Church of England warning on gay marriage

It may also come under the remit of Article 8. Further, any limits on religious discrimination could be 'necessary in a democratic society' - which has wide interpretation.



That's not how Article 17 works.

But the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights does not apply to the UK. We're exempt, it's in the Treaty of Lisbon. The EU Commission can only enforce EU laws by suing member states before the European Court of Justice, but since there is no EU law on marriage aside from the CFR, there's no law for them to enforce here.

The ECHR does apply, but the Convention defines marriage as between one man and one woman. The European Court of Human Rights, which is not a component of the EU, is responsible for holding whole countries to the Convention, but does not actively enforce it - if you feel your convention rights have been violated by the state you can bring a case before the court.

The purpose of the convention is to protect the population from the excesses of the state. If the law were to prevent black people from marrying, that would violate the convention. If a religion were to refuse to perform their marriage rites for black couples, that would not violate the convention - the state still provides for them to get married, but an individual religious group is not willing to provide a ritual for it.

If the state tried to compel that religion to marry a black couple, the religion could almost certainly sue the state and win under the ECHR because of their rights to conscience and free exercise of religion. The rights of the individual are only compromised when they are prevented from exercising them, not when some other individual(s) refuse to assist in exercising them.

Marriage existed as early as 3000 years before Christ. So the church is a newer concept for us than marriage was the Jesus.

That's not necessarily true, there's been strong concerns about if the opt out is actually worded strongly or clearly enough to class the UK as being exempt, thus issues have arisen, such as the recent debate over privacy laws in the uk and their legality on an EU level.

Theres nothing to be astounded about really. The church is a Christian entity. Christianity forbids homosexual marriages (it doesn't forbid homosexuality though) and thus, the church cares very much about the gender of the couple.

What is so astounding about that? Not everything has to be PC.

Also, yes i agree with your first point. I don't believe the church should be speaking on these matters but that doesn't mean that it cant haves rules and regulations on who can get married on its premises. The church is at full authority to deny someone who does not share its beliefs. I see nothing wrong with that. I just don't agree with the church unanimously denouncing something, rather than just on its premises.


Posted via TSR iPhone App

What is astounding is letting an institution marry you and your partner if said institution cares more about your gender and orientation than the fact that you both love and care for each other. If marriage really is so special and sacred, I don't understand why gender matters so much. There is plenty in the bible that christians pretty much everywhere choose to ignore so I don't know who decided that homosexuality being an 'abomination' should be something the church followed rather than leaving it to the dark ages, along with slavery, death by stoning etc etc

Surely by now you're realized that groups of people don't really abide by the same logic and concern for rationality you can hold individuals to.

Nothing astounding about this.

Perhaps I am simply too optimistic... I suppose the internet really should have proved to me that reason is in short supply these days...

Whether homosexuals intend to or not, they are violating God's word and a sacred tradition. You deserve to be treated equally, I completely agree, but please don't think that homosexuals can just hijack marriage and still pretend that it will mean something, because it won't. Marriage is sacred, reserved for man and wife

this country rewards men for sticking their penises up eachother's bottoms by providing a womb to bear their children. that is the most ridiculous thing ever.
If you go against the christian morals you were taught you are blessed with children. this country is not christian. closer to devil worship for me.

if you want to talk about hijacking, christianity (along with most religions) hijacked the institution of marriage in the first place. If you want to talk about sacred, that's gone out the window since every other marriage ends in divorce. And here is the final nail in your anti-gay marriage coffin: It's been around for centuries, specifically in christianity. http://www.gaychristian101.com/Gay-Marriage.html

this country rewards men for sticking their penises up eachother's bottoms by providing a womb to bear their children. that is the most ridiculous thing ever.
If you go against the christian morals you were taught you are blessed with children. this country is not christian. closer to devil worship for me.

Is there anything wrong with the current system? I understand that marriage is a union between a man and a woman, however being keen on equal rights I support civil partnerships for gay men and lesbians.

this country rewards men for sticking their penises up eachother's bottoms by providing a womb to bear their children. that is the most ridiculous thing ever.
If you go against the christian morals you were taught you are blessed with children. this country is not christian. closer to devil worship for me.

But civil partnerships aren't equal.

Except they are though. Marriage is a union between a man and a woman. However we live in modern times, where gay people and lesbian people (quite rightly) expect equal treatment. The solution is civil partnerships, which are pretty much the same.