Marriage Equality and Other MOGAI/Queer Rights

[Riverwillows]

This is what I've been saying, but it's nice that someone else confirms it.

 

[sparkle10184]

That reminds me of something I saw a while back on tumblr:

 

 

 

I giggled seriously hard.

That is an awesome quote! I put a gay rights stamp in my sig...

[sarahfish89]

Not sure if anybody has seen this, but I thought I put this out there: http://www.listenonrepeat.com/watch/?v=gl8...-eaEmFYjPha_5LQ

It's on youtube repeat because some of the comments on actual YouTube are horrible with lots of swearing and arguing so I don't want to link it.

Anyway, the video is about an NW MP standing up for gay marriage legalisation.

 

Some of the quotes are pretty awesome *is very much in support of gay marriage*

(Mostly off-topic, but I love your operating system/browser quote Sparkle , I might want to use that on another forum I visit if you don't mind?)

 

[pikapooka]

I have full respect for homosexuals. I believe they are as equal as a heterosexual. But I do not believe the government should force churches to do gay marriages. Gay marriage goes against Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. Now, I believe that homosexuals should be able to have a civic union, but not a religious cetemony. So basically, I support civic rights, but polititians have no place in religion.

[KageSora]

I have full respect for homosexuals. I believe they are as equal as a heterosexual. But I do not believe the government should force churches to do gay marriages. Gay marriage goes against Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. Now, I believe that homosexuals should be able to have a civic union, but not a religious cetemony. So basically, I support civic rights, but polititians have no place in religion.

And that's why religion needs to get it's ass out of marriage, seeing as marriage is a CIVIL ceremony. Otherwise atheists wouldn't be allowed to get married, but they're clearly legally allowed to.

 

No churches will be forced to marry gay couples. Churches can turn away a couple for any reason. But there are numerous LEGAL rights that come with having a marriage legally recognized by the government, and that's what religion is trying to prevent homosexual couples from having--legal equality.

 

I also think you're dead wrong on the "against the religion" thing--first of all, there are WAY more religions than just The Big Three that have religious ceremonies--what about somebody who's no Christian or Jewish or Muslim who wants to get marries? They're not forced to have a civil union--they're allowed marraige. Second, it's not even against those religions across the board! There are Christian churches that feel that homosexuality is not a sin according to the Bible, for example.

 

Additionally, marriage does NOT need to happen in a church--the religious ceremony =/= the legal contract that is marriage. So churches will never be forced to marry ANY couple they don't want to. They just won't legally be allowed to deny equal rights to people.

 

Marriage =/= civil union, at least not at this time. In the US, a friend of mine who happens to be gay views civil unions as essentially worthless other than they guarantee that you have the right to watch your partner die in the hospital and have control over their corpse.

 

 

All that aside, who the heck are YOU to say that they're not deserving of a religious ceremony if they have a religious institution that is more than happy to perform the ceremony for them? PLENTY of gay-friendly churches are more than happy to do religious ceremonies for gay couples.

Edited April 27, 2013 by KageSora

[bionelly]

I have full respect for homosexuals. I believe they are as equal as a heterosexual. But I do not believe the government should force churches to do gay marriages. Gay marriage goes against Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. Now, I believe that homosexuals should be able to have a civic union, but not a religious cetemony. So basically, I support civic rights, but polititians have no place in religion.

Churches wouldn't be required to perform same-sex marriages, though. They are allowed to have their own requirements for the marriages they will perform, beyond what's in the law (i.e., they can't marry a couple that can't legally get married, but if there's a couple who can legally get married but they don't fulfill whatever requirements that church sets, the church doesn't have to perform their wedding.) Allowing gay marriage would not be allowing politics into religion. However, not allowing gay marriages does mean politics is meddling in religion, because it means that any churches that do accept gay marriage aren't allowed to do them. You say that it goes against Christianity, Judaism, and Islam like that's a universally agreed-upon fact, but I know Christians and Jews who would disagree with you (and there are probably Muslims, too, I just don't know them personally.) I'm agnostic now, but the church where I used to go was very strongly in favor of gay marriage (the pastor's son, and a significant chunk of the congregation, were gay.) How can you be against them being allowed to perform wedding ceremonies for gay couples if you don't want politics involved in religion?

 

(And this is without even getting into the fact that many people in the US are not Christian, Jewish or Muslim. Seriously, this would make some sort of sense in a country with an official state religion, but in the US, where we supposedly have separation of church and state, it's just ridiculous.)

[Katie92]

Now, I believe that homosexuals should be able to have a civic union, but not a religious cetemony. So basically, I support civic rights, but polititians have no place in religion.

 

And religion has no place in politics or civil rights.

 

Marriage is more than a religious ceremony. It's a legal contract. There are thousands of legal benefits gay couples could receive if their marriage was recognized - why deny them this?

[NobleOwl]

I have full respect for homosexuals. I believe they are as equal as a heterosexual. But I do not believe the government should force churches to do gay marriages. Gay marriage goes against Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. Now, I believe that homosexuals should be able to have a civic union, but not a religious cetemony. So basically, I support civic rights, but polititians have no place in religion.

 

Hello, I am a Jew.

 

I am also a lesbian.

 

I also got married by a rabbi, under a chuppah, and signed a ketubah with my wife, before G-d.

 

What right have you to say that I shouldn't be allowed to practise my religion and have my wedding, according to my faith?

[Alpha1]

Hello, I am a Jew.

 

Under what branch of Judaism?

[NobleOwl]

Under what branch of Judaism?

Meaning what?

 

I am recognised as a Jew under all branches of Judaism, thank you.

 

My marriage is recognised under Reform, Conservative, Reconstructionist, Renewal, and Conservadox. Considering the ketubah was written up by two Orthodox rabbis, it is a valid legal document in Israel.

[herobrine745]

I am also a lesbian.

 

I also got married by a rabbi, under a chuppah, and signed a ketubah with my wife, before G-d.

Cool.

[pikapooka]

Like I said, you can't force a religion to accomodate gay marriage. It goes against Catholism, and in Islam, you could get Beheaded. Look it up. Now, I am saying that demanding religion to go against their beliefs to accomodate gay marriage is wrong. Now, for you all who's religion performs ceremonies, great! I realize that Judaism is more friendly after more research. My standpoint is this:

 

I support civil unions and religions that perform gay marriages. However I will not stand for other religions being forced to go against their beliefs.

 

As a 14 year old, I am saying this. I have researched on my own, and so please don't rip on me. This is how my priest put it:

 

There are two things needed in a marriage: Love and the capability to naturally reproduce. As catholics, we do not look downon homosexuals. But spiritually, we do not believe in gay marriage because it is tradition, and Jesus was married to the Church [ who is female]

 

I respect homosexuals. I think you guys are awesome I am happy some religions are accomodating marriage. I just don't want my beliefs compensated.

[Switch]

Why is the ability to reproduce needed in a marriage? >__>; You don't have to be gay to not be able to have kids, or to even not want kids in the first place. Some straight couples can't have kids.

 

Although this is a point that's been brought up lots of times before. x3

[Syaoransbear]

This is how my priest put it:

 

There are two things needed in a marriage: Love and the capability to naturally reproduce.

So if someone is infertile, they can't get married?

[pikapooka]

Ignore my first post, I worded everything all wrong

[LascielsShadow]

Like I said, you can't force a religion to accomodate gay marriage. It goes against Catholism, and in Islam, you could get Beheaded. Look it up. Now, I am saying that demanding religion to go against their beliefs to accomodate gay marriage is wrong. Now, for you all who's religion performs ceremonies, great!  I realize that Judaism is more friendly after more research. My standpoint is this:

 

I support civil unions and religions that perform gay marriages. However I will not stand for other religions being forced to go against their beliefs.

 

As a 14 year old, I am saying this. I have researched on my own, and so please don't rip on me. This is how my priest put it:

 

There are two things needed in a marriage: Love and the capability to naturally reproduce. As catholics, we do not look downon homosexuals. But spiritually, we do not believe in gay marriage because it is tradition, and Jesus was married to the Church [ who is female]

 

I respect homosexuals. I think you guys are awesome  I am happy some religions are accomodating marriage. I just don't want my beliefs compensated.

And once again, nobody is saying that we should force any religion or pastor/minister/rabbi/other figure to perform marriages that they do not wish to.

 

Marriage=legal contract between two people

 

Holy matrimony=religious ceremony

 

Cool, I guess you're ALSO not in support of people who are infertile getting married, then? They do not meet number two on your priest's list either.

Edited April 28, 2013 by LascielsShadow

[Banuk]

Exactly. My parents were not married in a church, by a priest. They were married in the town courthouse, and not by a priest. It was not religious in the slightest, was over in about five minutes, and then we all went on our merry way.

 

I'm not even sure why reproduction is an issue in these sorts of debates any more. We're already so massively overpopulated that the planet has already passed the point that it'll be able to sustain us much longer, why is it so important that every married couple NEEDS to have the capacity to have children?

[pikapooka]

Again, 14! Just sayin, in my area, people ARE trying to FORCE religious ceremonies. I said ''narurally" because of eh... For lack of a better term, turkey baster babies. I don't know the proper term, don't get mad! I'm cool with it as long as they don't force religion.

[Obscure_Trash]

What about a GSM (gender and sexual minority) who is a part of that religion that is telling them they are not equal, not good enough for their religion? Should they just be expected to suffer through the hate? Are they forced out? Can they not foster a more accepting community within their religion? Remember, people are fallible. People can easily misinterpret Word for their own purposes. Would it really be so evil if a GSM had a religion that supported them and their same-sex spouse? Will that hurt people in the religion to change to accept a neighbor who has the same faith as them?

 

Even beliefs in religion have evolved over time.

 

~

 

Are you talking about methods such as in vitro fertilization? =\

 

EDIT: I want to clarify. As a non-religious person, no, I do not think I have a right to bust into a religion and demand they change. However, that doesn't mean I have to agree with what they do and I don't think it means that nobody within can't stand up and demand better. Changes need to come from the inside. Think of Uganda's anti-homosexuality bill. LBGT Ugandians spoke up to thank us for support but told us we needed to let them bring about the change. I can support those who want change and help when they ask. My questions really are questions to gather your thoughts on this. As I'm not religious, I'm not going to burst into a religion and demand they change, but I will support those of that religion who are promoting change.

Edited April 28, 2013 by SockPuppet Strangler

[pikapooka]

Yes I think gays should be respected by religion, but they should not force it to perform the cetemonies against their beliefs. It would be nice if everyone knew about gay friendly religions. And in some religions, that change would go against it. It would not be evil, of course not. And yes, vitro fertilization is the term, thank you.

 

 

But if gays can get married, why is there so much controversy? Because religion is getting involved unwillingly.

[Banuk]

Yes I think gays should be respected by religion, but they should not force it to perform the cetemonies against their beliefs. It would be nice if everyone knew about gay friendly religions. And in some religions, that change would go against it. It would not be evil, of course not. And yes, vitro fertilization is the term, thank you.

 

 

But if gays can get married, why is there so much controversy? Because religion is getting involved unwillingly.

So...you're just fine with forcing gays to adopt a "gay-friendly" religion against whatever beliefs they might have? A gay Catholic should stop being Catholic in favor of some random other religion that he or she may not believe in simply because it's "friendlier" to him or her? (While STILL not allowing him or her to marry because people of a religion he or she would no longer be a part of are opposing the very idea?)

 

This debate is not about "showing religions who's boss and making them do something they don't wanna", it is about allowing gay couples to have the same rights straight couples do. That includes the legal benefits that come with marriage, which a civil union does not allow them.

 

And for the last time. Marriage. Is. Not. Religious. See LascielsShadow's post. There is a difference between marriage and holy matrimony.

 

Also, I'd say religion is pretty willingly involved in this debate. It wouldn't be a problem if religions didn't make it one in the first place.

Edited April 28, 2013 by Derranged

[pikapooka]

NO! Geez, if you are gay, be any religion you want! Just don't make the ones that don't accomodate gay religious ceremonies change I will speak to my priest tomorrow with better info. Get married. I don't care, as long as my religion isn't messed with. Pika out.

[LascielsShadow]

Yes I think gays should be respected by religion, but they should not force it to perform the cetemonies against their beliefs. It would be nice if everyone knew about gay friendly religions. And in some religions, that change would go against it. It would not be evil, of course not. And yes, vitro fertilization is the term, thank you.

 

 

But if gays can get married, why is there so much controversy? Because religion is getting involved unwillingly.

What Derranged said.

 

Also, no, religion is not getting involved "unwillingly". Many religious leaders are quite willing to step in and tell gays, lesbians and bisexuals and those of us who support equal rights for them that we are sick/wrong/evil/morally bankrupt/going to hell/misguided/any number of other nasty things. They are far more than willing to tell a committed, loving couple that they may not marry-in a religious OR legal ceremony-simply because they are both men or both women, and to make those religious beliefs law (like in California with Prop. 8). That's not exactly them being dragged kicking and screaming into the debate.

[Banuk]

NO! Geez, if you are gay, be any religion you want! Just don't make the ones that don't accomodate gay religious ceremonies change I will speak to my priest tomorrow with better info. Get married. I don't care, as long as my religion isn't messed with. Pika out.

I fail to see how allowing gays to marry is going to interfere with your--or anyone else's--faith in any way. The sun will still rise the next day. The tides will come in and out. The Bible will say the same things it's said for the past two thousand years. Preachers will continue to preach the way they always did. People will still find ways to discriminate against each other. And everything will be the exact same as it was...except that gay people will be allowed to enter into a legal pact with each other.

 

Religion will not fall apart. The terrorists will not win. The human race will not die out. Gays will not force everyone else to be gay.

 

Simple as that, really.

[Syaoransbear]

Pretty sure all Pika is saying is that the government shouldn't be able to force religions to go against their religion, which may include marrying homosexuals depending on the religion and how a person interprets it.

 

I've found it pretty funny that I was able to have a christian ceremony when I'm an atheist and my husband is agnostic. Isn't not believing in their religion... against their religion, ?