Reply
Captain Obvious 2 kids; Havana, Cuba 25634 posts
28th Mar '13
Quoting TheCoopersKnitWitch:" I'm saying that from the sounds of it that's how it used to be. You just have to see it from a Christian ... [snip!] ... it be any different. I don't want to be bashed for my beliefs, I just want to put in here from the Christian stand point."


I'm Catholic. My kids are both baptized and I have received all of my sacraments, including being married in the church.



Nobody is asking churches to recognize marriages not performed by them...I was married in Disney World and my marriage was not recognized by the Church because a priest did not perform the ceremony. There was a year between my wedding and my convalidation ceremony where the church recognized our marriage...they even told us we were living in sin for a year-- WE WERE LEGALLY MARRIED and a man and a woman.



How is this any different? The church does not have to recognize any marriage it doesn't perform...Christians are arguing semantics and wanting so badly to give gays something separate but equal.

......................... Oregon 14226 posts
28th Mar '13
Quoting Captain Obvious:" I'm Catholic. My kids are both baptized and I have received all of my sacraments, including being married ... [snip!] ... marriage it doesn't perform...Christians are arguing semantics and wanting so badly to give gays something separate but equal. "


I think that's what i was trying to say, if I understood you correctly.



I was just stating that, that was how it USED to be. That the churches used to preform all the ceremonies, used to recognizes all the marriages.



But we've lost that. And now they want it "back" but I don't think that it's going to happen. You can't just give up on something and then demand it back.



And they can argue semantics all they want.



But like you said, and like I mostly agree, if they're not being asked to be married in a church, if they're not asking to be married by a pastor, what's the argument? Give them something fair. Give them something just.



But at this point in the world, if the church isn't doing all the marriages anymore, why can they argue it?



I would like to see it returned to the church. To me, being married in a church is where I'd want to be. But I got married in a house, by a JP, but that was only because the pastor who was going to marry us, bailed a month before the wedding and we were scrambling.



To me and my husband as Christians it meant more to us to be married in a church, but we didn't get that.



My biggest thing about the whole thing is the ones who want to get married in a church by a pastor. But that's me.

......... nowhere, NW, United States 25972 posts
28th Mar '13

<blockquote><b>Quoting TheCoopersKnitWitch:</b>" So this is what DH said that he's learned. Apparently marriage used to be defined only in the church, ... [snip!] ... then no they shouldn't, but we lost that a long time ago. Now it's being run by the government and it's whole different story."</blockquote>




Marriage doesn't have to be religious though--you're thinking of holy matrimony.. The church does not own marriage. In fact, marriage is older than Christianity.

......... nowhere, NW, United States 25972 posts
28th Mar '13

<blockquote><b>Quoting Captain Obvious:</b>" I'm Catholic. My kids are both baptized and I have received all of my sacraments, including being married ... [snip!] ... marriage it doesn't perform...Christians are arguing semantics and wanting so badly to give gays something separate but equal. "</blockquote>




:!:

Captain Obvious 2 kids; Havana, Cuba 25634 posts
28th Mar '13
Quoting TheCoopersKnitWitch:" I think that's what i was trying to say, if I understood you correctly. I was just stating that, that ... [snip!] ... get that. My biggest thing about the whole thing is the ones who want to get married in a church by a pastor. But that's me."


The ironic thing is, priests don't perform ceremonies at WDW because.......they allow gays to have commitment ceremonies there LOL

......... nowhere, NW, United States 25972 posts
28th Mar '13

<blockquote><b>Quoting TheCoopersKnitWitch:</b>" I think that's what i was trying to say, if I understood you correctly. I was just stating that, that ... [snip!] ... get that. My biggest thing about the whole thing is the ones who want to get married in a church by a pastor. But that's me."</blockquote>




There are churches that are gay friendly... No one would be forced to do anything..,

The Doctor 2 kids; Whiskey Dick Mountain, WA, United States 59959 posts
28th Mar '13
Quoting TheCoopersKnitWitch:" I think that's what i was trying to say, if I understood you correctly. I was just stating that, that ... [snip!] ... get that. My biggest thing about the whole thing is the ones who want to get married in a church by a pastor. But that's me."


It's not about that, though. Especially DOMA, and giving heterosexual legally married couples more legal benefits than homosexual legally married couples, under the law.



While I think it's sad that some couples may be denied to be married by a church, that's the church's perrogative (IMO).



But the real argument is under the law. State and federal. And if the state (which, mostly regulates marriage) allows same sex couples to get married, then the federal government should recognize those couples as married, too, and grant them the same benefits as a heterosexual married couple.



IMO people are bringing church into it when it is not a church issue. Marriage was around before Christianity, and this country was founded based on freedom of religion, not freedom of Christianity only. Freedom of religion is a constitutionally guaranteed right. And granting equal legal benefits is not infringing on anyone's relgious freedoms.

......................... Oregon 14226 posts
28th Mar '13

I understand everything everyone is saying.



But OP did ask how it pertains to the Bible, which I stated.



I just stated my beliefs.

......................... Oregon 14226 posts
28th Mar '13

And unfortunately we don't want to get into the aspect of gays and that in the church.



For a true believer in Christ, that follows the Bible, it clearly states the homosexuality is not condoned and is not approved in the Bible. Granted, yes Old Testament, but for Christians, it clearly states in the Bible that men and women are made to be together, not the other way around.



I did have someone tell me once, "It doesn't say anywhere in the Bible that you can't be gay" but it actually does.



But that's from the Bible, personally I have a don't ask don't tell policy. What they want to be if they're Christian is between them and God, and if they believe that it's ok between them and God, that's on them. At our church we also have a don't ask don't tell policy.

The Doctor 2 kids; Whiskey Dick Mountain, WA, United States 59959 posts
28th Mar '13
Quoting TheCoopersKnitWitch:" I understand everything everyone is saying. But OP did ask how it pertains to the Bible, which I stated. I just stated my beliefs."


Well, she asked why the Bible pertained to the legal aspects, I think. But maybe that's just how I interpreted it.

The Doctor 2 kids; Whiskey Dick Mountain, WA, United States 59959 posts
28th Mar '13
Quoting TheCoopersKnitWitch:" And unfortunately we don't want to get into the aspect of gays and that in the church. For a true believer ... [snip!] ... if they believe that it's ok between them and God, that's on them. At our church we also have a don't ask don't tell policy."


Yes, it does state that in the Bible. I'm just wondering how many of those other examples of no-nos from Leviticus are ignored in most churches.

Captain Obvious 2 kids; Havana, Cuba 25634 posts
28th Mar '13
Quoting TheCoopersKnitWitch:" And unfortunately we don't want to get into the aspect of gays and that in the church. For a true believer ... [snip!] ... if they believe that it's ok between them and God, that's on them. At our church we also have a don't ask don't tell policy."


Yes but Christians need to realize that the bible only applies to people who believe in it, we can't force people to follow it. The bible should have no effect on what we legislate.

......... nowhere, NW, United States 25972 posts
28th Mar '13

<blockquote><b>Quoting TheCoopersKnitWitch:</b>" And unfortunately we don't want to get into the aspect of gays and that in the church. For a true believer ... [snip!] ... if they believe that it's ok between them and God, that's on them. At our church we also have a don't ask don't tell policy."</blockquote>



My issue with that is yes, it's Old Testament. When things such as not eating shellfish, wearing blended fabrics, not shaving your beard, etc. are brought up, we're told those laws do not apply because they're OT and Christ dying for our sins made those invalid. But not when it comes to homosexuality.
It's all or nothing. You can't pick and choose.



Do you think divorce should be allowed? Should you marry you husband's brother if he does? What about marrying your rapist?

Captain Obvious 2 kids; Havana, Cuba 25634 posts
28th Mar '13
Quoting The Doctor:" Yes, it does state that in the Bible. I'm just wondering how many of those other examples of no-nos from Leviticus are ignored in most churches."


I'm willing to bet most church-goers like to eat shrimp :wink:

......... nowhere, NW, United States 25972 posts
28th Mar '13

<blockquote><b>Quoting Captain Obvious:</b>" Yes but Christians need to realize that the bible only applies to people who believe in it, we can't force people to follow it. The bible should have no effect on what we legislate."</blockquote>




And there's this...