If you can believe it, we can laugh at it!
Excellent! This is so well expressed. It should be posted in every church in the world, starting with the Westboro Baptist church.
brilliantly expressed? Marriage is actually a religious union, a civil one would be… lets see… a civil union? Being vehemently anti-religion in place of genuine intellect has been passe since manson’s epoch in the 90’s. Live what you teach and evolve.
So I’m not married, Henry? We didn’t have a religious ceremony.
So Henry I guess courthouse ceremonies no longer exist… neither do all the legal rights that come along with marriage. If you’re argument were true then legally marriage would be defined the same as a civil union (and every married couple would in fact be in a civil union). However, the law distinguishes between the two and goes to great lengths to grant married couples rights that other couples do not enjoy; therefore marriage is not strictly a religious ceremony. It has nothing to do with being “vehemently anti-religion” it’s about fairness in civil rights.
If marriage is a religious union then it should not be carried out by the state and should not have any weight in terms of civil rights. /common sense
Yeah, no, marriage is not a religious union. You may elect to have a religious ceremony, but that doesn’t make it a specifically religious institution. If marriages were only a religious union, then non-religious folk– like myself– could not legally get married. Aaaaand guess what….we can. So there goes that argument. Be happy with your religion and let others be happy with theirs (or their lack of one.) Gay people getting married doesn’t negatively affect yours, so focus on your own happiness, please. The world will be a much better place for it.
Actuall according to Luther Martin (founder of the Lutheran Church) and John Calvin (One of the founders of the reformed tradition for protestants) “marriage is a worldly thing . . . that belongs to the realm of government”.
Also the English Puritans in the 17th century even passed an Act of Parliament asserting “marriage to be no sacrament” and soon thereafter made marriage purely secular. It was no longer to be performed by a minister, but by a justice of the peace. The Restoration abolished this law and reverted to the old system, but the Puritans brought their concept of marriage to America where it survived.
Since most of our law is based on the historical tenets of American Puritainism it is very clear that in America the basis for marriage is wholly secular.
even in a religious ceremony, a marriage certificate must be signed, witnessed and submitted to the local government. not the same for baptism, confirmation, etc.
Religious freaks aren’t the only people who get married and have sex.
Wait! They get married and then don’t have sex. Or so says Rich Lyons from Living After Faith.
Henry, You twat.
Henry, it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt.
If marriage is a religious union, why do I get a license from the state, rather than the church? Is it perhaps because civil governments are in place, at least in part, to guarantee the same rights to everyone regardless of religion or the lack thereof?
Marraige as we know it may have been based on a religious idea, but the moment that it became something that the government recognizes and allows exemptions and perks for it becomes a federal thing and thus should be treated as a civil right.
Then why is a cicil Marriage license required? What other religious activity do you need a civil license to do?
The prohibition against homosexuality is not just in Leviticus. There is a difference between moral/civil/ceremonial laws in the Bible. You can find
the prohibition against homosexuality in several places of the New Testament too (Romans, for example.)
Also, since Jesus is God and God inspired the Bible, all the writings are important and are an essential to faith (and authored by Jesus.)
I know you don’t believe it, but Christians do, and that’s why they believe homosexuality is not only wrong, but also Jesus’ will.
Christians also believe that if they believe in a zombie who was created by himself so he could get a woman pregnant with himself, so that he could then allow himself to be tortured to death so if people believed in him and ritualistically symbolically ate his flesh, he would forgive them for the very sins he allowed them to commit in the first place.
If he had planned to forgive them, why go about it in such a roundabout way?
I don’t mean to mock your religion (at least not too much), but why is it when Christians get into arguments based on logic and reason, they always fall back on “the Bible says so.” Isn’t that the spiritual equivalent of “because I’m the mom and I say so”?
Perfect example: “The word of God, and it is perfect. How do I know? Because the Bible says so.”
My view on rights has always been that my rights end where someone else’s rights begin. It is not my right to infringe on anyone else’s rights. Likewise for everyone else. Equal rights to me mean exactly that. All people should have the same rights as everyone else, and civil unions, as opposed to marriage, falls short of being equal.
‘If Jesus did not mention a subject…’
Never mind homosexuality, Jesus never mentioned the fact that if you’re good you go to heaven when you die, if you’re bad you go to hell. Is it because this is a later invention, or did it just slip His mind?
You must be logged in to post a comment.