Posted on 02/24/2012 11:18:47 PM PST by EnglishCon
The Church does not "own" marriage nor have the exclusive right to say who can marry, a government minister has said.
Equalities minister Lynne Featherstone said the government was entitled to introduce same-sex marriages, which she says would be a "change for the better".
Her comments come as ministers prepare to launch a public consultation on legalising gay marriage next month.
Traditionalists want the law on marriage to remain unchanged.
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.co.uk ...
The state was a late in picking up that bit of booty. I think Henry VIII had something to do with that.
/johnny
Any criminal can issue a licence for anything, but that doesn't really mean they control it, or that it actually matters to them.
Marriage is a sacrament. And governments, around here, don't offer those.
They give you pieces of paper, and bills, instead. But no sacrements.
/johnny
Who decides, or enforces, that it is a man and a woman?
Marriage predates Christianity.
It took the federal government to stop polygamy in America, how do we stop it, and homosexual “marriage” now?
Aye, odd to think that if one man could have simply kept it in his pants and not been obsessed with a male heir that things would be hugely different today.
Using govt to solve social issues is to fiddle with a double-edged sword. I prefer we persuade one another outside the fencing of statist rule.
The sanctity of marriage is a critical component of a healthy society. It cannot be used as a device to rationalize the illusion that “homosexual marriage” is something that can be realized. The terms “gay marriage” and “homosexual marriage” are completely degenerate having no real meaning.
This issue is less about homosexuality and more about destroying the fabric of a healthy, independent, Christian society.
I don’t fault anyone for wanting to “fit in”, but it’s obvious the commie secularists have identified a group that’s ripe for exploitation, and is using it to marginalize the traditionalism that’s required for a strong, independent society. It’s doing so through the force of law; rulings and law based on the fallacy of “homosexual marriage”.
Purely for the mental exercise and discussion, and not something I condone at all, but:
By what right did the federal government have to stop polygamy?
What does that have to do with Islamic and Mormon Americans, and any homosexuals starting a church defining marriage anyway that they want, other religions may have even more bizarre “definitions”
It sounds like you prefer polygamy not being stopped. That is pretty much the point of this thread isn’t it, that anything called a church “defines” marriage to it’s own desires and purposes?
So what do you propose, govt regulations?
You are fighting for polygamy and homosexual marriage, and whatever else churches like the Children of God come up with?
The govt. licenses marriage and thus the govt. controls marriage.
Look at divorce: who gets what isn’t decided by a church, or the couple, or any concept of sacramental bonds, but rather by govt. courts.
That is what is happening BECAUSE OF government control / licensing of marriage.
What is your excuse for what gave us polygamy?
>> You are fighting for polygamy and homosexual marriage
No, I am not fighting for that. But you are indeed advancing govt regulations.
You need to entrust a free society instead of embracing the kind of statism that makes you feel secure.
What is your excuse for government controllers / licensers of marriage imposing “gay marriage”?
So you are actually promoting marriage as having no definition at all, any church, any religion, any cult, issues their own definition, of course what power would insist and enforce that only religious entities can define marriage anyway, why not anybody, any group, and household?
Islamic and Mormon, and FLDS child marriage and Polygamy, homosexual marriage, and stuff that we cannot even name or imagine.
I agree totally. The state has zero rights to define something which is basically faith based and fundamental to being human.
Look, as I said, I have very good friends who are homosexual. One of them, the guy who sent me this story, in a long term relationship that outlasted the marriages of most of my heterosexual friends, literally saved my a$$ and my marriage. No jokes please!
Not a single one of them wants gay marriage. Civil unions, fair enough. I am not hugely happy with it, but it is what it is. I disagree from a moral and religious standpoint. As a friend I am happy for them, though most of them have not bothered.
To me, as a Christian and Catholic (yes, I seperate them sometimes - there are slightly different tacks depending on what hat you wear), their lives are simply and totally wrong. Against all teaching.
Yet it is their life. Not mine. I can talk to them, witness to them, but I can’t prevent them living as they wish. Watching a good friend following a path that is going to lead them to eternal damnation hurts. I pray hard for them every single day.
I don’t want my duly elected representatives - most of whom have problems in their personal lives too - sticking their nose in.
Because, in the interests of fairness and equality, those same politicians are going to degrade the sanctity of marriage as sure as eggs is eggs.
Two people - one man, one woman - joined before God in Holy Matrimony. That is marriage. Full stop, end of story.
We get it. My friend gets it. Why the H3ll doesn’t the government get it!
You a big fan of
A) not addressing questions while expecting others to
and
B) making up big long lists and pretending that someone else said them
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.