The Student Room Group

Christians to divorce if gay marriage passes

He also thinks shops should be able to refuse service to interracial couples.


http://www.dailyliberal.com.au/story/3138951/christian-couple-vow-to-divorce-if-same-sex-marriage-is-legalised/?cs=7Christian couple vow to divorce if same-sex marriage is legalisedBy Kate AubussonJune 11, 2015, 5:26 a.m.Divorce vow: Nick and Sarah Jensen. Photo: FacebookA Canberra couple have vowed to get a divorce, ending their "sacred" 10-year union, if Australia allows same-sex couples to legally marry.Nick Jensen and his wife Sarah believe widening the definition of marriage to include same-sex couples threatens the sacred nature of the union and leaves the door open to polygamy.The Christian couple have been happily married for over a decade, have no intention of separating and hope to have more children. For all intents and purposes they have a healthy marriage.But in a novel protest against any successful move to legalise same sex-marriage in Australia, Mr Jensen wrote in an article published in Canberra CityNews on Wednesday that they are prepared to divorce."My wife and I, as a matter of conscience, refuse to recognise the government's regulation of marriage if its definition includes the solemnisation of same sex couples," said Mr Jensen, who is director of the Lachlan Macquarie Institute, whichpartners with the Australian Christian Lobby to offer scholarships designed to develop a Christian worldview and foster leaders in government policy.Mr Jensen told Fairfax Media that he and his wife entered into their marriage "as a fundamental order of creation, part of God's intimate story for human history, man and woman, for the sake of children, faithful and for life".<br>"And so, if later on in the year the state does go ahead and changes the definition of marriage and changes the terms of that contract then we can no longer partake in that new definition unfortunately," he said.Legalising same-sex marriage would undermine "our most sacred institution, and have serious consequences for children who would grow up without a mother or father," Mr Jensen said.He also feared that recognising same-sex couples would mean that the definition of marriage could be expanded even further."Once you say that marriage is detached from children, [that it's] just about love, then when three people come to the state and say 'well we're all in love', then the state has no grounds, except unjust discrimination, to say why they can't get married," he said."When it becomes detached to the child's right to a mother and a father and the sacred institution that it is, then suddenly it becomes meaningless and those boundaries can't be put back in place," he said.The move is in stark contrast to high-profile celebrities who have vowed not to marry until gay marriage is legalised.While Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie reneged on their promise not to marry in 2014, former Wallabies captain David Pocock and his partner Emma Palandri pledged in 2011 to not get married until same-sex marriage was legalised in Australia.The story Christian couple vow to divorce if same-sex marriage is legalised first appeared on The Sydney Morning Herald.

Scroll to see replies

Saddens me that they've already spawned offspring.
Reply 2
Avatar for TarnyGee
TarnyGee
8
I didn't read the whole thing, but where can I go to make same-sex happen faster and for them to divorce...:colone:
Gosh, they should just leave everyone alone, they are happily married who asked if we care about what they think and what same-sex marriage would result in. I mean 50% of marriages end in divorce in the UK. Marriage was never that sacred and special anyways. Just look at celebrity marriages.
Original post by TarnyGee
I didn't read the whole thing, but where can I go to make same-sex happen faster and for them to divorce...:colone:
Gosh, they should just leave everyone alone, they are happily married who asked if we care about what they think and what same-sex marriage would result in. I mean 50% of marriages end in divorce in the UK. Marriage was never that sacred and special anyways. Just look at celebrity marriages.


These people have twisted minds or are just terribly ignorant.

So two people who love each other for years but who happen to be members of the same sex getting married in making marriage no longer 'sacred'; yet The Princess of Pop Grammy Winner Britney Jean Spears marrying someone random in Vegas for 55 hours or Famous Person Kim Kardashian West marrying someone for like a week are not affecting marriage in any way.

Regardless, the rhetic shows that the bigots have won. People nowadays support same-sex marriage because they don't think it matters to 're-define' marriage, when the fact that marriage has already been redefined ages ago. Marriage was merely a ceremony to signify that the woman (or women in many other cultures) is now the man's property.
Reply 4
Avatar for Hopple
Hopple
18
Why don't they just have their marriage recognised by their church and leave it at that? Why do they need their 'sacred' union authorised by some mere mortals as well?
Original post by Hopple
Why don't they just have their marriage recognised by their church and leave it at that? Why do they need their 'sacred' union authorised by some mere mortals as well?


Clearly they didn't marry for love, but for the bragging right.

It's like all those hipsters listening to Avril Lavigne then abandoning her because she's gotten too popular into the mainstream and too many people were buying her stuff.
I heard they may not actually be able to do it, because there are certain prerequisites for divorce, and this isn't one of them.
Reply 7
Avatar for _Fergo
_Fergo
19
They expect people to care? I mean c'mon...

Posted from TSR Mobile
50 Australian dollars say he just wants a divorce so he can go **** around.

Only an idiot who went to all the trouble to marry his "soul mate" and then have kids with her would divorce after a decade just to ...something...the gays for having the audacity to also marry.

It's funny how many religious opponents say that gay people marrying impacts their marriages when it simply doesn't.

Until you yourself decide to divorce because reasons.

lol
Original post by minimarshmallow
I heard they may not actually be able to do it, because there are certain prerequisites for divorce, and this isn't one of them.


Indeed. But they can cite other reasons, even though they cannot do it right away still.

It'd be awful for their children because they'd need to separate at the very least for an extended period of time (three years?). But hey, who cares about the children? We must put god first.

Original post by Studentus-anonymous
50 Australian dollars say he just wants a divorce so he can go **** around.

Only an idiot who went to all the trouble to marry his "soul mate" and then have kids with her would divorce after a decade just to ...something...the gays for having the audacity to also marry.

It's funny how many religious opponents say that gay people marrying impacts their marriages when it simply doesn't.

Until you yourself decide to divorce because reasons.

lol


Strange they aren't opposing other non-traditional marriages such as a christian marrying a non-christian, a catholic marrying a christian, or a non-christian marrying a non-christian.
Original post by Little Toy Gun
Indeed. But they can cite other reasons, even though they cannot do it right away still.

It'd be awful for their children because they'd need to separate at the very least for an extended period of time (three years?). But hey, who cares about the children? We must put god first.


Till death do us part.
Or till gay marriage...
Original post by minimarshmallow
Till death do us part.
Or till gay marriage...


Original post by minimarshmallow
I heard they may not actually be able to do it, because there are certain prerequisites for divorce, and this isn't one of them.


It's like employment discrimination - employers only have to make up seemingly valid reasons not to hire someone when really they don't want to hire them because they're a pregnancy risk, black or gay etc. In this case, couples only have to claim they've fallen out of love, need to go separate ways etc. in order to get approval.

Original post by minimarshmallow
Till death do us part.
Or till gay marriage...


Interesting how Christians like those mentioned in the article essentially equate gay marriage with death in terms of severity.
Reply 13
Avatar for Howard
Howard
5
Wackos.
People were marrying thousands of years before christianity. So why the **** do Christians think they hold some kind of monopoly on marriage. Marriage has existed as long as human civilsation
So these good Christians hate the sinning homosexuals so much they sacrifice their own place in heaven by committing the sin of divorce to prove their point... awwww geniuses
I would point out that humanity invented marriage before Christianity came along and hijacked it, but I think such an argument would be lost on their closed minds.

Their threat to divorce just seems like another good reason to legalise gay marriage. Come on, Australia. If Catholic countries like Ireland and Spain can do it, then so can you.
Original post by Quantex
I would point out that humanity invented marriage before Christianity came along and hijacked it, but I think such an argument would be lost on their closed minds.

Their threat to divorce just seems like another good reason to legalise gay marriage. Come on, Australia. If Catholic countries like Ireland and Spain can do it, then so can you.


Not only that, but that it never really hijacked marriage outside of Christendom. There's a world outside of the west and the middle east, but christians just don't really know about it.

'Marriage has always been between one man and one woman.' No it hadn't been the case in China until only a few decades ago.
Original post by BrightBlueLight
People were marrying thousands of years before christianity. So why the **** do Christians think they hold some kind of monopoly on marriage. Marriage has existed as long as human civilsation


They also think they hold the copyright to other terms such as 'god', 'religion', 'faith', 'rainbow', 'church', etc.

I remember how offended many christians were when I insisted on referring to Taylor Swift as 'The Lord' as apparently 'lord' can only mean their god.

It should be quite obvious that they don't hold a monopoly to the terms, with for example Vodermont being the Dark Lord, The Doctor being a Time Lord, and peers and Law Lords and Lord Mayors and landlords and everything exist. But hey, I suppose god works in mysterious ways and their religion owns everything.
Original post by Little Toy Gun
They also think they hold the copyright to other terms such as 'god', 'religion', 'faith', 'rainbow', 'church', etc.

I remember how offended many christians were when I insisted on referring to Taylor Swift as 'The Lord' as apparently 'lord' can only mean their god.

It should be quite obvious that they don't hold a monopoly to the terms, with for example Vodermont being the Dark Lord, The Doctor being a Time Lord, and peers and Law Lords and Lord Mayors and landlords and everything exist. But hey, I suppose god works in mysterious ways and their religion owns everything.


Christianity and Islam etc. does not belong in the 21st century and anyone who beliefs in these ridiculous religions deserve to be ridiculed for the idiots that they are.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you