No Same Sex Marriage Violates My Religious Rights

1. 59

   MelissaBarrettposted 11 years ago

   I am a Unitarian.  My faith supports same sex marriages and wishes to perform these ceremonies within our church yet most states say this is illegal.  If marriage is a religious right then these states are violating my religious rights by not allowing such services the same legal recognization as those done in... oh say... baptist churches.
   
   Could someone explain to me how this isn't a violation of my constitutional rights?

   replyreport
   1. 69

      aguasilverposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      We had a similar problem in Spain (and still do to a degree) as we (being a free church group) are not allowed to conduct a legal marriage ceremony for any of our members of any sex.
      
      In Spain only the RCC can conduct legal church marriages, or the mayor of the town, or court official, church weddings are reserved for Catholics.
      
      Of course what we all do is marry first into a legal marriage, to satisfy the state laws, and secondly 'in the eyes of God and in the sight of the congregation, make these vows'
      
      The second marriage, the one in the eyes of God, is of course the REAL marriage, the other one, the secular one, is just apiece of paper to assist the tax authorities.
      
      If your religions god blesses same sex marriages, I see no problem.

      replyreport
   2. 61

      Paulshubposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I believe it all has to do with who issues the marriage license. It’s like how some fanatical branches of Mormons allow men to have more than one wife, but, you know as well as I do, that’s illegal in all 50 states.

      replyreport
   3. 61

      Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It's so good to see tolerant religions and religious people. Having said that the courts have established that the law takes precedence over religious mandate, so as a previous poster mentioned you cannot practice polygamous marriage either therefore there is no constitutional violation.

      replyreport
   4. 0

      Motown2Chitownposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I personally belong to a church that does not sanction same sex marriage - but feel that just because it is not considered a sacrament in my church does not mean that it can be prevented legally.  If same sex marriage were to be approved, I wouldn't expect my church to have to marry a same sex couple.  They could simply be married in a civil court.  Should they choose to have their marriage blessed by God, and their church is willing to do so, so be it.  For me, the difference is between the words - marriage and union.  I believe that marriage is truly a sacrament...a civil union is a union that has taken place outside of a church and hasn't been blessed by a spiritual leader.  Go - get your civil union confirmed by the law - if you indeed want it to be a marriage - head to your church and let them bless it!
      
      No skin off my nose either way.

      replyreport
   5. 72

      Cagsilposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Marriage is an individual right, regardless of what religion is practiced.

      replyreport
   6. 60

      ib radmastersposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It violates your constitutional rights, by having a minority getting its non traditional lifestyle forced on the country because they are rich and politically powerful.
      
      They are diluting the constitution.
      Marriage is not a constitutional right, it is a state privilege that requires a license.
      
      Constitutional rights cannot be varied by the states, and they cannot be restricted by a license.
      
      Gay marriage is simply a preference that can be changed unlike skin color.

      replyreport
      1. 59

         MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Actually... if marriage is a religious rite then it IS a constitutional right... and any state passing a law forbidding it is violating my faith's constitutional rights.
         
         If a marriage is valid when performed by a Baptist Church than it should be valid performed by any church... including mine.  Or... again it violates my  constitution right to freedom of religion by making a law that grants priviledges to one religion but not another
         
         Lastly... The government (neither state nor federal) may interfere with the operation of a church.  They cannot say who my church may marry any more than it can say whom a church baptizes or who receives a bris....
         
         Assuming that all three statements are legally sound... and they are at least argumentatively legally sound... then my state government is persecuting my faith by violating my federal constitutional rights.

         replyreport
2. 80

   skyfireposted 11 years ago

   

   replyreport
   1. 61

      Josakposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      could not agree more, the blindness of people who repeat history is astounding.

      replyreport
3. 77

   stevesoposted 11 years ago

   This is not really a religious matter. Ignorant people who hate and fear anything that is not familiar always use religion to justify their bigotry.

   replyreport
4. 42

   Hypersapienposted 11 years ago

   Marriage is not a religious right.  It is a legal right that has traditionally had religious aspects.  However, the legal facets have superiority over the religious ones.  For instance, your religion may grant you the right to have multiple spouses, but legally you can only have one.
   
   Basically, the fallacy in your argument is that you seem to think that actions sanctioned by religion are granted preeminence over the law.  That is simply not the case.  Thus, you can't practice human sacrifice, honor killings, etc., just because they are allowed by your religion.  Moreover, denying you the right to do those things doesn't deprive you of any constitutional rights.  You have freedom to worship how you choose within the confines of the law.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      *Nods* and the fallacy in your argument is that say... honor killings... are killings.  No church anywhere is allowed to kill.  It's universal and fair.
      
      However churches are allowed to have weddings.  Those weddings are legally recognized.  To tell my church who they may or may not marry is placing limits on the decisions of my church... which is unconstitutional.
      
      To be universal and fair then either all weddings performed by all churches need to be legally valid or none are.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         screamingposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         I agree, should be for all or none. What happened to The People? Or was the Bible and Constitution supposed to discriminate? Who are we to judge? God will judge in the end, if gay marriage was a sin or not.

         replyreport