A Unique Perspective on Gay Marriage

I just got done reading an article from the BBC on how the government of Britain is proposing to handle the whole gay marriage situation.  Here is listing of the 4 main things the government want to enshrine in legislation.


"In her statement, Mrs Miller promised a "quadruple lock" to protect religious freedom, involving:

• No religious organisation or individual minister being compelled to marry same-sex couples or to permit this to happen on their premises

• Making it unlawful for religious organisations or their ministers to marry same-sex couples unless their organisation's governing body has expressly opted in to provisions for doing so

• Amending the 2010 Equality Act to ensure no discrimination claim can be brought against religious organisations or individual ministers for refusing to marry a same-sex couple

• The legislation explicitly stating that it will be illegal for the Church of England and the Church in Wales to marry same-sex couples and that Canon Law, which bans same-sex weddings, will continue to apply

Gay marriage: Religious 'opt-in' offered, but not to CofE

Once you read the whole article you will notice that this a rather ingenious way of handling things.  They want to make sure that some of the problems that have surfaced in the United States are not problems in Britain.  Essentially, so many states including California have pasted legislation to ban gay marriage.  They don't want to be forced to do anything, especially, gay marriage with which they don't believe.

One oft sighted example is what has or is happening in Canada.  There several churches and recreational facilities have been sued due to the fact they won't lease/rent their location to someone having a gay marriage. 

So in Britain they are making it so that no one can sue if a specific religion or organization wants nothing to do with gay marriage.  They also want to make it so that those that want to can go full head into the mud can be happy about it.

This keeps religious leadership from having to compromise their principles, and be forced into something they wish no part of.

One major issues that is coming to light in the states is what to do about gay married couples that move out of a state to one that does not recognize their situation.  As of right now the majority of states have written into their constitution something against gay marriage.  So those that leave Massachusetts and head to one of those 32 states would be plumb out of luck.  I guess that is one issue the Supreme Court will have to resolve.  They could just push it to the side and leave it alone giving each state their autonomy.

One of the complications of the Prop. 8 situation in California is that the pro-gay group went to a federal judge to get around what was a state issue.  This forced the hand to have the supreme court get involved.  Is this a state's issue or a federal issue?   This could end up being like the whole Slaves issue back 150 years ago.   I don't think it would come down to a civil war.  We have to many passive people in the country now and really the gays make up say 10-15% of the population max.  Would the wishy washy people that passively support gays and their right to marry take up arms to defend them?   I don't think so.  They'd rather watch some gay on TV and feel good about it.  So the more hard core Christians and religious people will win out the day with this.  Unfortunately, things can get foisted on us if we are not careful.

So hopefully, the supreme court can do the right thing and see the light provided by the British Government.  And especially not follow the example that is being set in Canada.

The majority has to take the higher hand there and firmly put down their foot.  And Poo huh to those that cry discrimination.  Don't force your point of view on me and I'll not force mine on you.

Love the Sinner and not the Sin.

Buaidh - NO - Bas