Originally Posted by Viv

I have reservations about this. Too many religious fanatics want to exclude gay people from participation in religious ceremonies and access to church communities.

Originally Posted by Chan

And they are well within their rights to do so. Who are you - or anyone else - to dictate to any religion what it must believe about homosexuality?

There is no right to belong to a particular religious group. You support the right of homosexuals to pursue happiness but what about the rights of others whose sexual proclivities deviate from the norm? Or are you being hypocritically selective - denying the rights of some to pursue their happiness?

People are free to enter into any kind of relationships they choose but they do not have the right to demand that the government give any kind of recognition to those relationships, nor do they have the right to demand that other people recognize their relationships (whether those relationships are gay, straight or whatever).

Originally Posted by Zephyr

The government mustn't interfere with the churches. That's something that we sometimes fail to remember. We are often--rightly--quick to condemn the church's encroachment into government, but not as quick to condemn the opposite.

Originally Posted by palerider

Read your constitution. The church is allowed to exert its influence in the government to the extent of its ability. The government, however is forbidden to exert its influence in the church.

Originally Posted by Viv

Why not? It's discriminatory. Why should a heterosexual have the right to marry in the church and in a civil ceremony, but a gay person doesn't have the same rights?

The church is medieval. It discriminates and that should be illegal. I am not in the habit of telling anyone anything, but I do support equal rights in all arenas. I would expect any reasonable person to do the same, is that illogical?

Originally Posted by Guernicaa

How about you quote the sections for us?

Originally Posted by Young Stupid Radical

And this puts the religion in position to dictate the State (and the people's) views on such? As you can see from the poll we have right here, nowadays the majority is gay marriage; I mean, what can you possibly argue against it that doesn't have biased religious rhetoric or a simple statement of "it's unnatural". I mean, I have a question to every anti-gay-marriage individual: Why the hell not? I mean, you're obviously not gay, so what do you even care? Let people have rights and liberty; anyone in love should be able to marry; is marriage not a union based on love nonetheless? Or are you as heartless as to claim love is merely a thing placed in us to, I dunno, plant our seed faster, and thus only a man and a woman can truly be in love (and I've gotten that rebuttal before)? There's really no reason why anyone would wish for gays to be banned from showing love for each other.



So let the others pursue happiness as well; there's enough ambition to go around, bro.



So it's wrong they protest that they can't get married? A society with quiet people and no protest would suck very badly. People can demand what they want; and the State has obligation to serve them accordingly. Of course, "the State and law are there to protect us".

Originally Posted by Viv

Why not? It's discriminatory. Why should a heterosexual have the right to marry in the church and in a civil ceremony, but a gay person doesn't have the same rights?