Pope calls for Civil Union laws for Gay couples

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

OSU79

Federal Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Oct 22, 2009
12,322
11,106
1,743
Back home in God's (Green) Country
#2
https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/1318908193309970432
I've long held that government entities should recognize only "civil unions" and church entities should be able to define "marriage" as they see fit. Discrimination against any form of legal civil union should be illegal. A church marriage would be only one form of civil union, but churches would not have to recognize a civil union as a religious marriage if they were opposed (many, many churches are not/would not be opposed).
 

snuffy

Calf fries are the original sack lunch.
Staff
A/V Subscriber
Feb 28, 2007
35,259
30,210
1,743
Oklahoma
#3
I've long held that government entities should recognize only "civil unions" and church entities should be able to define "marriage" as they see fit. Discrimination against any form of legal civil union should be illegal. A church marriage would be only one form of civil union, but churches would not have to recognize a civil union as a religious marriage if they were opposed (many, many churches are not/would not be opposed).
I think Mexico does it right. If you want to get married in a church go ahead, but for the state to recognize it a judge must perform a civil service . Dr.Smith, OSU history prof, was married in Mexico and said it was normal for the bridge, groom and both sets of parents to go before a judge and then drive to a church for the wedding ceremony.
 

OSU79

Federal Marshal
A/V Subscriber
Oct 22, 2009
12,322
11,106
1,743
Back home in God's (Green) Country
#5
I think Mexico does it right. If you want to get married in a church go ahead, but for the state to recognize it a judge must perform a civil service . Dr.Smith, OSU history prof, was married in Mexico and said it was normal for the bridge, groom and both sets of parents to go before a judge and then drive to a church for the wedding ceremony.
I know 2 couples, each man/woman, who were to be married in the past couple years at a particular Presbyterian church. Said church required prior civil unions because their pastor didn't want to marry gay couples. One of the couples I know complied and proceeded with their plans. The other couple's parents strongly opposed the requirements, had their wedding at a different church and withdrew their financial support from the church (the funny part being the parents have no problem with gay marriage).

Related/unrelated (?): in past year the pastor was found to be having multiple affairs - all with gay lovers. You can't make this sh#+ up.
 

Midnight Toker

Territorial Marshal
May 28, 2010
8,873
1,747
1,743
#6
I think Mexico does it right. If you want to get married in a church go ahead, but for the state to recognize it a judge must perform a civil service . Dr.Smith, OSU history prof, was married in Mexico and said it was normal for the bridge, groom and both sets of parents to go before a judge and then drive to a church for the wedding ceremony.
That's not a bad way to go about it i suppose. The only issue I take with the marriage thing is treating gay and straight couples differently. I just want equal treatment, whatever that is.
 

snuffy

Calf fries are the original sack lunch.
Staff
A/V Subscriber
Feb 28, 2007
35,259
30,210
1,743
Oklahoma
#7
That's not a bad way to go about it i suppose. The only issue I take with the marriage thing is treating gay and straight couples differently. I just want equal treatment, whatever that is.
That would be for everyone, gay, straight or throuple.
 
Aug 11, 2004
1,260
90
1,678
57
Newkirk, Ok
#9
I respect and esteem Pope Francis and I know he often expresses pastoral concerns for all people, especially the marginalized. It is important to understand his comments about civil unions are most likely in the context of these pastoral concerns. They are not a change in the truth or teaching of the Catholic Church, which recognizes the dignity of marriage as between a man and a woman as constituted by the Creator and affirmed by Scripture and natural law throughout history.

From OKC Archbishop Paul Coakley
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
29,798
31,782
1,743
oklahoma city
#11
I've long held that government entities should recognize only "civil unions" and church entities should be able to define "marriage" as they see fit. Discrimination against any form of legal civil union should be illegal. A church marriage would be only one form of civil union, but churches would not have to recognize a civil union as a religious marriage if they were opposed (many, many churches are not/would not be opposed).
Churches are able to define marriage as they see fit. They just aren't able to apply their definition to people that are not members of their church. Being that there are already many churches that allow gay marriage, I don't what the addition of the term "civil union" adds other than confusion.
 

wrenhal

Federal Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
10,203
4,117
743
#15
Related/unrelated (?): in past year the pastor was found to be having multiple affairs - all with gay lovers. You can't make this sh#+ up.
This is a common theme. Those who are adamantly anti-gay often have gay tendencies.
So if you are adamantly anti murder, you secretly want to murder? It's a false premise you are making. It just tends to be that those who don't like what they do tend to find ways to fight it outwardly and seek out being around those that also fight it. That didn't mean that all who fight against it are secret doers.

Not all fire fighters are arsonists, but arsonists sometimes try to and do become fire fighters.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
 

steross

he/him
A/V Subscriber
Mar 31, 2004
29,798
31,782
1,743
oklahoma city
#16
So if you are adamantly anti murder, you secretly want to murder? It's a false premise you are making. It just tends to be that those who don't like what they do tend to find ways to fight it outwardly and seek out being around those that also fight it. That didn't mean that all who fight against it are secret doers.

Not all fire fighters are arsonists, but arsonists sometimes try to and do become fire fighters.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk
Your post is a festival of logical fallacies.
 

Midnight Toker

Territorial Marshal
May 28, 2010
8,873
1,747
1,743
#18
Certainly not scientific, but.... it is a common theme. Those who are adamantly anti-racist often have racist tendenvies.
You might be referring to actual racist people who are pretending they arent racist by espousing anti racist rhetoric, while secretly still being a racist. That's usually how it goes.

Kind of like how some closet gay people hide in plain site by acting like they are anti gay.
 

wrenhal

Federal Marshal
Aug 11, 2011
10,203
4,117
743
#20
Certainly not scientific, but.... it is a common theme. Those who are adamantly anti-racist often have racist tendenvies.
You might be referring to actual racist people who are pretending they arent racist by espousing anti racist rhetoric, while secretly still being a racist. That's usually how it goes.

Kind of like how some closet gay people hide in plain site by acting like they are anti gay.
And some people are simply not racist and don't like being labeled that by people that don't know them.
Just being a white male and living in Oklahoma pretty much guarantees people will think you are racist.

Sent from my Moto Z (2) using Tapatalk