Catholic church oppose gay marriage

[Blue Cat]

Hugo a Gogo said:

I didn't know that, that's how it should be then

carry on!

Another thing you might be interested to know is that the Catholic Church does not charge any fee for a wedding ceremony but simply requests a donation.

[Hugo a Gogo]

presumably the couple still have to pay the registrar the normal fee though

[Blue Cat]

Hugo a Gogo said:

presumably the couple still have to pay the registrar the normal fee though

Yes but that goes to the Local Council and not the Church.

[Hugo a Gogo]

well, the catholic church can afford it, I'm sure

[crofty1984]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

If you don't agree with gay marriage, then don't marry someone of the same sex. That's all. In case you weren't aware, gay marriage isn't fking compulsory. But if 2 gay people want to marry, why would it effect you? Why do you even care about something that doesn't have any relevence to you or your life. I have no interest in playing golf, but if others want to play, then be my guest.

It doesn't affect me, and therefore I don't mind one way or the other. Hell, if it means that much to them, they can get married in my house. As long as they don't have the wedding night there. I don't want Santorum on my couch. (That goes for straight couples too).
But if gay people want to get married in a church, and the priest doesn't think that's what they should be doing, then it DOES affect HIM, so maybe he should be listened to.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Blue Cat said:

Another thing you might be interested to know is that the Catholic Church does not charge any fee for a wedding ceremony but simply requests a donation.

That's very generous of them, considering how poor the catholic church is!!!

[AndrewW-G]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Blue Cat said:

Another thing you might be interested to know is that the Catholic Church does not charge any fee for a wedding ceremony but simply requests a donation.

That's very generous of them, considering how poor the catholic church is!!!

IME they may "only" request a donation, but they do so in a manner reminiscent of a mobster "suggesting" you may need their protection to prevent your knees falling off!

[anonymous-user]

I guess this is the same Catholic Church that threatened to shut down all of its adoption agencies & charities and if they were forced to accept adoption applications from gay men or women?

And then had the gaul to blame gays and lesbians for the suffering they would cause the children as a result of the Church closing their agencies.

They sound like a lovely bunch.

[MOTORVATOR]

Marf said:

You've sidestepped my question about religious gay folk again. Yes, civil partnerships offer the same rights to hetero and homo couples but that is not the point I'm making, nor is it the point of the thread.

This also isnt about suiting me. I'm not religious, so this will never be an issue for me.

I'll ask you once more then give up as it seems you don't want to debate the salient point which is; why should someone raised and confirmed catholic who just happens to grow up to be gay not be allowed to marry in the church where they celebrate their faith?

I haven't sidestepped it at all in fact I have answered it a number of times but once more for you.

Because that faith denounces it and you or I have no right to change that faith by legal redefinition in the same way as we have no right to dictate to a muslim / buddhist etc what he should believe or not. The church itself has that ultimate right.

Or indeed a gay whether he is or isn't right in his beliefs.

These things always seem to be one way to my mind. Gays want this so we all pander to it, Catholics want that and everybody is meant to ignore their wishes.

In an equal world we seem to be creating factions that are more equal than others.

[Bill]

So it's ok to discriminate, so long as god's telling you to?

[carmonk]

Bill said:

So it's ok to discriminate, so long as god's telling you to?

Of course, didn't you know? Try setting up a club and denying certain aspects of memberships to homosexuals and you'll be up in court before you know what's what. Do the same under the protection of religion and not only is it OK, it's insensitive and militant of us to even bring up the subject.

[MOTORVATOR]

Bill said:

So it's ok to discriminate, so long as god's telling you to?

I'm sorry, which side with weird belief systems is being discriminated against?

[Bill]

MOTORVATOR said:

I'm sorry, which side with weird belief systems is being discriminated against?

Is that meant to be a trick question?

[blindswelledrat]

MOTORVATOR said:

I haven't sidestepped it at all in fact I have answered it a number of times but once more for you.

Because that faith denounces it and you or I have no right to change that faith by legal redefinition in the same way as we have no right to dictate to a muslim / buddhist etc what he should believe or not. The church itself has that ultimate right.

Or indeed a gay whether he is or isn't right in his beliefs.

These things always seem to be one way to my mind. Gays want this so we all pander to it, Catholics want that and everybody is meant to ignore their wishes.

In an equal world we seem to be creating factions that are more equal than others.

I understand your point but you are not comparing like for like.
Gay people want equal rights as everyone else and Catholics want to restric those equal rights for others.
Thats why. MOst poeple believe that one group should not be allowed to marginalise minorities.

Now I know the basis of your argument that is that marriage is a religious ceremony thus why should Catholics endorse something that is against thier religion?
I would agree with that argument apart from the glaring fact that about 90% (pure guess) of straight couples who get married are not religious in the slightest.
I would also defend the Catholic churches right to not perform those ceremonies on gay couples in exactly the same way as they don't perform ceremonies on non-catholic straight people.

But I maintain that if non religious straight people can legally get married then there is no logical reason on earth that a gay couple cannot also get married. Marriage stopped being about religion on the whole many *many* years ago

[anonymous-user]

MOTORVATOR said:

other stuff and

In an equal world we seem to be creating factions that are more equal than others.

Explain please?

You have the Catholic Church telling all of the UK that same sex marriage is wrong and shouldn't be allowed.

This piece of legislation is not trying to force a change to Catholic religious beliefs, but allowing same sex civil marriages in registrar offices and the like. The Government has specifically stated it does not want to force churches to marry same sex couple where it is against their belief.

So where is the problem to the Catholic Church?

Edited by djstevec on Monday 5th March 17:41

[Ozzie Osmond]

MOTORVATOR said:

I will always regard it as different to a gay 'marriage' or unmarried family, if that upsets some people well go hang.

Good man.

No-one has yet come up with any answer at all to my question why "marriage" in this new and open-minded form is limited to two people, i.e. 1+1

So I'll ask again, if two men can get married why can't three men get married?

And for the PC sensitive, if two women can get married why can't three women get married?

[anonymous-user]

Ozzie Osmond said:

MOTORVATOR said:

I will always regard it as different to a gay 'marriage' or unmarried family, if that upsets some people well go hang.

Good man.

No-one has yet come up with any answer at all to my question why "marriage" in this new and open-minded form is limited to two people, i.e. 1+1

So I'll ask again, if two men can get married why can't three men get married?

And for the PC sensitive, if two women can get married why can't three women get married?

Probably because it isn't socially acceptable in the UK. (However it is allowed in the Islamic faith and even the Prophet Muhammed had up to 4 wives at a time)

In those societies that it is socially acceptable then it is allowed, many countries in Africa and Asia for example.

[Marf]

MOTORVATOR said:

Marf said:

You've sidestepped my question about religious gay folk again. Yes, civil partnerships offer the same rights to hetero and homo couples but that is not the point I'm making, nor is it the point of the thread.

This also isnt about suiting me. I'm not religious, so this will never be an issue for me.

I'll ask you once more then give up as it seems you don't want to debate the salient point which is; why should someone raised and confirmed catholic who just happens to grow up to be gay not be allowed to marry in the church where they celebrate their faith?

I haven't sidestepped it at all in fact I have answered it a number of times but once more for you.

Because that faith denounces it and you or I have no right to change that faith by legal redefinition in the same way as we have no right to dictate to a muslim / buddhist etc what he should believe or not. The church itself has that ultimate right.

Or indeed a gay whether he is or isn't right in his beliefs.

These things always seem to be one way to my mind. Gays want this so we all pander to it, Catholics want that and everybody is meant to ignore their wishes.

In an equal world we seem to be creating factions that are more equal than others.

OK then fknuts I'm done with you, you can't even answer a straight question.

[Marf]

Ozzie Osmond said:

Good man.

No-one has yet come up with any answer at all to my question why "marriage" in this new and open-minded form is limited to two people, i.e. 1+1

nonsense, you just choose to ignore the answers given to you.

[MOTORVATOR]

djstevec said:

Explain please?

You have the Catholic Church telling all of the UK that same sex marriage is wrong and shouldn't be allowed.

This piece of legislation is not trying to force a change to Catholic religious beliefs, but allowing same sex civil marriages in registrar offices and the like. The Government has specifically stated it does not want to force churches to marry same sex couple where it is against their belief.

So where is the problem to the Catholic Church?

Edited by djstevec on Monday 5th March 17:41

The problem to the catholic church is the same as it for me.

What this supposed equality legislation is about is forcing people to accept that a gay marriage is the same as a traditional hetero one.

The gay community already have exactly the same rights in law as a married couple through a process known as civil partnership.

Despite what anyone here may think, the rights of a married couple and those in a civil partnership are identical.

The gay community also have the right to have their partnership blessed by any church willing to undertake the process or indeed any other organisation if they so wished.

I support the wishes of those who don't carry in the same way that I don't get my knickers in a twist about halal food or gays unless it is shoved in my face. Live and let live and all that.

They also have the right to invent a word to be used for the partnership if they feel civil partnership does not correctly portray their feelings for what they have entered into.

The term marriage has since the first use of the word been associated with the joining of heterosexual couples and contrary to what has been written here does not necessarily become a legal act. Marriage itself confers no legal standing at all, hence it is quite possible to be married but not legally man and wife.

So the Gays have all the rights already that I and the wife do but still are intent on having the english language redefined for their benefit.

Now that tells me they see 'marriage' as a higher level than their own civil partnership and it therefore stands to reason that if we equal things up then they are asking me to bring the term down their level.

I say bugger off and invent your own word for your practice and I will support it's use.