Skip to main content

View Diary: Religious establishment bigots sound alarm against loving same-sex marriages (141 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  "wide variety of faith communities," lol - NOT! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JeffW, OrdinaryIowan, apimomfan2

    1 Jew, and the rest all very right wing Christian churches (which includes the "free" methodists )

    No Muslims, no Buddhists, no Sikhs, no Hindus, no Zoroastrians, No Jains, No Scientologists, No Pagans, No Wiccans, No "liberal" Christians, hell there aren't even any Mormons

    Their "wide" looks pretty narrow to me

    Bumper sticker seen on I-95; "Stop Socialism" my response: "Don't like socialism? GET OFF the Interstate highway!"

    by Clytemnestra on Fri Jan 13, 2012 at 09:27:40 AM PST

    •  all the people you list (0+ / 0-)

      are so silent on the issue, or very supportive. So of course they wouldn't be included.

      [insert pithy sigline here]

      by terrypinder on Fri Jan 13, 2012 at 09:39:15 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  really? Pagan and Wiccans and liberal Christian (0+ / 0-)

        chruches like the United Methodist Church who just had a ton of ministers announce that they will  preform gay marriages, are silent on the issue and support it

        Or is it just they can't get any attention

        Bumper sticker seen on I-95; "Stop Socialism" my response: "Don't like socialism? GET OFF the Interstate highway!"

        by Clytemnestra on Fri Jan 13, 2012 at 09:45:36 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  they can't get attention. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ohiolibrarian

          The media prefers the fundamentalists, for whatever reason (ratings, I suspect). Personally, I think there's a religious freedom argument to be made here, on their part.

          I would love to see a couple marry in one of those churches or temples, by someone who the state legally says can do it, and then apply for a marriage license. When rejected, use religious freedom. The other side does it all the time.

          If such a case already exists I'm not aware of it.

          [insert pithy sigline here]

          by terrypinder on Fri Jan 13, 2012 at 09:48:42 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I was wondering if anyone would make the point (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Sue B, terrypinder

            that not being able to marry same sex couples impinges on the religious liberty of churches that allow it.

            Help us to save free conscience from the paw Of hireling wolves whose gospel is their maw. ~John Donne

            by ohiolibrarian on Fri Jan 13, 2012 at 10:46:26 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  in my eyes it does. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              apimomfan2

              although the whole banning of same sex marriage is a violation of the 14th Amendment. It's so obvious.

              [insert pithy sigline here]

              by terrypinder on Fri Jan 13, 2012 at 11:32:26 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  Of course it does (0+ / 0-)

              I made at a comment to this effect at the end of the diary before seeing your comment.

              In fact, I think the harm is now much greater to the churches that allow any couple to marry since the state doesn't recognize these church's marriages.

              The opposite is not true.  The state recognizes all of the marriages (even the questionable ones where children as young as 13 are marrying) of the churches who are howling about this.

              Yeah, that's right we allow 13 year olds to marry in the good ole USA but don't allow consenting adult couples to marry if they are of the same gender.

              •  13? Really? Where? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                According to Fish

                I thought 16 was the youngest ... at least without parental permission.

                Help us to save free conscience from the paw Of hireling wolves whose gospel is their maw. ~John Donne

                by ohiolibrarian on Fri Jan 13, 2012 at 06:20:32 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Well it is wikipedia but (0+ / 0-)

                  New Hampshire:

                  Applicants who has reached the age of 18 can marry without parental consent. A female between the age of 13 and 17 years and a male between the age of 14 and 17 years can be married only with the permission of their parent (guardian) and a waiver (See Waiver). A female below the age of 13 and a male below the age of 14 are not allowed to marry under any conditions. The above regulations on age apply to New Hampshire residents or to a non-resident who desires to marry a resident. If both parties are non-residents and are below the age of 18 they cannot be married in N.H. under any conditions. Waivers: When "good and special cause" is shown waivers may be obtained which can alter certain requirements. Age: When either of the applicants is not yet 18 years of age but meets the minimum age requirements (See Age) whether a resident or marrying a resident of this state, when joined in the request by their parents or guardian, he/she may request and obtain permission to marry by applying to a justice of the superior court or to the judge of probate where one of the parties resides within N.H. Waiting period: This requirement can be waived on application to a justice of the superior court or judge of probate within the county where the marriage is to take place.

                  http://en.wikipedia.org/...

    •  oops miscount (0+ / 0-)

      2 Jews

      Bumper sticker seen on I-95; "Stop Socialism" my response: "Don't like socialism? GET OFF the Interstate highway!"

      by Clytemnestra on Fri Jan 13, 2012 at 09:46:05 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site