Just what IS "marriage" anyway?

[alfablue]

Re: Just what IS "marriage" anyway?

It falls under the same pretense of how the huff-and-puffer ilk whine about how a private establishment refuses the right to service, and the person refused coincidentally happens to be of a specific sexual orientation. We had this argument about ten pages ago. Say that a priest is the only person in town who performs marriages, and does so under a religious pretense. The religion happens to forbid same-sex marriages. Are you going to force that minister to go against the church because of this law?

Is there a place in the US where a local government official does not perform marriages? There are plenty of non-religious marriages all over the country.

So if that priest was also the offical that does marriages, then then would not be allowed to deny a civil marriage- if legal in that state. But that would not be in the church, and would be part of the resposibility of being a public servant.

Basically- no, can't force a church to perform the marriage. But you can force a public servant to carry out their legaly responsible duty to perform a civic marriage in a civic location.

[Rover]

You guys can all be sarcastic but I really am curious why he thinks that. There seem to be a lot of people who feel this threatens their religion and I don't find it logical. I would like someone who feels that way to explain to me why.

I can understand the people who think that we should live by their particular belief system being upset. This takes away the legal constraints to people doing what they believe is wrong (according to their religion). I don't understand how it is anti-religion. It does not impede a particular religion from practicing their belief system. The rule that was overturned forced people to abide by a belief that did not encompass everyone's beliefs. There are many churches that recognize same sex marriage and they were not able to practice their beliefs. (Please don't argue that this means we can marry animals, plants or minerals. Humans are humans whatever their gender).

I had a discussion on a broader theme with joecct some time ago, and I'll say it again. People like him are normal people who've been driven nuts by right wing propoganda, which they all claim not to listen to. So, Obama putting out a relatively innocuous statement about how this doesn't affect religious marriages gets turned into some anti-religious diatribe from an anti-religious President, and how can the rest of us not see that because everybody knows Obama hates religion. Obviously this is all ludicrous, but you have to ask yourself what would make a guy like joecct even go there? Or better yet, how did these ideas get planted in his head? Now if he's doing this just to get a rise out of poeple God bless 'em. If he truly believes that God help him.

[Priceless]

Re: Just what IS "marriage" anyway?

Is there a place in the US where a local government official does not perform marriages? There are plenty of non-religious marriages all over the country.

So if that priest was also the offical that does marriages, then then would not be allowed to deny a civil marriage- if legal in that state. But that would not be in the church, and would be part of the resposibility of being a public servant.

Basically- no, can't force a church to perform the marriage. But you can force a public servant to carry out their legaly responsible duty to perform a civic marriage in a civic location.

But...but... TEH GAYS!!!!!!

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: Just what IS "marriage" anyway?

Is there a place in the US where a local government official does not perform marriages? There are plenty of non-religious marriages all over the country.

So if that priest was also the offical that does marriages, then then would not be allowed to deny a civil marriage- if legal in that state. But that would not be in the church, and would be part of the resposibility of being a public servant.

Basically- no, can't force a church to perform the marriage. But you can force a public servant to carry out their legaly responsible duty to perform a civic marriage in a civic location.

So then what's the problem with someone going to a shop in the next town to get what they want? Let's say the couple is in Newcomb NY, and the closest civil place is 40 miles away.

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Just what IS "marriage" anyway?

Is there a place in the US where a local government official does not perform marriages? There are plenty of non-religious marriages all over the country.

So if that priest was also the offical that does marriages, then then would not be allowed to deny a civil marriage- if legal in that state. But that would not be in the church, and would be part of the resposibility of being a public servant.

Basically- no, can't force a church to perform the marriage. But you can force a public servant to carry out their legaly responsible duty to perform a civic marriage in a civic location.

Can you force a person who disagrees with gay marriage to sell a wedding cake for a gay marriage?

[joecct]

Can you force a person who disagrees with gay marriage to sell a wedding cake for a gay marriage?

It seems to be the case. They've been taken to court for not selling.

[Priceless]

Re: Just what IS "marriage" anyway?

Can you force a person who disagrees with gay marriage to sell a wedding cake for a gay marriage?

Can you force a person who doesn't like black people to sell a wedding cake to a black couple (or worse yet, an interracial couple)?

[Shirtless Guy]

Re: Just what IS "marriage" anyway?

Can you force a person who doesn't like black people to sell a wedding cake to a black couple?

race is a protected class. How can anyone claim this doesn't effect heterosexuals at all and then say this?

[Bob Gray]

Re: Just what IS "marriage" anyway?

can't force a church to perform the marriage.

Give 'em time.

[unofan]

Can you force a person who disagrees with gay marriage to sell a wedding cake for a gay marriage?

Depends on the state. But where sexual orientation is protected, yes. Selling a wedding cake is not a religious function.

Put another way, if you can be sued for not selling a car to a gay man because he is gay, you can be sued for not selling him a cake for the same reason.

State and federal antidiscrimination laws are wholly separate from the constitutional provisions at play when discussing marriage and the government's recognition thereof.

[bigblue_dl]

Re: Just what IS "marriage" anyway?

I've always thought that a business has the right to choose who the do business with. You can't force a business to serve a specific customer. They have the right to refuse service. If they refuse service because of a reason that someone disagrees with, then that someone shouldn't be able to go to court, but they sure can go on Twitter, and Facebook, and the 5:00 news and tell people their story.

edit: I re-read my post, and I should be more clear, these are my opinions, and not how it actually is

[Bob Gray]

Re: Just what IS "marriage" anyway?

race is a protected class. How can anyone claim this doesn't effect heterosexuals at all and then say this?

logic has no place in this discussion, unfortunately.

[Rover]

I've always thought that a business has the right to choose who the do business with. You can't force a business to serve a specific customer. They have the right to refuse service. If they refuse service because of a reason that someone disagrees with, then that someone shouldn't be able to go to court, but they sure can go on Twitter, and Facebook, and the 5:00 news and tell people their story.

edit: I re-read my post, and I should be more clear, these are my opinions, and not how it actually is

Up to a point I'd say. Someone wants a cake to celebrate Hitler's birthday and I'm fairly sure you can decline their business. . However, you can't deny an interracial couple a cake because you don't think they should marry.

[Rover]

logic has no place in this discussion, unfortunately.

Bob I'm sympathetic to your views on this issue but you need to get off your high horse sometimes. I'm not sure why all you guys see yourselves as martyrs.

[unofan]

I've always thought that a business has the right to choose who the do business with. You can't force a business to serve a specific customer. They have the right to refuse service. If they refuse service because of a reason that someone disagrees with, then that someone shouldn't be able to go to court, but they sure can go on Twitter, and Facebook, and the 5:00 news and tell people their story.

edit: I re-read my post, and I should be more clear, these are my opinions, and not how it actually is

You have the right to refuse service for any legal reason. Doing business in a state means you agree to abide by the laws of the state. Most states say you can't deny service to people because of their race, or gender, or disability. Some include sexual orientation as well.