Welcome to ASFN Fan Forums! We're glad to have you here. Please feel free to browse the forum. We'd like to invite you to join our community; doing so will enable you to view additional forums and post with our other members.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
View Poll Results: whose job is it change the definition of marriage?
...your arguement seems to be that there is no legal definition of marriage, that that only exists within a church. i'm saying that, if it does only exist within a church, why did a state who already had civil unions for homosexual couples feel the need to change the definition of the legal term marriage?
My argument (a little more focused after talking to you) is that a church should not dictate to a government that marriage should only be for the purpose of procreation and child-rearing by a husband and a wife.
That rationale is at odds with a law that allows opposite-sex couples to marry regardless of whether they can, or want to, have children, but disqualifies same-sex partners who are raising children.
One does not have to be married in order to procreate - nor does one have to procreate in order to be married.
Registered Members don't see these ads. Register now it's free!
right. religion should be the dictator of right and wrong, in terms of who they let be joined, not government. but i do have a problem with changing legal definitions. that's why i care about the distinction between marriage and civil union.
lol...better edit yer post a little...I think yer missing the word "not"
by not allowed, of course, i mean the not condoned by the church, aka sin. as for the bolded part, i want to make sure i didn't paint catholicism to be so hard and uncaring. they believe that all people are loved by god, regardless of what people do. and all sin can be forgiven, of course. but yeah, the catholic church doesn't mess around. they are pretty strict. but they believe that with their strict nature comes the greatest out pouring of grace. kind of that idea that hard work pays off.
I know I'm totally getting off topic here, but oh well, here I go! I do feel that the Catholic church is TOO strict. I know some VERY good pastors that have been divorced and are re-married. It's almost like a former life that they learned from and gained strength from. I just feel that if God can forgive and move on, which He can and does, why can't "the church"?
__________________
~Just because I have a short attention span doesn't mean...~
Location: on the run from johnny law... ain't no trip to cleveland
Posts: 9,352
A$FN: 1,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djaughe
My argument (a little more focused after talking to you) is that a church should not dictate to a government that marriage should only be for the purpose of procreation and child-rearing by a husband and a wife.
That rationale is at odds with a law that allows opposite-sex couples to marry regardless of whether they can, or want to, have children, but disqualifies same-sex partners who are raising children.
One does not have to be married in order to procreate - nor does one have to procreate in order to be married.
i absolutely agree with you, a church shouldn't tell a government. as for the hypocrisy within a church, i know that it exists, but (at least within the catholic church) it shouldn't. if they were stricter in enforcing their own beliefs, it wouldn't happen.
Location: on the run from johnny law... ain't no trip to cleveland
Posts: 9,352
A$FN: 1,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by CQ
I know I'm totally getting off topic here, but oh well, here I go! I do feel that the Catholic church is TOO strict. I know some VERY good pastors that have been divorced and are re-married. It's almost like a former life that they learned from and gained strength from. I just feel that if God can forgive and move on, which He can and does, why can't "the church"?
are they protestant? because catholic priests cannot get married.
Location: on the run from johnny law... ain't no trip to cleveland
Posts: 9,352
A$FN: 1,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djaughe
lol...better edit yer post a little...I think yer missing the word "not"
i meant that to be that religions can do their own dictating within their own churches, but they shouldn't dictate to governments. sorry, i was typing too fast and got a little sloppy!
i absolutely agree with you, a church shouldn't tell a government. as for the hypocrisy within a church, i know that it exists, but (at least within the catholic church) it shouldn't. if they were stricter in enforcing their own beliefs, it wouldn't happen.
Pardon my slowness...why are you hung up about civil unions and marriage again?
Legal definitions evolve as any society does (i.e. voters rights)...why is this one so important to you that a distinction needs to be made when a gay couple either gets married or civil unionized through the state?
I really don't care which argument make more Consititutional or logical or historical sense. Opposing gay marriage means treating or classifying certain men and women different from all others based solely on who they fall in love with, which I think is a ridiculous notion. And all of the justification for those opposing gay marriage is window dressing for homophobia or religious intolerance or disdain or pure bigotry. And I hate how the Republican party is beholden to those most vocally and virulently opposed to it.
And I should say I think most who oppose it do so mainly on religious grounds--in which case, keep your religion to yourself.
Wow, did you read what I posted? I was asking why someone would stay in a religion that dictates like that. I believe I stated in one of my posts above that I am not catholic, I am Christian.
__________________
~Just because I have a short attention span doesn't mean...~
Location: on the run from johnny law... ain't no trip to cleveland
Posts: 9,352
A$FN: 1,000
Quote:
Originally Posted by Djaughe
Pardon my slowness...why are you hung up about civil unions and marriage again?
Legal definitions evolve as any society does (i.e. voters rights)...why is this one so important to you that a distinction needs to be made when a gay couple either gets married or civil unionized through the state?
i guess i don't like any definition changes. it seems to negate the importance of a definition if it can be changed whenever.
I really don't care which argument make more Consititutional or logical or historical sense. Opposing gay marriage means treating or classifying certain men and women different from all others based solely on who they fall in love with, which I think is a ridiculous notion. And all of the justification for those opposing gay marriage is window dressing for homophobia or religious intolerance or disdain or pure bigotry. And I hate how the Republican party is beholden to those most vocally and virulently opposed to it.
And I should say I think most who oppose it do so mainly on religious grounds--in which case, keep your religion to yourself.
I do feel that the Catholic church is TOO strict. I know some VERY good pastors that have been divorced and are re-married. It's almost like a former life that they learned from and gained strength from. I just feel that if God can forgive and move on, which He can and does, why can't "the church"?
Cosmic Defender Champion!
Linear Mode
