“Homosexual people have the right to be in a family. They are children of God” - Pope Francis

[Back2Buff]

Do people still look towards the Catholic church as a guidance on what is right and wrong?  If you followed their morals, you would be in jail.

[Chef Jim]

1 hour ago, wAcKy ZeBrA said:

Should have stopped while you thought you were ahead

 

Oh you're winning!  Good for you!  

 

Now drink your wine and eat your wafer!  

1 hour ago, Warcodered said:

Maybe we should care since there are over a billion Catholics in the world.

 

How do you feel about their stand on abortion?  

[GETTOTHE50]

im a practicing catholic and i believe gay people should absolutely have the right to marry, adopt children, and have all the rights straight couples have. i dont think catholic priests should marry gays bc i think the church should stay more conservative. i just believe in the separation of church and state.

 

with that being said, pope francis is an idiot and he has been a terrible pope.

[SoCal Deek]

I’ve said for years that gays have the right to have whatever kind of union they’d like to have, but...the term ‘marriage’ should be reserved for the union of a man and a woman. It’s just a better construction of the language if we don’t mingle the terminology. 

[Chef Jim]

18 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I’ve said for years that gays have the right to have whatever kind of union they’d like to have, but...the term ‘marriage’ should be reserved for the union of a man and a woman. It’s just a better construction of the language if we don’t mingle the terminology. 

 

Why (sorry @wAcKy ZeBrA it's what I do)?  What is the reasoning behind the term "Marriage" being used only for heterosexual couples?  

[Warcodered]

1 hour ago, Chef Jim said:

How do you feel about their stand on abortion?

I'm far more torn on that issue but I do believe that legally it should absolutely come from a scientific standpoint and not a religious one.

 

24 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

I’ve said for years that gays have the right to have whatever kind of union they’d like to have, but...the term ‘marriage’ should be reserved for the union of a man and a woman. It’s just a better construction of the language if we don’t mingle the terminology. 

Your free to do you and call it whatever you want and they're free to do the same, the government should absolutely not be involved in reserving words based on peoples religious beliefs.

[SoTier]

4 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

Everyone is supposed to have the same rights under the law.  States should get out of the business of granting marriage licenses, and simply legalize civil unions.  That should be federal such that states cannot opt out of allowing two people who want to join their lives as a couple do so.   Marriage should be religious in character, and as such places of worship can decide if they want to sanction marriage between any two specific individuals.

 

In the United States, only a civil marriage is recognized by law, so civil unions are irrelevant.  Couples who wish to marry legally have to obtain a marriage license from their locality, but their choice of whether to have a religious or civil ceremony is up to the couple.   Without the license, no marriage is legal no matter how many religious officials are involved in the marriage ceremony. 

 

 

 

 

 

[Unforgiven]

Good then these two can come out.

Hint: the G stands for Gary

Edited October 21, 2020 by Unforgiven

[oldmanfan]

57 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

In the United States, only a civil marriage is recognized by law, so civil unions are irrelevant.  Couples who wish to marry legally have to obtain a marriage license from their locality, but their choice of whether to have a religious or civil ceremony is up to the couple.   Without the license, no marriage is legal no matter how many religious officials are involved in the marriage ceremony. 

 

 

 

 

 

I think it comes down to the word marriage.  I know a number of gay couples that are married, but it’s the word that raises the hackles on some.  Personally it doesn’t bother me, but if you change to civil unions as what is recognized by law then gay and straight couples each have the same legal rights and you take away the argument over the word marriage.  Many gay couples would then still be married as many church denominations would do so.

[Orlando Tim]

6 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

Everyone is supposed to have the same rights under the law.  States should get out of the business of granting marriage licenses, and simply legalize civil unions.  That should be federal such that states cannot opt out of allowing two people who want to join their lives as a couple do so.   Marriage should be religious in character, and as such places of worship can decide if they want to sanction marriage between any two specific individuals.

When I suggested that about 10 years ago I was called a bigot. Basically to those who are anti religion Govt is the highest level of enlightenment.

[SoTier]

48 minutes ago, oldmanfan said:

I think it comes down to the word marriage.  I know a number of gay couples that are married, but it’s the word that raises the hackles on some.  Personally it doesn’t bother me, but if you change to civil unions as what is recognized by law then gay and straight couples each have the same legal rights and you take away the argument over the word marriage.  Many gay couples would then still be married as many church denominations would do so.

 

Every law that dealt with marriage and marital rights in the US would have to be changed in order to give "civil union" the same legal status as "marriage" has.  That would be thousands of laws.  I'm not sure how court decisions dealing with marital rights would be dealt with.  My guess is that that might be a real pandora's box.   The SCOTUS has ruled that same sex couples can obtain marriage licenses, so their marriages are legal, and nobody is even trying to force any religious institution to sanction those marriages by performing wedding ceremonies for same sex couples.   Marriage vs civil union in the US is irrelevant.

[Warcodered]

3 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

Every law that dealt with marriage and marital rights in the US would have to be changed in order to give "civil union" the same legal status as "marriage" has.  That would be thousands of laws.  I'm not sure how court decisions dealing with marital rights would be dealt with.  My guess is that that might be a real pandora's box.   The SCOTUS has ruled that same sex couples can obtain marriage licenses, so their marriages are legal, and nobody is even trying to force any religious institution to sanction those marriages by performing wedding ceremonies for same sex couples.   Marriage vs civil union in the US is irrelevant.

I mean that is a lot of wasted man hours and resources just because some people are butt hurt about people using the word marriage.

[oldmanfan]

6 minutes ago, SoTier said:

 

Every law that dealt with marriage and marital rights in the US would have to be changed in order to give "civil union" the same legal status as "marriage" has.  That would be thousands of laws.  I'm not sure how court decisions dealing with marital rights would be dealt with.  My guess is that that might be a real pandora's box.   The SCOTUS has ruled that same sex couples can obtain marriage licenses, so their marriages are legal, and nobody is even trying to force any religious institution to sanction those marriages by performing wedding ceremonies for same sex couples.   Marriage vs civil union in the US is irrelevant.

I agree with you.  My suggestion was aimed at getting the controversy out of it.

[SoTier]

8 hours ago, oldmanfan said:

I agree with you.  My suggestion was aimed at getting the controversy out of it.

 

Same sex marriage isn't really controversial in the US any more.  It has been legal throughout the US since 2015.   It was legal in many states before that.   That's hundreds of thousands -- maybe even millions, because I have no idea what the annual numbers are --- of same sex marriages across the country.   Most Americans have accepted it.  Many may not like it, but the only people who want to continue to fight against same sex marriage are virulent homophobes and some religious zealots.

 

I think that Pope Francis' statement is humane and laudable.  It's about as far as a leader of a conservative religious institution can go. 

[SoCal Deek]

10 hours ago, Warcodered said:

I mean that is a lot of wasted man hours and resources just because some people are butt hurt about people using the word marriage.

Or....how about they just come up with another word so the language is clearer? Would it really be so hard? We have new words in the English language every year. Problem solved. No man hours wasted. 

[Warcodered]

3 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

Or....how about they just come up with another word so the language is clearer? Would it really be so hard? We have new words in the English language every year. Problem solved. No man hours wasted. 

Changing/creating forms and printing them out instead just being able to use what we already have isn't wasted resources/hours? There is really no point the only reason to change it is for people who aren't going to be happy about it anyway.

[SoTier]

4 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

Or....how about they just come up with another word so the language is clearer? Would it really be so hard? We have new words in the English language every year. Problem solved. No man hours wasted. 

 

What isn't clear about marriage in the US today?   Any two consenting adults who obtain a marriage license can be married by either a public official or a religious official of their choice.   The only thing that's changed about US marriage law is that the gender of couples has become irrelevant.  

 

It's a non-issue.

[Sherlock Holmes]

Christian McCaffrey, I'm on one knee...

[SoCal Deek]

1 hour ago, SoTier said:

 

What isn't clear about marriage in the US today?   Any two consenting adults who obtain a marriage license can be married by either a public official or a religious official of their choice.   The only thing that's changed about US marriage law is that the gender of couples has become irrelevant.  

 

It's a non-issue.

The purpose of every language since the dawn of time is to make human communication MORE clear and precise, not less clear and less precise. While it’s possible to hyphenate words and insert adjectives you’re better off using a distinct word wherever possible. That’s why we don’t call every vegetable simply ‘vegetable’. We use a distinct word for corn, peppers, etc. It isn’t complicated and shouldn’t be controversial. 

[WEATHER DOT COM]

Just now, SoCal Deek said:

The purpose of every language since the dawn of time is to make human communication MORE clear and precise, not less clear and less precise. While it’s possible to hyphenate words and insert adjectives you’re better off using a distinct word wherever possible. That’s why we don’t call every vegetable simply ‘vegetable’. We use a distinct word for corn, peppers, etc. It isn’t complicated and shouldn’t be controversial. 

 

We even use different words for different peppers - poblano, bell, banana, etc. Banana can also be plural - bananas - to imply multiple peppers of that variety or also a type of fruit, and your current state of mind.