Marriage

In the U.S., a 5-4 Supreme Court ruling decided that state prohibitions on same-sex marriage violate the Constitution.
In other words, gay marriage is now legal in all 50 states! I suppose we can call it marriage now, not "gay" marriage. It's just marriage.

I'm a liberal and believe in equality for all, so for me, this was amazing news. Wondering what the rest of you think? Please be careful in your wording because PnQ is a diverse community, and this can be a sensitive, controversial subject.

I respect all opinions and hope we can have a calm discussion. We all believe and are from different walks of life and that's what makes us unique. None of us are less, or greater.

I consider myself extremely Conservative, and since I'm a Catholic, this is an important topic in my life. Not just raised with certain beliefs but coming to meditate on it and find the truth for myself. I get what people are saying about separation of church and state, and that there are no constitutional amendments defining marriage as a "man and woman" only. I disagree with it more on a moral level. I know others have said, well just call it a "civil ...." instead of a marriage. But (in my mind) that wouldn't be solving everything. I know obviously not everyone is religious and sees marriage as made by God, but made by man. I hold fast to the belief that it is made by the divine Being, and cannot be redefined. Mike Huckabee made an interesting post earlier that this decision by the Supreme Court was not about "marriage equality" but "marriage redefinition" and I see his point there. I know this topic is its own and shouldn't be compared, some may call this radical thinking but if the "majority" gets to decide this and that, then who's to say what will be accepted next? I worry and pray about religious liberty and how it will be affected. Glenn Beck also made a post that there will be a change. Not overnight, but with time. Even though people say, oh churches can still say no, priests can say no to marrying a same-sex couple without repercussions, I fear that the churches (not just the Roman Catholic Church) will be attacked or called bigots. That's why I fight and feel so strongly to protect religious liberty. I know a lot of people support same-sex marriage, but for those of us who want to keep marriage sacred and regard it as a holy Sacrament, I just hope the government won't use force. That's what I'm afraid of.

I'd also like to peacefully point out the argument that "love is love". That's between those people and God. Love can be many things as there are different types of love. I don't believe I would ever have the right to say whether or not something is "love". Saying I am against same-sex marriage does not mean I don't see those people has having dignity, I just aim to defend the value of the marriage institution, as created by God. I believe love is divine and transcends feelings, and that love is doing what's best for the other partner, turning the partner away from sin. Such as in my faith, same-sex attraction may happen and be normal, but it's the acting on it that is sinful. Total disregard of that is engaging in sin instead of trying to work through it and cast it away. Some may say it's not my business to say what is and isn't a sin but I speak about the repentance of it, which I know some may not even believe in sin. Sin comes in all forms. It would be like me saying that (an example) an addiction of mine is okay as long as it doesn't affect another, so I don't do anything about it. I read this article earlier and shared it on my Facebook that I believe in too, homosexuals are no more the sinner than I, but I believe it's our call as Christians to help each other defy that sin. Pointing out our own first. Love the sinner, hate the sin. Some may be skeptical of that, but I believe it's possible. With love, mercy, understanding. We can still defend our beliefs and values, yet love others without accepting that certain behavior we believe hinders truth.

This may well turn out to be one of the most controversial threads on P&Q.

I believe people have both a male and a female component in their genital 'make up'. To me personally, there is nothing more scary then the people who overdo it in trying to appear 'straighter than straight'. Usually they are trying to cover up something ;)

Love is sacred, I don't care whether it is between members of the opposite sex or same sex, as long as people get the love they so crave. We all need to be loved and cherished and deserve to be. If you are wired in such a way, you are best of being with the same gender then why not? I have no problems with that.

I believe in God with all my heart and cannot imagine this divine force that IS pure love would ever condemn one of his children for loving another human being and following their heart...

My sister is gay, I'm incredibly happy for her today. In addition, I go to one of the most liberal minded colleges in the US, live next door to one of the most LGBT+ friendly towns in New England, and have a host of LGBT+ friends. Actually, right now I'm living with three lesbians. Go figure. I firmly believe that the sexual orientation (and gender expression, frankly) of every single human on this planet is completely fluid. No one is simply gay or straight, we all operate on an ever shifting spectrum. Ultimately, gay rights are as applicable to you as "straight rights" are, however you define that term. So, cool! Go humanity!

I understand from conversations I've had with my extremely conservative step father that the term "marriage" in the culture of his and many people's religion does not allow for same sex marriage. As a student of translation and lover of words I think it's interesting how much stake has been put into the definition of this word. For some, the supreme court's ruling represents a radical redefinition of what marriage is (or should be) and for others it's a nod to a definition they've long understood. Words are funny that way.

It's super important right now to not forget that although this is a huge step forward for gay rights, this doesn't constitute the end of the struggle for gay people, certainly not for trans* people, nor for anyone under the umbrella of non-cishet. So I'm gonna celebrate cause this is awesome, but I want to recognize that today I've seen some of the most homophobic/transphobic facebook statuses and twitter posts ever, so there's obviously a lot that still needs to change in this world before we can say we've reached anything near a state of equality.

Same sex marriage was legalised in New Zealand a few months ago and more recently in Ireland. Now that America has followed suite I think it's inevitable that other countries will allow it. Personally I have no problem with the actually act of a marriage between the same sex but, I do worry about the effects it could have on any children involved in such a relationship. There is a lesbian couple who frequent my local shopping mall and they have a small child still in the pram. The child seems well cared for and, could possibly be a biological child of one of these females. Both have numerous tattoos...short spikey hair so they draw attention to themselves and generally people pay more attention to the child than they would normally...so I'd be concerned about any psychological effect on children of same sex marriages regardless of it being male or female relationships. As for relationships between the two...what ever floats your boat....

GREAT responses from everyone thus far! Way to keep it civil while voicing vastly different opinions. I hope the conversation can remain this enlightening.

Few responses from me:

I think what's key to the ruling today is re-defining marriage. Narph is absolutely right that words are funny; a definition has divided people. I understand why those who believe marriage is a sacred union between husband and wife feel threatened by this re-defining of marriage. However, to me, marriage is a fundamental aspect of my culture and my values regardless of religion. Marriage exists in some form in most parts of the world, and across religions. I was not raised with the idea that marriage is restricted to one religion, or to any religion for that matter. I'm agnostic and I want to get married. I would not wish to take away the importance of marriage to a Catholic, and I would not want a Catholic to take away the importance of marriage to me (or anyone else). It's unfortunate that it's not that simple... yet.

MA, as a liberal, I can say that I would never be in favor of forcing priests to marry any two people, homosexual or otherwise. That seems as wrong to me as telling homosexuals they can't get married. I don't want to tell anyone what they can or cannot do when it's in direct violation of their human rights and freedom of choice... I'm hoping most liberals feel the same way, and I honestly believe that we do. I think it's wrong that a priest would deny a loving couple a wedding because of sexuality, and you think it's wrong that a homosexual couple should be married -- that's totally fine that we disagree, so long as we're not forcing our beliefs on others.
Question: Are priests currently forbidden to deny marriage to anyone? I think each priest should be able to decide for his or herself who they agree to marry. I can think of plenty of reasons to refuse marrying two people that don't have to do with sexuality...

Narph, back to you! The Kinsey scale, have you heard of it? "The Kinsey scale, also called the Heterosexual-Homosexual Rating Scale, attempts to describe a person's sexual experience or response at a given time. It uses a scale from 0, meaning exclusively heterosexual, to 6, meaning exclusively homosexual."
Many of us are not a 0 or a 6. I'm probably a 1, and maybe was a 2 in my early 20s.

Hellon, regarding parenting: There are bad parents belonging to every sexuality. Good parenting is about offering love, support, understanding, availability, encouragement, and instilling values, strength, morals, confidence, etc. You shouldn't base lesbian parenting off of one bad example (though the couple you explained with the wild hair and tattoos would fit right into the bay area, CA, where I grew up -- male or female), just as I shouldn't base straight parenting off of one bad example. I don't have enough fingers to list the number of bad straight parents I know! I do, however, know a handful of excellent gay parents with kids that turned out pretty awesome. Good parents come in all shapes and sizes.

Jane, I have heard of it. I think it's probably a good jumping off point but I definitely don't think it's inclusive enough for the complexities of sexuality. I know loads of people who would never describe themselves as distinctly straight or gay, or bi, for that matter. The problem with these terms? They operate under the assumption that the people involved are cisgendered. One of my best friends, for instance, is attracted to masculinity, on whatever body that manifests-- so long as it is a distinctly masculine presence. Some of my friends are trans, some of my friends are gender-fluid. It's a whole heap of complicated, but ultimately it boils down to liking who you like for whatever reason seems right to you.

Also, as to parenting Hellon, I don't think it's a problem. I've met a bunch of people who grew up with non heterosexual parents. I wouldn't have been able to pick them out in a crowd without them telling me. Parents are parents regardless of their orientation or gender, kids are lucky to have adults in their lives that love them no matter what structure their family has. And kids with gay parents probably think their moms or dads are major pains in the ass just like those of us with straight parents do. And they probably love them to death just like us, too.

Jane....as a parent and grandparent I do know that there are good and bad parents out there regardless of which combination of the sexes they are. I didn't mean I thought these two girls were bad parents, and, I personally have no problem with their tats' or hairdos but...a lot of people will and that could reflect on the child. If people are looking side-ways at this family now, what's it going to be like when the child goes to school...pretty sure the school yard will be a nightmare for him....Why do you have two mummys and no daddy? etc..

EDIT

On a lighter note...I don't know if any of you would have seen the interview with the Irish taxi driver when same ex marriage was legalised over there? Anyway...when asked what he thought of it he replied..."I don't know what all the fuss is about...I've been having the same sex for 30 years now and still enjoying it" :)...

I don't have a great deal to add to this thread, except to say that I'm thrilled with this decision by the Supreme Court. I'm also thrilled to be reading such a respectful thread on this topic...

I'm glad this is a respectful thread too. It's great when we can all share our voices and talk about big events like this.

Jane - Currently, Catholic priests are forbidden to marry same-sex couples as it goes against our faith. I don't know about Christian pastors or specific denominations, but from what I've read a lot of denominations (not just Catholic) have pastors who would refuse to marry. I respect you a lot for what you said about not forcing others to marry if it goes against their faith. The only reason I worry about it coming to that is people filing lawsuits or in this article I read (http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/10/20/ordained-ministers-who-refuse-to-marry-gay-couples-in-their-chapel-are-fighting-back-after-reportedly-being-threatened-with-fines-and-jail-time/) a nondiscrimination ordinance. These ordained ministers were threatened with possible fines or jail time if they refuse. So I fear the government's involvement will become a big ordeal.

There are also (some may call strict) guidelines for allowing marriage in the Catholic faith, especially if one spouse is Catholic and the other another denomination. Now for a priest to accept, be comfortable and sanction that marriage with that couple, that part is up to the priest. This is where I've seen a bit of disagreement and bitterness, sadly. I obviously am not in these situations so I don't specifically know the exact time a priest takes, but there are classes and sessions that a couple goes through with the priest. If the priest feels like that couple's intentions are pure and good, and that they are ready to marry, the priest will give them that blessing. My best friend's older sister was married last year. She is Catholic but her husband is not. She requested a specific priest in our diocese that her and her fiancee at the time would travel to and attend the masses at his parish. After meeting with the priest, who happened to be young and recently ordained, the priest said he couldn't in good conscience marry them, and they would have to find another priest. Now, there was a lot of hurt and I'm sure disappointment, but that part is up to the priest if the priest feels the arrangements aren't "how they should be", meaning if the couple lives together before marriage. Cohabitation is looked down on in our faith, but one priest may look past that and see if the couple is willing to live apart until marriage or make other arrangements. Another priest may simply look at that without spending more time with the couple and say they have lived in sin, so the priest cannot accept that. This is where the reasons why need to be explained. If the couple was financially burdened and weren't planning on living together, but had a crisis and saw that as their only way out. Abstinence and intent would probably be discussed as well. So to my knowledge there is not a specific exclusion that says, no this bride cannot marry her groom, but it takes time, prayer, and consideration. Like if the bride and groom are of two different faiths, they will be asked how they will raise their children, etc. Procreation and continuing the education of faith would be an important issue that needs to be addressed before jumping into marriage.

Hope that all made sense.

Jason and I had to do premarital counseling through our church before we were able to have our pastor marry us. He could have very well said no, if that was his choosing. I understand that may sound awful to some people, but for us personally to have the blessing from people who understood and truly lived out Scripture better than we do, it was important. We also learned a lot about each other and our communication styles etc, and in that it healed some past hurts. If we wouldn't have had a good session, our Pastor would have declined. That's okay, it's his right to do so.

We see all over places that are being sued and shut down due to refusing service over their beliefs. A pizza place, a flower shop, and locally for me a bakery. What makes a Pastor/Priest different? I don't mean that to sound confrontational, but I am genuinely curious.

I serve a God who calls me to love others. We are not to judge, but to discern. It's probably no surprise where my beliefs on same sex marriage are, and honestly this is something I am really struggling with. I agree with MA that we are to hate the sin and not the sinner. I am a sinner. I would never want someone to hate for me any one of my sins. Your sin is no bigger or smaller than mine - murder is right next to that little white lie. God's grace is overwhelming and He sees them all as heartbreaking, not a rank on a ladder as most people have made it out to be.

I keep thinking of the parable of an adulterous woman who was caught in the act, and the religious leaders tried to engage Jesus in debate. They wanted Him to persecute her and believed she should be stoned to death. Jesus did not want to engage in this conversation but this is where He said let those without sin cast the first stone. It is here I see that we are to not judge this woman, but her sin. Jesus then tells her to go and sin no more. That's where I struggle and don't understand with topics where people continue to lead a lifestyle of sin. This covers a multitude of areas, not just same sex relationships.

In the end I know that I will be judged by God with the same merit of judgment I gave to others. Just because I disagree doesn't mean I can't have a relationship with others. So in this area, I choose grace. I choose to love people for who they are. I choose to take my concerns, confusion, worry and any frustration I may have to God - and know that He will take care of it however He intends and wants it to be.

God loves every single person. Every one. Yes God wants His people to be happy, but He also wants them to live without sin. This is impossible, and the entire reason He sent His son for us. So I recognize the struggle with sin. I understand those with different beliefs will disagree with me, and think I am crazy for calling it sin. But please understand and let me reiterate, sin is sin is sin. I am not saying my sin is better than a homosexuals because I am not gay. I break God's heart. I mess up. I'm broken. I've never met someone who isn't.

This is for anyone who isn't a believer in God, please take a minute before you call a Christian a bigot, or homophobic. I am neither of these things. Yes there are homophobic\bigots out there, but please do not lump everyone together.

I am ecstatic about same sex marriage, being bi of course I am. :D.

GAHHHHHH I wrote this HUUUUUGE thing with a bunch of facts/quotes and I forgot to log in before hitting post. Now it's gone forever.

I'll try again, but this one will be sloppy.

Here goes:

A lawyer can deny legal services if he or she finds the case immoral; so should a priest be able to deny marriage services if he or she finds the couple in conflict with his or her religious doctrine. There is no separation between profession and service provided. There is a separation of church and state.

Narph, I totally agree that the Kinsey scale doesn't do justice to the complex graph of sexuality. We don't need a sliding scale, we need a massive, mobile dot plot where each person can have indefinite, moving dots.

I was interested in voter religious identification and support of same-sex marriage and did a little poking around.

More than 80% of voters in 2012 self-identified as Catholic or Protestant, while less than 15% self-identified as having no religious affiliation.

Since 2010, more than 50% of the U.S. population has been in support of same-sex marriage, with the gap widening every year.

In 2014, the religious make-up of the U.S. looked something like 70% Christian and 22% Atheist, agnostic, or zero religious affiliation. That other ~8% belonged to many other religions.

This all being accounted, it appears many people who identify as religious have somehow rationalized homosexuality and same-sex love or marriage. My mom is one of them. She used to be incredibly intolerant of gays and thought they were all going to hell, but if you spend more than a decade living in an urban, liberal (and as she likes to add, "highly educated") environment, you're ideas are likely to change. She still endures some internal conflict over homosexuality - were I to guess, she'd be on the fence about same-sex marriage, though she definitely understands and can appreciate same-sex relationships. Enough about my mom though.

I understand the idea behind differentiating the sinner from the sin, though I personally struggle with mutual and consensual love ever being considered a sin. The examples used by Britt, murder and lying, those are certainly sins with varying degrees of evil attached. How can two people loving each other and wanting to spend the rest of their lives together be considered evil? How can they be compared to anything like stealing, killing, lying, adultery, etc.?

"The examples used by Britt, murder and lying, those are certainly sins with varying degrees of evil attached. How can two people loving each other and wanting to spend the rest of their lives together be considered evil? How can they be compared to anything like stealing, killing, lying, adultery, etc.?"
Yeah. Totally this.

I think one big challenge is that the perspective is dated. Which is not to devalue any Christian or otherwise bible-affiliated perspective as antiquated and obsolete, but that, from what I know of human history, marriage used to be really important for communal success, and now it isn't.

My understanding is that, while marriage has been tied to religion for a really long time, it also went hand in hand with ideas of female virginity, patriarchal society, and progression of familial power through clear parental lineage. This was all to ensure bloodlines and, particularly for men, make sure that the children their wives were baring were actually theirs, cause who were they to tell? Yes, marriage also defines a clear relationship between man and woman under god, but there were clearly more political power dynamics at play back when marriage was invented. It used to be that failing to get married and produce children could be as detrimental to your individual success as lying/stealing/killing. So those comparisons, at the time, might have made sense.

Now the times have changed and we know a little more about how to work together without needing to follow super stringent rules. Unfortunately, the bible hasn't changed with the times, and that's where we run into problems. I do think it's interesting that there are other rules/procedures laid out in the bible that people don't actively follow/cheer for, while other (seemingly mundane) rules become the topic of wild debate.

Love always wins

always
always
always

sooner than later, later than sooner

love triumphs each and every time.

kisses and hugs to everyone. specially those against gay marriage. it must be hard to see everyone partying and sit upset in a corner about who someone else love.

26.6.2015

#HISTORY

p.s anyone noted how Obama didn"t say "god bless america"
but "god give America your grace"?

that was glorious.

I also can"t comprehend how people talk about
how the core essence of marriage is ruined

when marriage initially, was founded as a business arrangement.

^ Agreed, I don't know why gay marriage is a sin. Also I find it sad that people use the bible to point out their point, I mean there are a lot of rules in the bible that people do everyday, Love is love no matter what anyone says. doesn't the bible also say Love thy neighbor?

WE ARE ALL GETTING SKITTLES

IT IS MY TREAT.

LOVE DOESN'T WIN ALL THE TIME, BUT THIS TIME IT DID YA'LL. LOVE WON....

*THROWS CONFETTTI ALL UP IN DIS B*

I'm not ignoring your questions just so you guys know lol. I keep thinking about this over and over and honestly, unless you truly believe the Bible and have the faith in it like a believer does, I don't know that anything I say is going to make any sense. From the unbeliever perspective, I understand it sounds crazy and archaic... however I believe every word with every fiber of my being. I could read it front to back and quote Scripture until I'm blue in the face, but I honestly don't know that it would matter. This isn't meant to sound like a slam on anyone at all.. more so just the realization that unless you want to believe the Gospel, you (collective) won't really..care? I don't know that that's the proper word to use here, I just can't think of the right word lol.

Those that aren't Christian or religious don't let bigotry or misguided faith cloud there thought processes and see such topics with more clarity and an open minded approach

Like most I was brought up in a society where gays were considered sick weak and inferior. I sat in the middle somewhere, not openly opposed but neither in agreement. It never really affected me personally so I was in a safe zone where gay jokes were thrown about and gays scoffed at... My thought processes have changed to the affirmative where I no longer have problem with somebody being gay and don't think any the lesser of them.... Its been a long slow process to get to where we are today

If you go back in history homosexuality was much more acceptable, in fact there isn't an equivalent word for homosexuality in ancient languages, it was considered acceptable my most cultures. It wasn't till the advent of Christianity and Islam when societies entered the dark ages that the word came into being, with all the bigotry, persecution and misunderstands that went with it.

In essence its not really new but pleased the debate has crossed over to the socially acceptable in the eyes of the law

Nicko, I meant care what I think/say/believe lol