Actually this completely VALIDATES the argument that legalizing Gay Marriage "violates the sanctity of marriage" as Marriage is first, foremost and exclusively a RELIGIOUS institution
( Read more... )
I'd be in favor of that. If a religion opted to NOT marry Gay folks due to their religious beliefs, I think that's well within their 1st Amendment rights. Concurrently those religions who do find it favorable to marry folks with all granted powers and such... same deal. Right now one is imposing its will on the other.
I think the problem is not who gets to define marriage. Its that there are all these legal things you get from the government when they recognize your marriage. So while marriage might be a religious ceremony, it also a cultural right of passage which has legal implications which are well within the governments sphere of influence.
If a Catholic or Baptist (etc.) doesn't want to marry a gay couple. That's fine, but why can't an Episcopalian priest? Or a Rabbi? Or a Justice of the Peace? etc.
Is this in reference to the meme going around or is there something more I am unaware of?
Comments 1
I think the problem is not who gets to define marriage. Its that there are all these legal things you get from the government when they recognize your marriage. So while marriage might be a religious ceremony, it also a cultural right of passage which has legal implications which are well within the governments sphere of influence.
If a Catholic or Baptist (etc.) doesn't want to marry a gay couple. That's fine, but why can't an Episcopalian priest? Or a Rabbi? Or a Justice of the Peace? etc.
Is this in reference to the meme going around or is there something more I am unaware of?
Reply
Leave a comment