mention lawful or even social union but no references to religion.
Click to expand...

Indeed in all old cultural references, marriage is defined by shared occupation, aka living together, nothing more.

Often referred to as *common law*

Technically all marriages are in today's world at least nothing more then a contractual commitment to a partner (or several if your Mormon :naughty:).
 
neil_g said:
ive just looked up the definition of marriage on a few places, a lot mention lawful or even social union but no references to religion.
Click to expand...

that's because you need a licence to get married....that is why it is a legal thing but there is a certain criteria for that licence.

Matrimony is a different thing though, in the catholic church anyway.
 
OED specifically mentions opposite sexes:

Definition of marriage
noun

1the formal union of a man and a woman, typically as recognized by law, by which they become husband and wife:
 
Lynton said:
OED specifically mentions opposite sexes:

Definition of marriage
noun

1the formal union of a man and a woman, typically as recognized by law, by which they become husband and wife:
Click to expand...

so now the law has changed they will have to change that quote.
 
Good for them. Maybe now same sex couples will get the same rights and entitlements as heterosexual married couples.

No problems for me here.
 
I don't have a problem with anyone getting married so long as it is legal but eventually someone will take a 'church' to court trying to force them to conduct the ritual which is against the beliefs of that said church. Only a matter of time.
 
tiler65 said:
I don't have a problem with anyone getting married so long as it is legal but eventually someone will take a 'church' to court trying to force them to conduct the ritual which is against the beliefs of that said church. Only a matter of time.
Click to expand...

which i agree is stupid for the reasons i pointed out earlier. just "because" someone who wants a church wedding.

but then the same could be said for hetro couples getting married in a church and not having a religious bone in their body.
 
viv1969 said:
Good for them. Maybe now same sex couples will get the same rights and entitlements as heterosexual married couples.

No problems for me here.
Click to expand...

I agree. This world is bad enough. If you can find someone to love then go for it. What diff should it make to anyone else what gender you are.
 
pepi1967 said:
I agree. This world is bad enough. If you can find someone to love then go for it. What diff should it make to anyone else what gender you are.
Click to expand...

:clap:

And incidentally....the world in general would be a better place......ahh, no religion here....I shall get a grip.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top