Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 60 (9209 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Skylink
Post Volume: Total: 919,484 Year: 6,741/9,624 Month: 81/238 Week: 81/22 Day: 22/14 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Church and Homosexual Marriage
Angeldust
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 63 (188287)
02-24-2005 9:59 PM


This post may ramble a bit before I get to the point.....
It's absolutely unfair that of all the classes I'm taking this semester, the one that makes me think the most is only a one credit class that I should have been able to breeze through. The name of that class is "Current Issues and Scripture: Homosexuality."
I'm not looking to start another "Is homosexuality condemned in the Bible?" thread. For the sake of this thread, let's assume that it is, just for discussion.
Even if the Bible condemns homosexual practice, I'm not certain that it's the churchs place to take a political stand against homosexual marriage.
Here's my thought process....
I'm not certain that attempting to impose the LETTER of the law of the gospel on unbelievers is what Christ had in mind.
In 1 Corinthians 5:11-13 it states: "11 But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.
12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside. Expel the wicked man from among you."
Whether it is for the protection of societal good, like I've heard on several family oriented websites, or not, whether we are attempting to consciously judge or not, that is what it looks like to the world.
yes, Scripture indicates judgement, but the judge is God. You don't see Jesus in any of the gospels walking up to a sinner of any sort and telling them that they are going to hell. The ones that he gave scathing condemnations to were the religious leaders of that day. He was never soft on sin, but recognized that telling people straight out that their going to hell isn't necessarily the best way to keep them from going there. Look at the woman caught in adultery. He didn't condemn her, like the law said he should, but told her to go and quit doing it. There was mercy and love there.
On a political scale, the church (pick a denomination, any denomination) is a faceless organization to a world that already thinks badly of them. All they see is a pointing finger telling them that they are wrong.
I'm not saying that on a face to face level, on a personel level that Christians shouldn't call sin what it is, but one on one it can be tempered with love and everything else that comes with the gospel that the world often doesn't see.
I guess this all leads up to the question.....
Christian or not, how do you perceive the church's stand on homosexual marriage? And do you see any validity in the different arguements presented against homosexual marriage?

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by macaroniandcheese, posted 02-26-2005 12:20 PM Angeldust has not replied
 Message 4 by bob_gray, posted 02-26-2005 1:06 PM Angeldust has replied
 Message 5 by jar, posted 02-26-2005 2:09 PM Angeldust has not replied
 Message 6 by coffee_addict, posted 02-26-2005 3:15 PM Angeldust has replied
 Message 11 by Monk, posted 02-26-2005 7:09 PM Angeldust has not replied
 Message 63 by Taqless, posted 03-23-2005 10:43 AM Angeldust has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 13107
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


Message 2 of 63 (188693)
02-26-2005 11:40 AM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4182 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 3 of 63 (188705)
02-26-2005 12:20 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Angeldust
02-24-2005 9:59 PM


very good point (though it was a bit difficult to find it in there). the american churches have this nasty habit of imposing their beliefs on the general populace. this is neither their place nor their responsibility as believers. the bible seems very clear (to me at least) that the 'laws' it presents are meant to be group-based social traditions and not meant to be made into an actual governing force. even paul would be appalled (haha) at what is going on today. he suggested that the early christians in their various 'cities of sin' live separate from their culture as models of behaviour which might draw in new believers from the torid townsfolk looking for something more than the oversexualized ritualism of the day.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Angeldust, posted 02-24-2005 9:59 PM Angeldust has not replied

  
bob_gray
Member (Idle past 5267 days)
Posts: 243
From: Virginia
Joined: 05-03-2004


Message 4 of 63 (188714)
02-26-2005 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Angeldust
02-24-2005 9:59 PM


Christian or not, how do you perceive the church's stand on homosexual marriage? And do you see any validity in the different arguements presented against homosexual marriage?
For me the answer is the same that I use for most issues. If you don't like it don't do it. Then there is no problem. Churches who are opposed to homosexual marriage simply don't have to perform them.
From the point of view of the government marriage is simply a legal union granting legal rights to the participants. From that point of view there is no rational argument (except possibly deliberate discrimination) against homosexual marriage. Why should the gender of the consenting adult participants matter to the granting of the legal protections?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Angeldust, posted 02-24-2005 9:59 PM Angeldust has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Angeldust, posted 02-26-2005 5:47 PM bob_gray has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 34140
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 5 of 63 (188721)
02-26-2005 2:09 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Angeldust
02-24-2005 9:59 PM


As a Christian, I think that you've pretty well summed things up. Any individual church is certainly free to set standards on what they consider valid within their communion. That does not mean that those standards should be applicable outside the communion.
I find it very difficult to understand why ANY Christian church would opppose same-sex marriage as a general rule or why the vast majority of Christians are not in the forefront of the fight to see the discrimination against a whole people is ended.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Angeldust, posted 02-24-2005 9:59 PM Angeldust has not replied

  
coffee_addict
Member (Idle past 121 days)
Posts: 3645
From: Indianapolis, IN
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 6 of 63 (188730)
02-26-2005 3:15 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Angeldust
02-24-2005 9:59 PM


And what's new here?
Churches used to burn people alive for heresy. Churches used to condemn the equal treatment of people other than white christian white men. Churches used to condemn the equal treatment of interracial couples. Heck, churches used to say that it was good to enslave other human beings so they could bring them closer to god.
The truth is every generation world churches will always find somebody to point fingers at and say "they're the enemy." It is now my belief that the true nature of religion is evil. Without doing something evil of some sort, somehow they feel insecured about their placement in heaven.
It's like "dude, we have to do something evil or god won't let us into heaven. We can start by burning witches. If they stop letting us do that, we can start enslaving other human beings. When people won't let us do that, we can start treating people of other races like crap. If they stop letting us do that, we can start condemning interracial marriages. If society moves on from there, we can always pick on the fags. As long as we do something evil, god will surely let us into heaven!"
Added by edit.
I'm willing to bet that the churches are secretly desperately trying to find extraterrestrial life, just in case society stop allowing them to pick on fags. Their plan is when that happens they can start saying "look, the aliens were created by the devil! Let us have another crusade and kill them all!!!" And what happens if people begin to think that aliens aren't the devil's children? Well, churches of the world will start building interdimensional ships so they can start mistreating beings that live in other dimensions.
So, in a way, we have the churches to thank for for our exploration. They are constantly in search of new people to bully.
This message has been edited by Resurrected Hector, 02-26-2005 15:35 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Angeldust, posted 02-24-2005 9:59 PM Angeldust has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Angeldust, posted 02-28-2005 12:50 PM coffee_addict has not replied

  
Angeldust
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 63 (188760)
02-26-2005 5:47 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by bob_gray
02-26-2005 1:06 PM


quote:
For me the answer is the same that I use for most issues. If you don't like it don't do it. Then there is no problem. Churches who are opposed to homosexual marriage simply don't have to perform them.
I wish it was the straight forward. Even though my location currently says Tennessee, I've only lived here for six months and am actually Canadian.
There are many people there saying that if your not willing to marry homosexuals then you need to turn in your credentials to perform marriages. In at least one province, any non-church officials who are unwilling to perform same-sex marriages were told to turn them in. There has been some protest in some places that ministers shouldn't get an opt out.
Although on that note, I have heard that some countries (wish I could remember where) only civil unions are legally binding. If you want a church ceremony, you have to do the legal ceremony seperate. I'd have no issue with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by bob_gray, posted 02-26-2005 1:06 PM bob_gray has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by jar, posted 02-26-2005 6:20 PM Angeldust has replied
 Message 13 by bob_gray, posted 02-26-2005 8:30 PM Angeldust has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 34140
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 8 of 63 (188774)
02-26-2005 6:20 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Angeldust
02-26-2005 5:47 PM


Although on that note, I have heard that some countries (wish I could remember where) only civil unions are legally binding. If you want a church ceremony, you have to do the legal ceremony seperate. I'd have no issue with that.
Actually, the US is that way. You can only get married by first getting a civil marriage license. Despite what many say, marriage in the US is a civil function. Once you get the license you can then have the ceremony performed in a church or a state court.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Angeldust, posted 02-26-2005 5:47 PM Angeldust has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Angeldust, posted 02-26-2005 6:26 PM jar has replied

  
Angeldust
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 63 (188775)
02-26-2005 6:26 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by jar
02-26-2005 6:20 PM


Fair enough. I suppose than the only difference is that in those countries most ministers aren't also licensed to perform marriages.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by jar, posted 02-26-2005 6:20 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by jar, posted 02-26-2005 6:34 PM Angeldust has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 93 days)
Posts: 34140
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 10 of 63 (188776)
02-26-2005 6:34 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Angeldust
02-26-2005 6:26 PM


I don't know whether ministers in the US have to apply for some licensing or whether they are simply grandfathered in or included by definition. But each church is open to set their own standards for marriage within their communion. For example Roman Catholics do not recognize divorces or remarriage and I believe most churches have varying degrees of restrictions on interfaith marriages.
But the issue of same sex marriage does not envolve anything within the communion. For that reason, as well as the obvious discrimination prohibiting same sex marriages places on a people, I don't understand Christian groups opposing it.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Angeldust, posted 02-26-2005 6:26 PM Angeldust has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Phat, posted 02-26-2005 7:24 PM jar has not replied
 Message 15 by Coragyps, posted 02-26-2005 10:55 PM jar has replied

  
Monk
Member (Idle past 4178 days)
Posts: 782
From: Kansas, USA
Joined: 02-25-2005


Message 11 of 63 (188787)
02-26-2005 7:09 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Angeldust
02-24-2005 9:59 PM


Several others have already replied with posts that basically cover my opinion, but I'll add my 2 cents anyway.
Angeldust quoting 1 Corinthians 5:11-13 writes:
"...12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13 God will judge those outside..."
I think many churches would do well to take these words to heart. I agree with you Angeldust in that most of the problems I see with this issue occur when churches point the accusatory finger outside of their ranks. Nobody likes to be thumped over their head with the Bible. I believe it is perfectly acceptable for any church to have standards by which their members must adhere to if they wish to remain members. Prohibition of homosexual marriage being one of them. But I also believe that churches could do a better job of acknowledging the fact that homosexual unions of some form will not simply go away just because they believe it is wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Angeldust, posted 02-24-2005 9:59 PM Angeldust has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18647
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 12 of 63 (188791)
02-26-2005 7:24 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by jar
02-26-2005 6:34 PM


The issue of what is and is not a sin
AngelDust, this was a great scripture that you presented!
NIV writes:
1 Cor 5:12-13= What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? God will judge those outside. "Expel the wicked man from among you."
From a church perspective, what constitutes wickedness?
Resurrected Hector writes:
It is now my belief that the true nature of religion is evil.
Is this not an irony of sorts?
Websters writes:
religion \ri-"li-jn\ n 1 : the service and worship of God or the supernatural 2 : devotion to a religious faith 3 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious beliefs, attitudes, and practices 4 : a cause, principle, or belief held to with faith and ardor religionist n
The issue is clarified within the above definition. Are we devoted to God or are we devoted to an "institutionalized system of religious beliefs"?
ResurrectedHector writes:
I'm willing to bet that the churches are secretly desperately trying to find extraterrestrial life, just in case society stop allowing them to pick on fags. Their plan is when that happens they can start saying "look, the aliens were created by the devil!
Actually, I personally think that extraterrestrial sightings are in reality demonic manisfestations. You are right in that I would not go embrace an "alien" at first sight. As a Christian, I DO discriminate against fallen angels.
Let me ask you something, though. Why are people so quick to dismiss Jesus as a valid supernatural claim yet so quick to embrace aliens as our hope for otherworldly wisdom?
Jar writes:
But the issue of same sex marriage does not involve anything within the communion.
Many Christians think that the union of opposite sexes is a complimentary action whereas the union of same sexes cannot be complimentary and is thus a type of idolatry and creature worship. The basic argument would be that a man who is prone to not seek a woman to compliment him would do better to seek communion with Jesus rather than with another man.
I DO agree with you that it is a civil issue and in that spirit, I am not against what society condones. As the scripture says, it is between the individual and God.
Even IF homosexual unions were proven to be a sin, it would only confirm that all of us are sinners in one way or another and all of us need communion with Jesus Christ.
MyMonkey writes:
Nobody likes to be thumped over their head with the Bible.
Agreed! Thump NOT lest ye be Thumped!
This message has been edited by Phatboy, 02-26-2005 17:26 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by jar, posted 02-26-2005 6:34 PM jar has not replied

  
bob_gray
Member (Idle past 5267 days)
Posts: 243
From: Virginia
Joined: 05-03-2004


Message 13 of 63 (188800)
02-26-2005 8:30 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Angeldust
02-26-2005 5:47 PM


Some valid concerns
There are many people there saying that if your not willing to marry homosexuals then you need to turn in your credentials to perform marriages. In at least one province, any non-church officials who are unwilling to perform same-sex marriages were told to turn them in. There has been some protest in some places that ministers shouldn't get an opt out.
The question is similar to asking whether or not they would have to turn in their credentials if they didn't want to marry a mixed race couple? The answer is the same to both questions. As far as the minister is concerned, he is not a representative of the state but rather a representative of his religion. He is certainly free to say he won't perform marriages for certain people. I know that some faiths won't marry an interfaith couple, it is about the same.
Although on that note, I have heard that some countries (wish I could remember where) only civil unions are legally binding. If you want a church ceremony, you have to do the legal ceremony seperate. I'd have no issue with that.
I would certainly agree with you. The state either needs to get out of the marriage business altogether or make it a purely secular institution. For me it comes down to the issue of legal rights. Why do mixed sex couples get cheap legal protections under the law and same sex couples don't?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Angeldust, posted 02-26-2005 5:47 PM Angeldust has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by RAZD, posted 02-26-2005 9:39 PM bob_gray has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1659 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 14 of 63 (188806)
02-26-2005 9:39 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by bob_gray
02-26-2005 8:30 PM


Re: Some valid concerns
Why do mixed sex couples get cheap legal protections under the law and same sex couples don't?
why should the benefits depend on even a secular ceremony? the issue is what governments need to {benefit\control} that is dependant on a piece of paper that can be voided at any time, versus the interpersonal relations that exist regardless of the pieces of paper?
should provisions for care of children depend on different standards due to their parents?
seems to me all one should have to show is cohabitation - whether for sexual relations or for economic ones - and shared resources.
{added by edit}
and government getting out of the marriage business altogether would leave it open for the various churches to define their own standards for marriages.
This message has been edited by RAZD, 02-26-2005 21:42 AM

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by bob_gray, posted 02-26-2005 8:30 PM bob_gray has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 988 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 15 of 63 (188820)
02-26-2005 10:55 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by jar
02-26-2005 6:34 PM


I don't know whether ministers in the US have to apply for some licensing or whether they are simply grandfathered in or included by definition.
I don't know about today, but in 1968 in Arkansas all I had to do to be able to be a state-recognized minister was go down to the courthouse, tell them I was a minister (Universal Life Church, which a friend got me ordained in by sending off a self-addressed stamped envelope), and signing my name in the book. Since a very great number of little fundy churches require only a "calling," not training, I'll bet it's still that easy. Well, here in the Bible Belt, at least.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by jar, posted 02-26-2005 6:34 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by jar, posted 02-26-2005 11:05 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024