Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1
Still Waters

Gay fathers to sue the Church of England

32 posts in this topic

The first legal challenge to the Church of England's ban on same-sex marriage was launched today - months before the first gay wedding can take place.

Gay father Barrie Drewitt-Barlow declared: 'I want to go into my church and marry my husband.' He added: 'The only way forward for us now is to make a challenge in the courts against the Church.'

The legal move means an early test for David Cameron's promise to the CofE and Roman Catholic bishops that no church would be forced to conduct same-sex weddings against the will of its leaders and its faithful.

http://www.dailymail...ied-church.html

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The first legal challenge to the Church of England's ban on same-sex marriage was launched today - months before the first gay wedding can take place.

Gay father Barrie Drewitt-Barlow declared: 'I want to go into my church and marry my husband.' He added: 'The only way forward for us now is to make a challenge in the courts against the Church.'

The legal move means an early test for David Cameron's promise to the CofE and Roman Catholic bishops that no church would be forced to conduct same-sex weddings against the will of its leaders and its faithful.

http://www.dailymail...ied-church.html

In earlier debates it was my contention that THIS has always been the goal. It's not enough to force your fellows to ensure that you have the same legal rights that might be afforded through a civil partnership. NO... it has always been about FORCING everyone to accept that the choice you have made is no different and is completely acceptable to society. I have never had a problem with homosexuals having the same rights legally as any other citizen. But if my church has to relinquish it's very soul to accommodate the wishes of a minority then what have we gained? And when did the rights of minorities completely outweigh the rights of the majority in this world? When did that change occur? If a C of E pastor refuses to solemnize such a union what would be the penalty? Would a pastor be jailed? Fired? To me this issue is very much like the contest between Islam and the world. They will accept nothing less than total acceptance and control of the world agenda according to what they hold sacred and to hell with ANYONE who stands in their way.
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it should be up to the individual church/priest.

If a church doesn't want to hold your ceremony, that's tough cookies. As long as the individuals in attendance abide by the law, the government has no place forcing them to do anything.

I'm a male in a relationship with another male and, hell, I'd be happy with going down to the courthouse with my two witnesses.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They will accept nothing less than total acceptance and control of the world agenda according to what they hold sacred and to hell with ANYONE who stands in their way.

While I am very much for homosexuals to be able to marry, and I think that this lawsuit is wrong, are you really equating people attempting to get the right to marry their loved ones to a hostile Muslim take over?

As for Muslims trying to force everyone to believe like them... as a Christian, don't you find that position a little hypocritical?

Yes, I realize not all Christians try to force everyone to believe like them, but then neither do Muslims. Christians have been forcing their religion on others for centuries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hilarious. Why they want to do that? Except ,again, as usual, for attention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hilarious. Why they want to do that? Except ,again, as usual, for attention.

Yeah, but there's people like that in all walks of life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Yeah, but there's people like that in all walks of life.

Thats just whats I try to tell you. I know Priests who didnt wont to married heterosexual couples, so...no one ever put charge on them. This is for show and I hope they loose all.

Edited by the L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats just whats I try to tell you. I know Priests who didnt wont to married heterosexual couples, so...no one ever put charge on them. This is for show and I hope they loose all.

I don't recall you saying anything like that, but I've never denied that every group of people had bad ones, stupid ones, sick ones, etc., I've just said a whole group shouldn't be judged by those people. It's up to the priest who he (or in rare-ish cases she) wants to marry.

It's really quite silly, bringing the law into this. I'm surprised this is being taken seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't recall you saying anything like that, but I've never denied that every group of people had bad ones, stupid ones, sick ones, etc., I've just said a whole group shouldn't be judged by those people. It's up to the priest who he (or in rare-ish cases she) wants to marry.

It's really quite silly, bringing the law into this. I'm surprised this is being taken seriously.

What surprise me that they want to marry in Church.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What surprise me that they want to marry in Church.

I can see why some would want to. If the church is a big part of their life, they'd want it to have a part in that aspect too. Aaaand, of course, some people are just [expletive deleted]'s who think they should be able to do whatever they want, whenever they want.

Personally, I don't want to get married in a church because, to me, marriage isn't about being recognized by a god or gods. It's about being recognized by the IRS, the local hospital, and other organizations. If there is a god, it knows how I feel - that is already recognized. Just my opinion. Not everyone will share it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm personally of the opinion a marriage is only something that should be recognized by the people who hold the ceremony and those they invite. Government shouldn't play a role in it.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can see why some would want to. If the church is a big part of their life, they'd want it to have a part in that aspect too. Aaaand, of course, some people are just [expletive deleted]'s who think they should be able to do whatever they want, whenever they want.

Personally, I don't want to get married in a church because, to me, marriage isn't about being recognized by a god or gods. It's about being recognized by the IRS, the local hospital, and other organizations. If there is a god, it knows how I feel - that is already recognized. Just my opinion. Not everyone will share it.

I understand. But I was under impression that none Gay want to marry in it. But I think marriage is only custom, tradition...

It become sacrament in 13 century. So what about all people before?

So I understand your view.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand. But I was under impression that none Gay want to marry in it. But I think marriage is only custom, tradition...

It become sacrament in 13 century. So what about all people before?

So I understand your view.

I think people should be handled on an individual basis.

Various people have had various beliefs throughout the ages. But most, that I've seen or read about, have had some kind of bonding ceremony. Some did it for the community, some did it for the god(s). Some for reproduction, some for love and some for profit. Most of us are lucky enough to marry out of love these days.

I'm glad we could have a friendly conversation.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think people should be handled on an individual basis.

Various people have had various beliefs throughout the ages. But most, that I've seen or read about, have had some kind of bonding ceremony. Some did it for the community, some did it for the god(s). Some for reproduction, some for love and some for profit. Most of us are lucky enough to marry out of love these days.

I'm glad we could have a friendly conversation.

Always. Ofcourse tension rose when person discuss about things he is convinced that are right. Its normal. In marriage. In senate. On court. In forums. So as on UM.

No hard feelings.

Yes ceremonies are different. In fact I think that in future everyone will choose own ceremony. You know, how people started...Underwater, jumping from airplane...others go on desert Island...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Always. Ofcourse tension rose when person discuss about things he is convinced that are right. Its normal. In marriage. In senate. On court. In forums. So as on UM.

No hard feelings.

Yes ceremonies are different. In fact I think that in future everyone will choose own ceremony. You know, how people started...Underwater, jumping from airplane...others go on desert Island...

If we look back, we have a lot to choose from. With making some changes to modernize things, we'd have hundreds of thousands of choices. Then they can be personalized to each couple. Exploring this sounds like a lot of fun.

One of my mates friends actually wants to get married while storm chasing, near some bad weather conditions. Now, I don't know if I'd go that far, but I wouldn't mind taking a good, long look at my mate's and my own cultural history and see what we could make of that. I'm Native American (Miami), German and French. My mate is Slovak, Polish, Russian and German. I'm sure we could come up with something uniquely "us" from that. Just for fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

If we look back, we have a lot to choose from. With making some changes to modernize things, we'd have hundreds of thousands of choices. Then they can be personalized to each couple. Exploring this sounds like a lot of fun.

One of my mates friends actually wants to get married while storm chasing, near some bad weather conditions. Now, I don't know if I'd go that far, but I wouldn't mind taking a good, long look at my mate's and my own cultural history and see what we could make of that. I'm Native American (Miami), German and French. My mate is Slovak, Polish, Russian and German. I'm sure we could come up with something uniquely "us" from that. Just for fun.

What a combination? Seminole?

Eversglades seems worst then bad weather conditions. :innocent:

Edited by the L

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the law is already posed that you cannot be sued, then I doubt these two guys will win...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What a combination? Seminole?

Eversglades seems worst then bad weather conditions. :innocent:

Well, I do use ritual tobacco in my ceremonies. But, the Miami I descended from was from the group that made their home in modern Indiana and Ohio when there was a split. Myaamiaki is the term for the tribe in the native tongue, I believe.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

In earlier debates it was my contention that THIS has always been the goal. It's not enough to force your fellows to ensure that you have the same legal rights that might be afforded through a civil partnership. NO... it has always been about FORCING everyone to accept that the choice you have made is no different and is completely acceptable to society. I have never had a problem with homosexuals having the same rights legally as any other citizen. But if my church has to relinquish it's very soul to accommodate the wishes of a minority then what have we gained? And when did the rights of minorities completely outweigh the rights of the majority in this world? When did that change occur? If a C of E pastor refuses to solemnize such a union what would be the penalty? Would a pastor be jailed? Fired? To me this issue is very much like the contest between Islam and the world. They will accept nothing less than total acceptance and control of the world agenda according to what they hold sacred and to hell with ANYONE who stands in their way.

For the majority of the LGBT community forcing churches to do anything is NOT the goal. Note that one couple does not represent the whole community. I do suppose it was bound to happen though. There are gay couples that want to get married in church. There are priests willing to marry them. But they are forced not to. Funny how them being forced to do something has no meaning for you. So yeah, I had a feeling it'd happen someway, but I figured it would be solved internally. I certainly didn't expect this to come up before the law even came into effect. My prediction is that they'll lose, but I don't think it'll go away.

Personally, and then, I don't think the church has much of a soul to lose considering how shamefully it has treated gay people (and continues to do so). It's stance is one that should not be maintained, respected or in any way treated as anything remotely positive.

Gay people are nothing like those radical muslims. A radical muslim wants everyone that's not his brand of islam to be executed. I've never heard a gay person make a similar call for straight people. It's curious, though, that in the past christians had a similar rallying cry. Anyone not their brand of christianity was persecuted severely. If you're comparing a group to muslims it seems christianity has much more similarities.

Edited by shadowhive
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If your religion conflicts with your beliefs then you have to choose whichever is more important to you. Forget your own beliefs or forget your religion.

If they really believed then it wouldn't matter where or how they got married.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I am very much for homosexuals to be able to marry, and I think that this lawsuit is wrong, are you really equating people attempting to get the right to marry their loved ones to a hostile Muslim take over?

As for Muslims trying to force everyone to believe like them... as a Christian, don't you find that position a little hypocritical?

Yes, I realize not all Christians try to force everyone to believe like them, but then neither do Muslims. Christians have been forcing their religion on others for centuries.

First, what I said was that the agenda of achieving these rights to gay marriage wasn't about LEGAL rights in this country. Civil partnerships would have accomplished this, no? But marriage by it's nature invokes a religious aspect. If this religious angle gives the couple no further legal rights than a civil union then why is it important? It is important because these individuals want to have their choices declared acceptable to everyone. Without trying to be either combative OR condescending to you, I ask you seriously, do you expect all of YOUR personal choices in life to be approved by everyone? And do you feel that if some choice you make is a very esoteric one statistically that you should be allowed to force everyone else to approve and be forced to change their beliefs to fit your's? I take you to be a reasonable individual and I suspect the answer is no you would not expect such treatment.

Second, yes I do compare this kind of behavior with what Islam does. It is about a group of individuals who desire to force the world at large to believe and condone the religion they believe in. Obviously I am not saying that even militant gay rights supporters would terrorize the world. But BOTH sets of individuals seek to cause a submission to their way of thinking BY FORCE. In one case by changing laws and in the other by murder and violence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the majority of the LGBT community forcing churches to do anything is NOT the goal. Note that one couple does not represent the whole community. I do suppose it was bound to happen though. There are gay couples that want to get married in church. There are priests willing to marry them. But they are forced not to. Funny how them being forced to do something has no meaning for you. So yeah, I had a feeling it'd happen someway, but I figured it would be solved internally. I certainly didn't expect this to come up before the law even came into effect. My prediction is that they'll lose, but I don't think it'll go away.

Personally, and then, I don't think the church has much of a soul to lose considering how shamefully it has treated gay people (and continues to do so). It's stance is one that should not be maintained, respected or in any way treated as anything remotely positive.

Gay people are nothing like those radical muslims. A radical muslim wants everyone that's not his brand of islam to be executed. I've never heard a gay person make a similar call for straight people. It's curious, though, that in the past christians had a similar rallying cry. Anyone not their brand of christianity was persecuted severely. If you're comparing a group to muslims it seems christianity has much more similarities.

I am not answerable for the sins of the "church". I agree that there are some in more ecumenical parishes who are happy to solemnize such unions and I believe they should be able to if that is their choice - it should be an internal matter. But if a priest or pastor genuinely feels that solemnizing such a union is abhorrent then why should they be forced to do so? What possible good comes from that?

Several hundred years ago mainstream Church (mostly RCC) was as brutal as Islam is today. There are even some instances in very backward parts of the planet where so called Christians still act this way. I have no argument about my faith and I have no need whatever to defend the teachings of Christ to anyone. I am not ashamed of His Gospel. If this couple wins in court there then priests are going to have a choice to make. And if the gay community is willing to remain silent and allow the church to be damaged by such actions then they are partly culpable. As you said, there are ministers out there who WANT to officiate. So why is there a need to force? The same for Islam. WHY do they need to force their beliefs on others? Christians share a message of hope. Take it or leave it. Muslims - devout Muslims - demand that you "take it" or they will end you. That comparison is valid except that I have seen no evidence yet that the LGBT community is willing to resort to violence. Perhaps Islam should take a page from their playbook. Change the laws and make the unwilling submit to what is essentially mob rule. I am NOT a person who hates gay people. It is not my place to judge anyone and I do my best to refrain from such and certainly have never actively tried to harm or even insult a gay person. But that does not mean I approve of the choice. I believe the Bible and take it at it's clear meaning regarding this choice of lifestyle. I feel the same chagrin for people who destroy themselves with food or drugs or other vices as well. I have my own vices to battle and I spend my time attending THAT struggle and not trying to get the splinter from my neighbor's eye.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

But that does not mean I approve of the choice. I believe the Bible and take it at it's clear meaning regarding this choice of lifestyle.

*cringes*

Edited by Ratte
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think everyone on here that reads my post knows that I’m all for equal rights, but these guys are only hurting the equal rights cause. I knew the moment I read this story that bigots would flock to this story going “see, see I told you this would happen”. This lawsuit will just make the bigots fight all the harder to stop equal rights. I will never get why people would want to be a part of a religion that despises them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think everyone on here that reads my post knows that I’m all for equal rights, but these guys are only hurting the equal rights cause. I knew the moment I read this story that bigots would flock to this story going “see, see I told you this would happen”. This lawsuit will just make the bigots fight all the harder to stop equal rights. I will never get why people would want to be a part of a religion that despises them.

Fear, their parents, belief that they actually are forgiven; there could be any number of reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 1

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.