‘New Law Will Compel Churches to Offer Same-Sex Marriages’ [UK]

The Catholic Herald (UK) ^ | 4/20/12 | Simon Caldwell

[marshmallow]

David Cameron will not be able to exempt the Churches from a duty to offer marriages to gay couples, a senior Catholic barrister has warned.

Neil Addison, the director of the Thomas More Legal Centre, said that the Prime Minister’s assurances to the Church that they would not be compelled to perform religious marriage for gay couples are worthless.

He said two judgments by the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg combined with a Court of Appeal ruling in 2010 clearly showed that the Government would be acting illegally if it legalised civil gay marriages without permitting them on religious premises too.

It means that if the Coalition Government presses ahead with its plans to redefine marriage to include gay couples the Catholic Church could face prosecution under equality legislation for acting according with its teachings.

“The Government will be obliged to permit same-sex marriage on religious premises on exactly the same basis as it permits heterosexual marriage,” said Mr Addison, a specialist in religious discrimination law.

“How this will affect the rights of Churches who are registered for marriage and in particular how it will affect the Church of England and its clergy who are registrars of marriage by virtue of their status as priests of the established Church is legally very arguable,” he said.

[Ransomed]

“We, as citizens, have a responsibility or “right,” to arbitrate, or to oversee the arbitration of, child custody disputes, and to define a legal marriage.”

As long as it coincides with what the institution actually is. There have been some states that have defined marriage as including two people of the same sex. Most by judges. Some by legislation. There are a number of states that barely passed pro-marriage amendments in the low 50% ranges, and the trend doesn’t look good as far as I can see. For the state, marriage is whatever most people think it is at any one time. Is gay marriage any more valid if most people agree that it isn’t an impossibility? That’s where the state involvement comes back to bite, at least in the modern era. It was always a danger.

And the state is never getting out of the institution. It would be giving up massive control of the culture, just not going to happen, in my opinion. I think what will happen is some faiths will just ignore the state and take the punishments that go with disagreeing with the gubberment about what is and is not a marriage.

Freegards

[Vaquero]

You know? I don’t know.

It’s is not the 1800s nor the 1900s. I too am disgusted but neither do I not want kNow of someone’s “genital contact” nor feel it is my business what they do with consenting adults behind closed doors.

I do know I do not wish to view it on tv. Nor do I want those people prostelitizing their lifestyle to children

I don’t have the answers

[Tax-chick]

I don’t have an answer, either. I was just bringing up additional complications!