Please select the category that most closely reflects your concern about this content,
so that we can review it and determine whether it violates Civility 101 or isn't
appropriate for some other reason.
Abusing this feature is also a violation of Civility 101.
Explanation:
The tide of marriage for same-sex couples has ebbed and flowed over the last decade with no end in sight. Because marriage sits squarely at the intersection of religion, law and society, the discussion around same-sex couples’ inclusion into the institution of marriage has been one of the most complex and hotly contested topics in America.
So because of the actions of a few same sex couples, they should all be punished? Yeah, that's totally fair.
"The Lambda reference to denominations willing to “bless” same-sex unions changes the argument not a bit. Said denominations may hold such ceremonies right now. The “unions” just wouldn’t be recognized in most states. So the argument that imposing same-sex “marriage” on Americans somehow expands religious freedom is not to be taken seriously."
Weather same sex marriage should be legal or not in those states is exactly what this debate is about. And religions that believe same sex marriage is ok are just as legitimate as ones that don't, such as Christianity. To suggest they aren't is discrimination.
- dudeman
August 27, 2008 12:07PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
The failure of the courts should not be a reason to deny same sex couples the same rights and privileges.
The reason same sex marriage should be legalized is to protect the religious freedoms of others. Any law that permits same sex marriage should also include provisions which permit people to exercise their own freedom of religion to not get involved with such ceremonies if it is against their religion. This is how same sex marriage is dealt with in Canada presently. Noone is forced to perform a same sex marriage ceremony.
- Concerned Citizen September 3, 2008 3:59PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(1)
Side: Yes
By that argument, interracial marriage should never have been allowed, since it previously wasn't. Hell, why change anything?
- Blue Linchpin
April 30, 2009 10:35PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
To have your "existance" threatened? Or even more so...how does it feel to have your precious religious "rights" and/or freedoms threatened? Religious liberty means you can create fear, constitutional amendments to ELIMINATE rights from a group of people? Yes there will be those who will want to cram it down your throats, just as it is in every area of debate or dissent. This isn't a golly-gosh brand new thingy, people do it all the time over a vartiety of issues. Religion is REDEFINING MY CONSTITUTIONAL rights as an American Citizen.
- sodaklt November 28, 2009 5:53PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Alliance Defense Fund, when you twist and omit the facts of your examples to suit your own purpose (as in the case of the lesbian brides at the New Jersey beach park pavilion, designated for use by the public; the photographer who refused service to lesbians; and the lesbian woman who was denied insemination after undergoing a full cycle of preparation for that insemination) you do your cause a disservice. How is anyone supposed to believe or trust anything you say when so much of what you say can be easily determined to be misleading or outright false?
- Babaroni February 10, 2009 4:38PM
Reply to this
Recommend
(2)
Side: Yes
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008-2010 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
The Freedom to Marry Still Respects the Freedom of Religion
- From Lambda Legal
By Lambda Legal - Making the Case for Equality
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
No, It Doesn't
Allowing same-sex marriage does not respect the freedom of religion . In European countries that have legalized same-sex marriages, pastors are being arrested and jailed for refusing to marry same-sex marriages. Already in this country, a Christian photographer was fined for not accepting a job photographing a same-sex "marriage" ceremony. I would be long before I, as a pastor, must face a tribunal for my refusal to officiate a same-sex cerermony.
- chev1958
April 21, 2009 4:55PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
The Freedom to Marry Disrespects the Religion and fabric of society
Don't be fooled that because of a few misguided indivduals that gay marriage is okay. For thousands of years, marriage has only been with man and woman. It is absurd that a very small group of people thinks that because the misinterpreted what the Constitution provides, that they can change history over night. By the way, this is not one of them. Marriage has always been and should never be changed from between man and woman. This is natural. During hard times in our history, with the lack of a partner of the opposite sex, genders have come together for the comfort and contact experienced from birth. It helps keep us sane: humans need contact. But to make this as ligitimate as mariage between a man and a woman is naive, arrogant, selfish.
- pvtguy
April 29, 2009 1:20PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: No
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
what about...
I'm an atheist, should I allowed to be married under your religious interpretation of marriage?
- willowly
June 6, 2009 1:03AM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
atheist marriage
I'm an atheist, and my husband agnostic. We did not get married for religious reasons or in a church , yet our union is still recognized by the state. End of story.
- willowly
June 5, 2009 11:58PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Yes
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.
Maybe, But It Does Not Respect Religion Itself
What if Congress passed a law declaring the 4th of July "Freedom Day". Did anything really change except the name? Would that make you any less upset? "Independence Day" doesn't really belong to anybody, especially the government , and no one has the right to redefine it. If everyone just stopped calling the 4th of July "Independence Day" then that's fine. Nobody should be forced to observe the holiday or celebrate it in the traditional sense.
In the same way, government does not own marriage . It shouldn't define it or redefine it or sanction it. The people should be the keepers and standard-bearers of marriage. If we decide that marriage means two loving individuals then we will be accepting of gay couples and respectful of their union. The government should not be saying, "accept this," or, "respect this," or, "recognize this." It's our right to recognize or ignore whatever social contracts we want.
If we still want to have some kind of government recognition then use the term "civil union." It's respectful and appropriate, because without the law (i.e. government) the term really has no meaning. I still object to the existence of a special class of citizenship though (i.e. I object to special privileges exclusive to married/unionized couples).
- snackle
November 16, 2009 1:31PM
Reply to this Recommend
(0)
Side: Uncommitted
Thank You for your Comment
We review all comments before they're posted. For more on our comment policy, please see our FAQ.