surfish1961 wrote:When a couple gets "married" by a judge it is not called a marriage per se. It's called a civil ceremony and I believe it is not recognized by the Church. And a "marriage license" is not a license at all. It is a certification that the joining of two persons is contractual by the law.
Look we could talk about this stuff forever but I still stand by my ORIGINAL quote that the Church should not be forced by law to marry same sex couples, legally or otherwise.
I don't think any church should be forced to do anything that's against their faith either within reason. But when it comes to marriage the Churches aren't the end all be authority. If two men or two women want to stand before a judge and say they love each other and want to be married and enjoy the same benefits that heterosexual couples receive, they should be allowed to. Taxes, health benefits, the right to inherit if one partner dies, all the rights the government grants to heterosexual couples, gay couples should also receive. The Church has nothing to do with these things, these are the things our government and the legal system have set up and it's time gay couples are also afforded these rights. If the government would allow these things to happen, the getting married in a church would become a non issue mostly, you're always going to get a few azzholes that want to rock the boat no matter what. Trying to force Catholics or Baptists or whatever religion is the wrong way to go about try to get equal rights. They should have the right to say no, this thing is against what we believe in. But the government allowing gay couples the right to marry and affording those couples the same legal rights heterosexual couples enjoy is a whole different ball game. That's all I'm saying.
Celtic