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.
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.
Your arguments and Tisme's are so last decade. Move with the times and do something constructive with your energy.
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.
What if the celebrant was gay and turned away a straight couple on the same grounds ?
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.
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.
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.
Your arguments and Tisme's are so last decade. Move with the times and do something constructive with your energy.
You saying black people and homosexuals are one in the same?
People's jobs and civil service should not be defined by the sexual desires of a minuscule % of the population.
Even if it impinges on one's own rights?Everyone's job requires respect for the rights of others. Respecting others rights is not persecution.
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.
"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.
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. .
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?
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.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?