Same sex marriage - Yes or No?

[bellenuit]

I don't think "they" as in churches are denying anyone's rights. There are civil celebrants that will marry gay couples if the churches or 'religious' celebrants won't.

You mean like black people had seats on the back of the bus they could go to, they didn't have to mix with the white people up front.

The gay couples have the choice to go to someone who will serve them, they don't have the right to force people to marry them.

The gay couple aren't forcing the celebrants to marry them. Those who issue a celebrant licence are. If they discriminate against people then they don't get to hold a marriage celebrant license.

 

[SirRumpole]

The gay couple aren't forcing the celebrants to marry them. Those who issue a celebrant licence are. If they discriminate against people then they don't get to hold a marriage celebrant license.

OK, so what if the celebrant had a full book when the gay couple turned up, and the celebrant just said "sorry I don't have the time" ? Is (s)he going to be dragged through the courts to prove that they didn't discriminate ? What if the celebrant was gay and turned away a straight couple on the same grounds ?

The whole thing can get ridiculous very quickly if people get stroppy about a few religious people exercising their rights.

 

[satanoperca]

"The whole thing can get ridiculous very quickly if people get stroppy about a few religious people exercising their rights."

That is exactly the point, why should people of religion have the right to discriminate anymore than anyone else in society, because god gave them the right.

Your arguments and Tisme's are so last decade. Move with the times and do something constructive with your energy.

 

[SirRumpole]

Your arguments and Tisme's are so last decade. Move with the times and do something constructive with your energy.

Tell that to the militant gays who want the rest of us to bend to their will . (Not literally obviously).

 

[bellenuit]

OK, so what if the celebrant had a full book when the gay couple turned up, and the celebrant just said "sorry I don't have the time" ? Is (s)he going to be dragged through the courts to prove that they didn't discriminate ? What if the celebrant was gay and turned away a straight couple on the same grounds ?

The whole thing can get ridiculous very quickly if people get stroppy about a few religious people exercising their rights.

I think all couples are aware that they may not get the date they want, whether it be for the ceremony (church or civil) or subsequent reception. Gay couples like any other couple will try and fit in with what's available. No one is going to drag the celebrant through the courts if they are completely booked up. But if particular celebrants persistently refuse to marry gay couples, even if they are available to do it, then complaints are going to happen and they may and should lose their license.

It only gets ridiculous when people who are licensed to do a job refuse to do it. You are completely mistaken about their rights. They have a right not to marry gay people, but do not have a right to assume a position that requires non-discrimination against gays and then discriminate.

You have got it all backwards. Instead of the gay couple looking for another celebrant, the celebrant should be looking for another job if they are unwilling to do it impartially. That way no one is discriminated against.

What if the celebrant was gay and turned away a straight couple on the same grounds ?

They should also lose their license.

 

[wayneL]

I always wondered how totalitarian regimes got themselves into power via a democratic process.

Now I know. It seems plenty of people prepared to cheaply hand away their liberty for one or another ideology.

 

[Tisme]

Not quite correct. They were promised protection for religious ceremonies and events only and that is the case. There is no compulsion on them to marry gays under the rites of the Christian or other churches. However, marriage is also a civil ceremony and if religious celebrants want to maintain their ability to also act as civil celebrants, then they cannot refuse to do civil marriages based on their religious beliefs. They can simply forego (resign or whatever is the process) their right to perform civil marriages and continue to perform religious marriages according to the dictates of their church. That is not persecution.

Wanna make a bet. WE are talkng pre vote here.

I'm wondering how many celebrants who were promised a grandfather clause would protect them, but hasn't?

People's jobs and civil service should not be defined by the sexual desires of a minuscule % of the population. They should not be "persecuted" at all .... SSM was touted as not hurting anyone, a kind of benign activity that not only righted wrongs of USA black slavery, women's suffrage, and any other absurdity, but recognised sympathy mascots could marry.

 

[Tisme]

I just tell people i don't want to work for to go $@€# themselves.

Call me a temperamentist if you like, but I ride to work for a55holes.

And I presume it's because you feel it would be detrimental to your business model, profitability, employee satisfaction, differential advantage, etc ... you know, embracing capitalism in a capitalistic/mercantile country.

I assume you, like me don't put your company up as a poster boy for curing or adding to, the social malaise of a sick community...that is govt's role. You don't run a company that answers to the mob hysteria?

 

[Tisme]

You mean like black people had seats on the back of the bus they could go to, they didn't have to mix with the white people up front.

You saying black people and homosexuals are one in the same?

 

[Tisme]

Your arguments and Tisme's are so last decade. Move with the times and do something constructive with your energy.

You mean so last >65000 years? So many generations who got it totally wrong, a wonder we managed to get this far and into the singularity in the space of 10 years.

Kinda odd that social media seems to have a coalesced with with mass hypnosis.

 

[bellenuit]

You saying black people and homosexuals are one in the same?

You can't even understand an analogy now?

 

[bellenuit]

People's jobs and civil service should not be defined by the sexual desires of a minuscule % of the population.

Everyone's job requires respect for the rights of others. Respecting others rights is not persecution.

 

[wayneL]

Everyone's job requires respect for the rights of others. Respecting others rights is not persecution.

Even if it impinges on one's own rights?

 

[satanoperca]

You mean so last >65000 years? So many generations who got it totally wrong, a wonder we managed to get this far and into the singularity in the space of 10 years.

Kinda odd that social media seems to have a coalesced with with mass hypnosis.

Please provide me one religion that is over 20,000 year old that is still in existing today.

Your words are big, but I have found that those that need to use big words to provide prove their opinion really have no substance to discuss in the first place.

Last I checked, people today still think the world is flat.

When religion can provide scientific evidence there is a god, then lets discuss the implications on regilion governing how people work and think in society.

Just take jesus for instance, if I was his boss, I would have fired him, turning up to work 2000 years late is just not acceptable.

 

[grah33]

"The whole thing can get ridiculous very quickly if people get stroppy about a few religious people exercising their rights."

That is exactly the point, why should people of religion have the right to discriminate anymore than anyone else in society, because god gave them the right.

Your arguments and Tisme's are so last decade. Move with the times and do something constructive with your energy.

It's been a while since I was here...

Freedom of conscience relates to not forcing people to do things that make them feel GUILTY, or feel like they are doing something morally wrong, where they have to choose between right and wrong. E.g. A religious doctor doesn't have to perform an abortion (more extreme case) etc. Surely it makes sense to leave these people alone rather than discarding their employment? Do you have empathy for other people, or do you just care about your own needs?

Why does it matter so much to you, when you can still achieve your goals of marriage etc? Couldn't such minority groups just happily go about their lifestyles leaving religious people in their own miserable way of thinking (according to you)? But no, that's not enough , you have to go further.

No point in using the word discriminate if not everyone agrees it is in fact discrimination.

 

[satanoperca]

Couldn't such minority groups just happily go about their lifestyles leaving religious people in their own miserable way of thinking (according to you)? But no, that's not enough , you have to go further.

No point in using the word discriminate if not everyone agrees it is in fact discrimination.

I love how people make shyte up, never said anyone who was religious was miserable. It is there choice, I will will always defend that, but not if it means they have the right to discriminate because of their faith.

But go ahead, defend the rights of people who believe in a god, it has been going on for centuries and my beliefs/opinion will not change that.

 

[Value Collector]

I love how people make shyte up, never said anyone who was religious was miserable. .

The religious crowd thrive on the feeling that they are persecuted, they will turn any situation around and act like they are the ones being discriminated against.

 

[cynic]

Everyone's job requires respect for the rights of others. Respecting others rights is not persecution.

And what of the rights of those with conscientious objections?

 

[Value Collector]

And what of the rights of those with conscientious objections?

They have the same rights as everyone else, no one is refusing to serve them anywhere.

 

[SirRumpole]

The religious crowd thrive on the feeling that they are persecuted, they will turn any situation around and act like they are the ones being discriminated against.

Oh that's a good one. Substitute "gay" for religious and it's exactly the same.