Should homosexuals have the right to get married?

For the record, you're not educating anyone. And don't try to pretend you know what the SFA is about...you just got here.

Do you honestly think that personal attacks will increase the validity of your statements? If you disagree so strongly, post a detailed reason why the bull shit of your last post is even the slighest bit relevant.

Plenty, though once again, irrelevant.

 

Im not saying their getting married to cause an uproar im saying their getting married because they want to. I said there are protesters because they themselfs believe it is wrong(this is what they believe to be right).

Im not bothered about any religious elements to this arguement im just stating that having feelings for the same sex is natural to them. They are human and should be able to marry who they wish.

 

I agree with this,

Even though same sex marriage is seen as socially unacceptable is it because of religion or the cultural norm? I know that Christianity is against same sex relations and whenever the topic is brought up to them they do not have much to say on the matter. I do not support same sex marriage but what does my opinion have to do with the rest of the world, I see it as socially unacceptable but what am I going to do about it? Nothing, its their choice and they can do what ever the hell they want

 

As true as this is, was it not Christianity that marks incest as a taboo?

 

Did you not ask Schnell why he presumed the church as Christianity only? And why he never considered the other religious marriages you listed?

I believe it is safe to assume that the general population accepts Christianity as the "main" religion so you could say, though i know the government has no favorites on the matter.

And so then, is it not evident that Christianity looks down upon homosexuals? (This is NOT my own personal opinion on homosexuals, but merely what they see it as)

 

Homosexuals should have the right to marry. Who are we to deny the right of 2 people, same sex or not, to be joined together and recognized by the state/country as such.

 

It would be tiresome to include a list of all religions in every post. My views still apply to them as well, though I agree I haven't been clear on that.

 

Yes, he is probably speaking in terms of places that do follow Christianity, for example, where I live now, Canada, Toronto Ontario, the only church's you seem to see are those that follow Christianity.

Also when one gets married do you not picture a priestly figure making references to God with a bible at hand? That is what I see.

Im backing up Schnell as im thinking he too believes the "main" religion is Christianity, so why would it not have revelence?

The bible does indeed condemn sodomy, Ive pulled some verses of scripture taken from the bible, read along with me.

 

A marriage is defined by the religion that recognizes it. I don't think any religion should have to conform to public opinion when it comes to who they should allow to be married.

 

What gives you the authority to declare religious teachings irrelevant to a religious ritual?

 

I have nothing against homosexual marriage outside of a religious setting. I'm pretty sure I mentioned that earlier in the thread. So we pretty much agree.

 

Would not a general view of Christianity relate these different types of the same religion? In the end they still have the same motive/belief.

Well I guess we have different points of view on this so further debating on the subject would be futile.

Why would it not? They set the example on how people should behave in a society, do not most of the 10 commandments in the bible closely tie with laws governments uphold?

From what you were talking about, you spoke as if the bible did not condemn homosexuality. So in turn I had to back up my disagreement with valid proof, from the bible itself ofcourse.

 

Nor do I have a problem along with the matter,

I do agree it is wrong to say marriage is something exclusively religious, to do so would make me horribly ignorant, but is it fair to say the ignorant side of society believes this to be so? (excluding the religious, because it is obvious of what their opinion of the matter is)

 

Possibility of a double post Finn? I am not really sure who you are addressing

 

Im sorry you had see it that way?..

 

Mariage is a legal ritual that many religions take part of. It is not neccesarily religious, although it usually is.

Since these sorts of debates are usually about legality, religion should take an irrelevant role. That is, churches are already given the freedom to choose where or not to sanction marriages.

 

A legal ritual? <-- what is that. What religions are we talking about here? And you then say its not religious in a sense. But it is sometimes?

I am truly confused.

I do not believe this to be the case, one of the most profound religions in north and south America is Christianity, and it is from the bible that it states homosexuality is condemnable, would this not mean marriage between them as well?

What does this have to do with whether it should be allowed, let alone where it could or could not take place?

 

When you marry someone, you become legally bound to that person. The separation of church and state tells us that the church should have no residing power in state/legal issues.

Are Americans forced to be Christians?

You can get married without a church. If you choose to have a Christian marriage, I suppose you would follow Christian guidelines. If not, religion is completely irrelevant.

I don't care if your church refuses to sponsor gay marriage. They have the complete right not to. The question here is whether or not churches have the right to legally restrict homosexual from marrying under different denominations.

 

Let view this in terms of homosexual marriage though, something seen as a taboo against some religion and a constantly fought issue by government.

Certainly not, but don't they promote the fundamentals of morality? (10 commandments)

You are right, but you would not be able to follow these "Christian Guidelines" if you were to have a homosexual marriage.

So you are right in the fact the religion would irrelevant if you did not have a christian marriage, however would society deem this to be socially acceptable?

This is a good question as in the past the church did have a say in these kind of matters. Im going to have to say no, in this day of age the church does not have much say on legal matters such as this.

Though im not sure what you mean by denominations.

 

Since when does social "acceptability" have legitamate merit in legal concerns? Granted though, a democracy tends to reflect such.

I will end my stay here in this debate with that.