• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Gay Marriage and that Line Between Church and State

Guitar's Cry

Guitar's Cry

Disciple of Pan
In Maine this November, we'll be voting on whether or not to repeal the new law allowing gay marriage.

The gay marriage issue is often argued over in terms of the moral or spiritual dangers either allowing or disallowing it presents. One of my issues with making gay marriage illegal is in how it begins to dissolve the line that separates church from state.

Either marriage is a religious ceremony or it is a word that has been secularized to include non-religious agreements. If it is the former, then we now suffer a religious dogma as law, and should forthwith strike it out of our legal system. If it is the latter, than homosexual marriage should be recognized by the state to prevent unconstitutional discrimination.


Unless, of course, we wish to allow religion to run the laws of the state.


And there are so many to choose from!
 
Neo-Logic

Neo-Logic

Reality Checker
I like the way this is going. This is not to say I'm happy with the status quo for gay rights, but I do like the fact that it's being resolved politically, rather on religious grounds.

Each state will determine their own constitutionality of Gay Marriage as voted by their citizens through whatever means of referendums and amendments. And this will be the way until such time that either: 1) the supreme court finds unconstitutional or 2) the movement reaches critical mass and a federal constitutional amendment is passed.

Just the way this should be working. Slowly, and legally. Perfectumundo.


Guitar's Cry said:
In Maine this November, we'll be voting on whether or not to repeal the new law allowing gay marriage.

The gay marriage issue is often argued over in terms of the moral or spiritual dangers either allowing or disallowing it presents. One of my issues with making gay marriage illegal is in how it begins to dissolve the line that separates church from state.

Either marriage is a religious ceremony or it is a word that has been secularized to include non-religious agreements. If it is the former, then we now suffer a religious dogma as law, and should forthwith strike it out of our legal system. If it is the latter, than homosexual marriage should be recognized by the state to prevent unconstitutional discrimination.


Unless, of course, we wish to allow religion to run the laws of the state.


And there are so many to choose from!
Click to expand...
 
PHOTOTAKER

PHOTOTAKER

Well-Known Member
whats interesting to me is that in many states gays (gay and gal) have the same legal rights as married people have already but its just called civil unions giving them the legal right but keeping the religious part out of it is the only difference... they are just picking a fight to be noticed "look at me"...
 
Neo-Logic

Neo-Logic

Reality Checker
PHOTOTAKER said:
whats interesting to me is that in many states gays (gay and gal) have the same legal rights as married people have already but its just called civil unions giving them the legal right but keeping the religious part out of it is the only difference... they are just picking a fight to be noticed "look at me"...
Click to expand...

Civil unions are not the same as marriage. They do NOT grant same rights or status. Even if the state allows taxes to be filed together at their level, the federal level won't recognize it. Most important benefits that marriage gets where civil unions do not are employee benefits. Employee benefits packages and insurances recognize marriage as opposed to civil unions since many of the carriers they use are national if not multi-national corporations that has to recognize the accepted federal terminology - like marriage.

The supreme court already ruled that separate but equal is unconstitutional. It will be interesting to see where they rule if and when a case comes towards that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top