Posted on 10/20/2014 12:08:03 PM PDT by Impala64ssa
Edited on 10/20/2014 12:44:04 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Two Christian ministers who own an Idaho wedding chapel were told they had to either perform same-sex weddings or face jail time and up to $1,000 in fines, according to a lawsuit filed Friday in federal court.
Alliance Defending Freedom is representing Donald and Evelyn Knapp, two ordained ministers who own the Hitching Post Wedding Chapel in Coeur d
(Excerpt) Read more at radio.foxnews.com ...
This is something I’ve been proposing for a while, that churches need to “take back” marriage from the state. The way to do this is for Orthodox and conservative churches to reach a written agreement that they will only perform *and* recognize “sacramental” marriages. This agreement would have two parts.
1) Agreement on what is a Christian religious marriage, to include who can get married. And to keep and share records of married people amongst them.
and just as important,
2) Agreement to recognize in any way non-sacramental marriages, to “the great degree”. This means that when somebody goes to any of those churches claiming to be married, their marriage will be recognized only when certified. Even to the point of addressing them by their first names instead of Mr. and Mrs.
For their part, the churches must be indifferent to secular marriage, that it does not apply to their congregants, as long as they are sacramentally married.
Puritans were dissenters from the Church of England which, like the Catholic Church, treated marriage as a sacrament. So, Puritans were in the context of their times the “radicals” in this matter and the Catholic Church and the Church of England were the “conservatives.” Now, you can go further back in time and argue how many “true” Christian sacraments there are. Some say only two: baptism and communion, but that is another argument.
The problem with “it’s a business and not a church” is that that means any business that has anything to do with a wedding - i.e. renting a facility, a church building, a DJ, a live band, flower shop, bake shop, caterer, etc. - are now being prosecuted for discrimination if they refuse to have anything to do with a same-sex wedding.
Somehow, the courts want to separate “freedom of religion” from a business owner. If you serve the public in general, then, according to the libs, you give up your right to freedom of religion.
Further, a part of me wants to just say, forget “legal” wedding ceremonies and just perform “religious” ceremonies - but then, where do Christians or Orthodox Jews get legally married? If you are a Christian couple and get married by a minister, but the minister is not “sanctioned” by the state, then is that couple able to enjoy all the legal benefits of marriage?
I know in this day and age many couples just shack up and have kids and don’t seem to have legal issues, or do they? I don’t know. Anyone out there with any expertise on this issue?
“Up to” $1,000 in fines? Previous reports said it was $1,000 PER DAY.
I hear what you’re saying, and I definitely empathize with the view to just tell the government to go “stuff it”. But, stepping back and looking at marriage in the New Testament context - we must remember that the early Apostles were, outside of Israel, living in a pagan world. Pagan marriages were probably recognized, in general, even if they were not performed by Christian ministers or Jewish Rabbis.
It would have been very difficult for them to reach out to the pagan world while refusing to recognize ANY pagan marriages. The only stipulations that I see in the Bible where a marriage would NOT be recognized would be homosexuality or bestiality, etc. Paul says that Christians should not “be unequally yoked”, which by that he meant Christians should not marry unbelievers.
But, Paul does discuss the problem of husbands and wives who convert to Christianity, but their unbelieving husband or wife does not. He does not recommend that the Christian leave the unbelieving spouse - only that if the unbelieving spouse does not want to remain married to the Christian, then to let them go. This leads me to believe that the early Christians recognized pagan marriages as long as they weren’t violating a greater Biblical moral law (such as homosexuality, incest, etc.).
Therefore, I think that if Christian churches quit performing “legal” state recognized marriages, they should still recognize marriages performed outside of their respective congregations if that marriage does not violate the moral standards of the Scriptures.
Wonder if a Muslim cleric would marry a Christian couple? Supposedly they cannot. And getting a Muslim restaurant to serve hot dogs might be fun too. (Hey, you MUST bake gay cakes!). You can’t have these things both ways. How about a full body burka in white instead of black ...ummm, no I think that was already tried. So maybe black ones are illegal? Fun to think about using these silly things to OUR benefit.
Sheesh, who would have expected the Spanish Inquisition ...
So they’re the cowards we know them to be. Nothing new here.
The trouble is that this is a semi-legal problem, not just a religious one. US law is heavily weighted against “exclusivity”, for example, it is not even legal to sell or rent an apartment or home in an “exclusive” community, because this is seen as racist.
However, an exception to this weight is “membership”, which provides considerable protections in the law. But any organization that uses membership as a defense, must be very clear about who their members are, and what rules they must follow.
Churches, however, have allowed government to take over many of their formerly exclusive activities, like registering births and deaths. And, of course, marriage.
The trouble is that government continually tries to enlarge its power at the expense of religion. So they need to either take a stand, or forfeit their sacraments.
This sounds quite logical. But, the "gays" will never go for it. They want to destroy marriage, not be a part of marriage. They want to destroy religion, because it says "no" to them. They could easily go to some "Church of What's Happenin Now" and get married with no problem; but, that's not the point. The point, is that you must be made to participate. You must be forced to celebrate. They already have the ability to just go to a Justice of the Peace, or whatever, to get married. They don't have to have a religious ceremony to be married; but, then they wouldn't have the fun of destroying other people's lives and businesses.
I take that you were aiming for a joke?
I still don't understand why certain people want to pay others to provide them with a service they don't believe in. Why can't they find a gay person to marry them? And the whole cake thing— damn I'm not paying for or eating a cake made by someone who doesn't want to do it! Yuck!
.....Oh nevermind, that must only apply to historic crosses out in the desert, or embedded in official seal logos
“Only a homosexual would want to be “married” by someone who didn’t want to perform the ceremony. Many are petty, political and vindictive like that.”
Regardless of that, such a sham marriage will never be valid in God’s eyes, or in the eyes of the majority. They don’t ‘get it’ because they love SIN more than God. They behave EXACTLY like Jesus said....like true reprobates. But God has a remedy for that. It’s called the burning “Lake of Fire”.
We are a nation who fails to discern good from evil. SHAME on us for tolerating such a tiny % of society who now think they can dictate that we live among the abominations of this world, through force.
One of the biggest signs that property rights are dying is when people are no longer allowed to decide who they will share their property with, for good or ill reasons.
If it wasn’t, he is just another deluded, militant individual with issues that only God can repair.
You are absolutely correct! Faithful Christians can’t be threatened into accepting this abomination any more than Christian ministers can be “forced” to profane their altars by blessing an abomination. Reference the Book of Daniel. The churches and the unfaithful who have equivocated on this or who try to justify by making it a political matter have given up their “fireproofing”. This is Satan’s best work. Sooner or later every person will have to choose and won’t be able to sit on the fence. Christians haven’t been imprisoned, murdered and persecuted since the beginning for bowing to popular opinion or corrupt laws. There’s a reason for that.
While it may be extremely hard for Christians to see their families eventually suffer for not having the Mark of the Beast, remember Lot who saved his by obedience.
Political correctness is no longer just a silly Liberal vapor. It has become a literal matter of life and death.
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.