If the definition of gay can change why can't the definition of marriage? Watch

PeaceFreak
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#1
The other day I had a rather nice old lady come to my door from my local CoE to tell me about the importance of keeping marriage between one man and one woman. I let her give me her reasons and i replied with this:

"The joy of declaring your true love for somebody by entering a binding contract with them for life should is something I will never experience. If the definition of gay can change why can't the definition of marriage? Come to my door and tell me how the church is launching a new initiative to help children in third world countries and I will hear every word. Come to my door and tell me how the church is fighting to protect 'traditional' marriage and all I will hear is nonsensical hate"

She looked at me and simply walked off.

I don't want a Christian marriage but I do want a marriage, what right does a church I don't follow have to try and deny me that?
18
reply
zaliack
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#2
Report 7 years ago
#2
Umm... Gay people have civil partnerships, and from what I can tell, the majority of them are content with that. Why would they even want to get "married" in a place which condemns them to an entirety in hell.
18
reply
Cephalus
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#3
Report 7 years ago
#3
You can have a marriage thats fine. Just not in a church. It's a win-win
0
reply
Cephalus
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#4
Report 7 years ago
#4
(Original post by zaliack)
Umm... Gay people have civil partnerships, and from what I can tell, the majority of them are content with that. Why would they even want to get "married" in a place which condemns them to an entirety in hell.
The church no longer teaches that I believe
1
reply
PeaceFreak
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#5
(Original post by zaliack)
Umm... Gay people have civil partnerships, and from what I can tell, the majority of them are content with that. Why would they even want to get "married" in a place which condemns them to an entirety in hell.
So I should just make do with what I have and accept I will never be equal?
1
reply
zaliack
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#6
Report 7 years ago
#6
(Original post by PeaceFreak)
So I should just make do with what I have and accept I will never be equal?
but you are equal? You have the exact same legal rights as everyone else has, and you can have as much fun at a marriage as a heterosexual couple. The only difference is that you can't get married inside a church, yet, judging by Four Weddings, having a marriage inside a church isn't even that common.
0
reply
Tommyjw
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#7
Report 7 years ago
#7
(Original post by zaliack)
but you are equal?..

..The only difference is that you can't get married inside a church
Spot the issue.
0
reply
zaliack
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#8
Report 7 years ago
#8
(Original post by Tommyjw)
Spot the issue.
This is a non-issue. Who the hell cares about where you get married. You don't complain that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge got married in Westminster Abbey, yet you can't.
0
reply
Caribbeantwist
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#9
Report 7 years ago
#9
The bible clearly states that lust between two men is wrong.
Most people wouldn't be happy with their church marrying two gay men.
The bible does not stand for it, so why should churches?


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
8
reply
The Troll Toll
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#10
Report 7 years ago
#10
(Original post by zaliack)
This is a non-issue. Who the hell cares about where you get married. You don't complain that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge got married in Westminster Abbey, yet you can't.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separate_but_equal
1
reply
Tommyjw
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#11
Report 7 years ago
#11
(Original post by zaliack)
This is a non-issue. Who the hell cares about where you get married. You don't complain that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge got married in Westminster Abbey, yet you can't.
A non-issue? Clearly not given it is constantly debated.....

Who the hell cares? Again, many people, given it is constantly debated.

Just because you think it is a non-issue and it doesnt matter doesnt mean that is the general conensus among those that actually are influenced by the difference.

You don't complain that the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge got married in Westminster Abbey, yet you can't.
What a ****ing idiotic point.
4
reply
Caribbeantwist
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#12
Report 7 years ago
#12
To be honest I don't get why non Christians get married in a church.


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
1
reply
zaliack
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#13
Report 7 years ago
#13
(Original post by Tommyjw)
A non-issue? Clearly not given it is constantly debated.....

Who the hell cares? Again, many people, given it is constantly debated.

Just because you think it is a non-issue and it doesnt matter doesnt mean that is the general conensus among those that actually are influenced by the difference.



What a ****ing idiotic point.
For the most part, it's heterosexuals who are constantly debating it, not homosexuals. The only few articles I've seen relating to this debate are about how homosexual couples didn't care about not being "traditionally married" because they were still surrounded by their friends and families at their marriage. That is the reason why I think it is a non-issue.

and it's not an idiotic point because it is the same, only in exceptional circumstances.
0
reply
Tommyjw
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#14
Report 7 years ago
#14
(Original post by alexandraa)
The bible clearly states that lust between two men is wrong.
Most people wouldn't be happy with their church marrying two gay men.
The bible does not stand for it, so why should churches?
Oh we should follow everything the bible states?

Do you have a tattoo? Not allowed one
Do you think divorce should be illegal? not allowed to get divorced.
Shave? Not allowed to
Do you cover your head in church if you are a woman? You have to.
Gossip? not allowed to.
Talk to women at 'that time of the month'? not allowed to.

So why should we allow a cherry picked book to dictate other things?
6
reply
Tommyjw
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#15
Report 7 years ago
#15
(Original post by zaliack)
For the most part, it's heterosexuals who are constantly debating it, not homosexuals.
Proof, thanks

The only few articles I've seen relating to this debate are about how homosexual couples didn't care about not being "traditionally married"
Then you clearly havent read much have you?

and it's not an idiotic point because it is the same, only in exceptional circumstances.
If you really think they are comparable points then you need help.
4
reply
Cephalus
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#16
Report 7 years ago
#16
(Original post by Tommyjw)
Oh we should follow everything the bible states?

Do you have a tattoo? Not allowed one
Do you think divorce should be illegal? not allowed to get divorced.
Shave? Not allowed to
Do you cover your head in church if you are a woman? You have to.
Gossip? not allowed to.
Talk to women at 'that time of the month'? not allowed to.

So why should we allow a cherry picked book to dictate other things?
Hmm at the risk of sounding cliched, its hard to use arguments from the OT (which all of these are) as they all have links to the culture and society of the times. Christians take guidance from Jesus, who defined marriage to be between a man and a woman
0
reply
username998490
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#17
Report 7 years ago
#17
It's discrimination. If a person from an ethnic minority or disabled person for example, was denied being allowed a wedding in church, there'd be an uproar. So why is this blatant discrimination allowed in modern society. There are laws about equality, so why is this any different? Why is it deemed acceptable by the church to be so against the LGBT community?
2
reply
madders94
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#18
Report 7 years ago
#18
Even if just one gay person wants to get married in the church, the wants of that one person makes it an issue, and there are gay people who are religious and want to get married in a church (and want a marriage ceremony, not what sounds like the signing of a business deal), so it IS an issue, contrary to what zaliack is saying.

The very basis of the CofE is that it was formed to allow a change in the definition of marriage; so that remarrying after divorce could happen for Henry VIII. Any argument against gay marriage based on it "redefining marriage" is hypocritical and shouldn't be taken seriously by anyone!
1
reply
zaliack
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#19
Report 7 years ago
#19
(Original post by Tommyjw)
Proof, thanks



Then you clearly havent read much have you?



If you really think they are comparable points then you need help.
Obama supports same-sex marriage, Obama is straight.

and I probably haven't read a lot, but I do read the Guardian regularly which is full of the LGBT movement.

And ultimately, we will continue to disagree because of our definitions of marriage. My definition of marriage is two people entering into a legal relationship with each other. Just because it is termed a 'civil partnership' and can't be performed inside a church, doesn't mean the marriage is worth less. I'd be happy for the church to recognise that homosexuals can be "married" under their definition, but in my opinion, it is for the church to decide if they want to do that, and not us.
0
reply
Caribbeantwist
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#20
Report 7 years ago
#20
(Original post by madders94)
Even if just one gay person wants to get married in the church, the wants of that one person makes it an issue, and there are gay people who are religious and want to get married in a church (and want a marriage ceremony, not what sounds like the signing of a business deal), so it IS an issue, contrary to what zaliack is saying.

The very basis of the CofE is that it was formed to allow a change in the definition of marriage; so that remarrying after divorce could happen for Henry VIII. Any argument against gay marriage based on it "redefining marriage" is hypocritical and shouldn't be taken seriously by anyone!
If the gay couple in question followed Christianity and were within a church community I would not condemn their marriage within a church. I'm talking about those who want to be married in a church but do not follow Christianity


This was posted from The Student Room's iPhone/iPad App
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you made up your mind on your five uni choices?

Yes I know where I'm applying (114)
66.67%
No I haven't decided yet (34)
19.88%
Yes but I might change my mind (23)
13.45%

Watched Threads

View All