Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Homosexual 'weddings' should be celebrated in church, says Chris Bryant...(UK)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/5723177/Homosexual-weddings-should-be-celebrated-in-church-says-Chris-Bryant.html ^ | July 2nd, 2010

Posted on 07/06/2010 12:47:10 PM PDT by TaraP

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 last
To: a fool in paradise

and funded by tax dollars of course


41 posted on 07/06/2010 2:03:31 PM PDT by GeronL (Just say NO to conservativecave.com, it rots your teeth!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: JimSEA

I am sure these are “oopen marriages” too


42 posted on 07/06/2010 2:05:01 PM PDT by GeronL (Just say NO to conservativecave.com, it rots your teeth!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Republic of Texas

“This is exactly why some religions are against gay marriage. They knew it wouldn’t be long before they were forced to sanctify them.”

You’re right on the money there. My husband was having an argument about gay marriage with a friend of his who was gay and the minute he brought up the issue of “what if certain churches won’t marry a gay couple” his friend shut right up—it was apparent he knew this would be the next step after gay marriage was made legal.

I had my own experience with this last year. I perform wedding ceremonies for relatives and friends, and last year did a wedding for a co-worker’s son.

After the wedding, a bunch of the groom’s family members came up to tell me how much they liked the ceremony I’d written and delivered, and the groom’s step-brother, who is gay and in a long-term relationship, asked me how often I do weddings.

I couldn’t help but feel like he was wondering if I would officiate at a ceremony for him. It’s something I would adamantly refuse to do, and it caused me quite a bit of worry (both on the legal front—I don’t think he’d sue me for refusing, although that’s always a concern—and from a “you’re such a bad person; you must be a homophobe” angle).


43 posted on 07/06/2010 2:26:26 PM PDT by The4thHorseman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: The4thHorseman

It’s coming, so get ready.


44 posted on 07/06/2010 2:35:42 PM PDT by Republic of Texas (Socialism Always Fails)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Genoa

“The church should not be mandated on what ceremonies they can or cannot perform for whatever reason.

Stay in the United States and thank God for the establishment clause. “

Most libtards think the Primary purpose of the Establishment clause was to protect the Government from a state church, but it was also to protect the Churches from the Government and Government meddling.


45 posted on 07/06/2010 2:58:35 PM PDT by GraceG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
Let me guess, he wants to force the churches to do with the power of law?

Vickie Gene Robinson has said exactly this here in the U.S. We are just a few years behind Great Britain in perversion.

46 posted on 07/07/2010 4:18:34 AM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Republic of Texas
They knew it wouldn’t be long before they were forced to sanctify them. The Libs keep proving us right, and unfortunately, no one cares.

That's because many of the Libertarian mindset despise religion and those who embrace it. They don't care if Christians are oppressed and churches overrun.

Selective "liberty?"

47 posted on 07/07/2010 4:24:50 AM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: GraceG

What makes you think a measly constitutional “establishment clause” will stand in the way of this Abominstration?


48 posted on 07/07/2010 4:26:59 AM PDT by fwdude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: beckysueb

The 1st way they will punish churches for refusing to marry gays will be to remove their tax exempt status.

I doubt the same will happen to mosques.


49 posted on 07/07/2010 4:30:00 AM PDT by dforest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson