Gay marriage – yes or no?

[naomi24]

On the news tonight, both a representative of the Church of England and a spokesman for Islam said that since it is in direct contravention of God’s law, marriage between same sex couples must not be legalised. I don’t believe we’ve had a discussion on the subject in this section, so your thoughts?

[Hopkirk]

Try as I might, I cannot find an opinion on this.

[douglas9401]

Gay marriage – yes or no?

Not for me thanks, but then I'm not homosexual.
If it's like any other registry office ceremony then let's get on with it and let the ghost story tellers wring their hands outside the reception.

[woofgang]

I am not sure why churches think that they can have a monopoly on what laws there should be....and I say this as someone who believes in god.
I really do not see what the problem is. The govt have said that no church will be forced to conduct gay marriages...so if a church's congregations decide that they don't wish their church to offer gay marriage then the church need not. Churches who wish to do so, can.

[emmie]

i couldn't care less, get married, don't get married, it's their choice.
but if the followers of Islam don't like it, then tough.

[Canary42]

Before the homosexuals hijacked the word, virtually all weddings were gay.

[mushroom25]

marriage in the uk is governed by statute. if it be the will of parliament that this be varied to permit same-sex couples to legally marry, it's really no business of the church.

[Answerprancer]

Gay marriage ? Perfectly fine IMO - without reservation too I might add.
If it's a question of the couple being members of a particular religeous group and that group disapproves, then they are faced with a choice:
either remain as adherants and 'live in sin' or reject it and have an alternative ceremony or convert to a religious order that isn't homosexist.

[Answerprancer]

Canary - you're an "Ainderby Quernhow" according to the book of Liff !

[NOX]

Absolutely yes, religion ought to have no role in how those who don't subscribe to their nonsense live their lives. Period.

[Canary42]

That makes me feel much better LOL.

[jomifl]

As long as homosexual couples can have a civil 'contract' which gives them the same rights as a married couple I cannot see why they need to call it a marriage. Historically marriages have been between men and women, surely it is not beyond the creative ability of the homosexual community to invent a word that describes the 'relationship in law' without it being confused with a bisexual marriage. As for the religions it is entirely up to them I would think and if they won't marry homosexuals in a religious ceremony I don't see how they can deny them the legal part which is their right in law if they are acting as registrar. The best solution must be for homosexuals that are rejected by their religion to form their own church and devise their own form of 'marriage' ceremony.

[FredPuli43]

While the Church of England is considering this, it might take time to explain why it will only marry divorced people in exceptional circumstances and says that the local priest may refuse, on grounds of conscience, to do so at all.

It's hardly surprising that it takes the stance it does on gay marriages when it thinks that way about heterosexual ones.

The Church and Islam think that homosexual sex is against God's law, but the Church is mealy-mouthed about it and does not condemn active homosexuals. It prefers to complain that it should not be made to conduct gay marriage services, something which no proposed law would make it do.

I approve of 'gay marriage' and see no reason why there should be a semantic argument about marriage. Words change their meaning by usage. What other word is there to describe it?

[cathfromsaron]

most/all gay people i know are quite happy with the current civil partnerships!

providing the state keeps out of religion i am also happy!

[ladybirder]

Yes. Unequivocally. Our democratically elected government runs this country, not the church.

[chakka35]

I can't imagione why people are fussing so much about what the Church thinks. Marriage is not a religious ritual but a contract between two people (currently male and female) which the state recognises in law. There is no earthly reason why that same state should not change the law to allow marriages between two homosexual men or two homosexual women.

The Church should think itself lucky in that (as with its treatment of women) it is again being allowed to circumvent the law.

People can get married in church if they wish, but the last two marriages I have attended have been in beautiful places chosen by the bride and groom with the registrar attending as a guest. They were full of the sort of joyous expressions forbidden in a stuffy church and not really done in a register office.

Ignore the Church. It has no rights in the matter.

[keyplus90]

Both of them were right.

[craft1948]

No.

[RATTER15]

"Gods Law" load of bl00dy nonsense, its a thing of the past!

[Mojo-Jo-Jo]

lol@Answerprancer. I just grabbed the Book of Liff and had a look.
I don't care who gets married. It's none of the Church's business if it's bound by law.

[Answerprancer]

:-) one of my 'bibles' (ooh .. topical)