15

Same Sex Marriages and Civil Unions - Religious tolerance

18 Jan 2017 21:24 | Author: whitetiger394 | Category: Essay domestic animal dog

Features Australia. Gay marriage and the death of freedom Rather than striking a blow for individual liberties, the dogma of gay marriage is stifling them

Comments
  1. author
    User1490915059 18 Jan 2017 04:57

    День дурака в Стране дураков Я Путина сегодня поздравляю
    со днём великим на века.
    Он праздник лично возглавляет
    в день, как известно, дурака.

    Он заседает с умным видом,
    «острот» его в рунет полно.
    Но в голове его, как видно,
    мозгов уж нет, одно говно.

    В говне все мы сегодня ходим,
    глупее нас страны уж нет.
    В день дурака себя позорим,
    даруя детям нашим сотни бед. 2017Apr01  

  2. author
    User1488131745 17 Jan 2017 23:25

    The Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life turns to professors Robert W. Tuttle and Ira “Chip” Lupu of The George Washington University Law School to discuss how some states are trying to reconcile these and other potential conflicts between the legalization of gay marriage and the free exercise of religion.

    Robert W. Tuttle, David R. and Sherry Kirschner Berz Research Professor of Law and Religion, The George Washington University Law School

    Has there ever been a sweeter-sounding, more goosebump-inducing phrase than ‘Freedom to marry’? Everyone likes freedom (even illiberal politicians pay lip service to liberty), and who doesn’t love a good wedding? Marry these two things together (pun intended) and you end up with an endorphin-releasing buzzphrase that will make anyone grin wildly.

    Consider France. Hundreds of thousands of French people — or ‘bigots’, as the gay-marriage lobby brands anyone who disagrees with it — marched against the legalisation of gay marriage in 2013. And they were beaten and tear-gassed by riot cops. Parisians in t-shirts celebrating traditional marriage were arrested for holding ‘unauthorised protests’. In the words of Parisian writer John Laughland, critics of gay marriage were turned into ‘ideological enemies’ of the French state. It’s a funny expansion of freedom that so violently pummels the right to protest.

    The Supreme Court ruling earlier this year legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide has continued to raise questions about how the decision will affect religious groups – especially those that remain opposed to allowing gay and lesbian couples to wed. The court’s ruling makes clear that clergy and religious organizations are not obliged to perform same-sex marriages, but some groups have expressed concerns about their tax-exempt status.

    Many of the largest U.S. religious institutions have remained firmly against allowing same-sex marriage, including the  Roman Catholic Church , the  Orthodox Jewish movement and the  Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints , as well as the  Southern Baptist Convention  and other evangelical Protestant denominations. The nation’s largest historically black church, the National Baptist Convention , and its biggest Pentecostal denomination, the Assemblies of God , also prohibit their clergy from marrying same-sex couples.

    Even before the Supreme Court’s decision granting same-sex couples a constitutional right to wed, legal scholars and others have been trying to determine how such a ruling might affect religious institutions. It has been a question on the minds of the justices, too.

    Indeed, during the April 28 oral arguments in the case, Obergefell v. Hodges , most of the justices asked about or commented on this issue. Justice Samuel Alito drew a possible parallel with Bob Jones University, a fundamentalist Christian institution that lost its nonprofit, tax-exempt status in 1983 as a result of its policy banning interracial marriage and dating.

    Jonathan AC Brown is the Alwaleed bin Talal chair of Islamic Civilization in the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown U., and associate director of the Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim Christian Understanding. His books include “Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet’s Legacy” (Oneworld, 2014).

    See More: Read Variety’s marriage equality issue, featuring Q&As, columns, features and analysis on Hollywood’s role in gay rights.

    Denying some people the option to marry is discriminatory and creates a second class of citizens. On July 25, 2014 Miami-Dade County Circuit Court… Read More

    Same-sex couples should have access to the same benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples. There are 1,138 benefits, rights and protections. Read More

  3. author
    smallelephant406 18 Jan 2017 01:29

    The Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life turns to professors Robert W. Tuttle and Ira “Chip” Lupu of The George Washington University Law School to discuss how some states are trying to reconcile these and other potential conflicts between the legalization of gay marriage and the free exercise of religion.

    Robert W. Tuttle, David R. and Sherry Kirschner Berz Research Professor of Law and Religion, The George Washington University Law School

    Has there ever been a sweeter-sounding, more goosebump-inducing phrase than ‘Freedom to marry’? Everyone likes freedom (even illiberal politicians pay lip service to liberty), and who doesn’t love a good wedding? Marry these two things together (pun intended) and you end up with an endorphin-releasing buzzphrase that will make anyone grin wildly.

    Consider France. Hundreds of thousands of French people — or ‘bigots’, as the gay-marriage lobby brands anyone who disagrees with it — marched against the legalisation of gay marriage in 2013. And they were beaten and tear-gassed by riot cops. Parisians in t-shirts celebrating traditional marriage were arrested for holding ‘unauthorised protests’. In the words of Parisian writer John Laughland, critics of gay marriage were turned into ‘ideological enemies’ of the French state. It’s a funny expansion of freedom that so violently pummels the right to protest.

    The Supreme Court ruling earlier this year legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide has continued to raise questions about how the decision will affect religious groups – especially those that remain opposed to allowing gay and lesbian couples to wed. The court’s ruling makes clear that clergy and religious organizations are not obliged to perform same-sex marriages, but some groups have expressed concerns about their tax-exempt status.

    Many of the largest U.S. religious institutions have remained firmly against allowing same-sex marriage, including the  Roman Catholic Church , the  Orthodox Jewish movement and the  Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints , as well as the  Southern Baptist Convention  and other evangelical Protestant denominations. The nation’s largest historically black church, the National Baptist Convention , and its biggest Pentecostal denomination, the Assemblies of God , also prohibit their clergy from marrying same-sex couples.

    Even before the Supreme Court’s decision granting same-sex couples a constitutional right to wed, legal scholars and others have been trying to determine how such a ruling might affect religious institutions. It has been a question on the minds of the justices, too.

    Indeed, during the April 28 oral arguments in the case, Obergefell v. Hodges , most of the justices asked about or commented on this issue. Justice Samuel Alito drew a possible parallel with Bob Jones University, a fundamentalist Christian institution that lost its nonprofit, tax-exempt status in 1983 as a result of its policy banning interracial marriage and dating.

  4. author
    か 🌙Яに 18 Jan 2017 08:57

    The Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life turns to professors Robert W. Tuttle and Ira “Chip” Lupu of The George Washington University Law School to discuss how some states are trying to reconcile these and other potential conflicts between the legalization of gay marriage and the free exercise of religion.

    Robert W. Tuttle, David R. and Sherry Kirschner Berz Research Professor of Law and Religion, The George Washington University Law School

    Has there ever been a sweeter-sounding, more goosebump-inducing phrase than ‘Freedom to marry’? Everyone likes freedom (even illiberal politicians pay lip service to liberty), and who doesn’t love a good wedding? Marry these two things together (pun intended) and you end up with an endorphin-releasing buzzphrase that will make anyone grin wildly.

    Consider France. Hundreds of thousands of French people — or ‘bigots’, as the gay-marriage lobby brands anyone who disagrees with it — marched against the legalisation of gay marriage in 2013. And they were beaten and tear-gassed by riot cops. Parisians in t-shirts celebrating traditional marriage were arrested for holding ‘unauthorised protests’. In the words of Parisian writer John Laughland, critics of gay marriage were turned into ‘ideological enemies’ of the French state. It’s a funny expansion of freedom that so violently pummels the right to protest.

    The Supreme Court ruling earlier this year legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide has continued to raise questions about how the decision will affect religious groups – especially those that remain opposed to allowing gay and lesbian couples to wed. The court’s ruling makes clear that clergy and religious organizations are not obliged to perform same-sex marriages, but some groups have expressed concerns about their tax-exempt status.

    Many of the largest U.S. religious institutions have remained firmly against allowing same-sex marriage, including the  Roman Catholic Church , the  Orthodox Jewish movement and the  Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints , as well as the  Southern Baptist Convention  and other evangelical Protestant denominations. The nation’s largest historically black church, the National Baptist Convention , and its biggest Pentecostal denomination, the Assemblies of God , also prohibit their clergy from marrying same-sex couples.

    Even before the Supreme Court’s decision granting same-sex couples a constitutional right to wed, legal scholars and others have been trying to determine how such a ruling might affect religious institutions. It has been a question on the minds of the justices, too.

    Indeed, during the April 28 oral arguments in the case, Obergefell v. Hodges , most of the justices asked about or commented on this issue. Justice Samuel Alito drew a possible parallel with Bob Jones University, a fundamentalist Christian institution that lost its nonprofit, tax-exempt status in 1983 as a result of its policy banning interracial marriage and dating.

    Jonathan AC Brown is the Alwaleed bin Talal chair of Islamic Civilization in the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown U., and associate director of the Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim Christian Understanding. His books include “Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet’s Legacy” (Oneworld, 2014).

    See More: Read Variety’s marriage equality issue, featuring Q&As, columns, features and analysis on Hollywood’s role in gay rights.

  5. author
    User1491511329 18 Jan 2017 04:38

    The Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life turns to professors Robert W. Tuttle and Ira “Chip” Lupu of The George Washington University Law School to discuss how some states are trying to reconcile these and other potential conflicts between the legalization of gay marriage and the free exercise of religion.

    Robert W. Tuttle, David R. and Sherry Kirschner Berz Research Professor of Law and Religion, The George Washington University Law School

    Has there ever been a sweeter-sounding, more goosebump-inducing phrase than ‘Freedom to marry’? Everyone likes freedom (even illiberal politicians pay lip service to liberty), and who doesn’t love a good wedding? Marry these two things together (pun intended) and you end up with an endorphin-releasing buzzphrase that will make anyone grin wildly.

    Consider France. Hundreds of thousands of French people — or ‘bigots’, as the gay-marriage lobby brands anyone who disagrees with it — marched against the legalisation of gay marriage in 2013. And they were beaten and tear-gassed by riot cops. Parisians in t-shirts celebrating traditional marriage were arrested for holding ‘unauthorised protests’. In the words of Parisian writer John Laughland, critics of gay marriage were turned into ‘ideological enemies’ of the French state. It’s a funny expansion of freedom that so violently pummels the right to protest.

  6. author
    User1487734576 18 Jan 2017 09:06

    The Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life turns to professors Robert W. Tuttle and Ira “Chip” Lupu of The George Washington University Law School to discuss how some states are trying to reconcile these and other potential conflicts between the legalization of gay marriage and the free exercise of religion.

    Robert W. Tuttle, David R. and Sherry Kirschner Berz Research Professor of Law and Religion, The George Washington University Law School

    Has there ever been a sweeter-sounding, more goosebump-inducing phrase than ‘Freedom to marry’? Everyone likes freedom (even illiberal politicians pay lip service to liberty), and who doesn’t love a good wedding? Marry these two things together (pun intended) and you end up with an endorphin-releasing buzzphrase that will make anyone grin wildly.

    Consider France. Hundreds of thousands of French people — or ‘bigots’, as the gay-marriage lobby brands anyone who disagrees with it — marched against the legalisation of gay marriage in 2013. And they were beaten and tear-gassed by riot cops. Parisians in t-shirts celebrating traditional marriage were arrested for holding ‘unauthorised protests’. In the words of Parisian writer John Laughland, critics of gay marriage were turned into ‘ideological enemies’ of the French state. It’s a funny expansion of freedom that so violently pummels the right to protest.

    The Supreme Court ruling earlier this year legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide has continued to raise questions about how the decision will affect religious groups – especially those that remain opposed to allowing gay and lesbian couples to wed. The court’s ruling makes clear that clergy and religious organizations are not obliged to perform same-sex marriages, but some groups have expressed concerns about their tax-exempt status.

    Many of the largest U.S. religious institutions have remained firmly against allowing same-sex marriage, including the  Roman Catholic Church , the  Orthodox Jewish movement and the  Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints , as well as the  Southern Baptist Convention  and other evangelical Protestant denominations. The nation’s largest historically black church, the National Baptist Convention , and its biggest Pentecostal denomination, the Assemblies of God , also prohibit their clergy from marrying same-sex couples.

  7. author
    heavybear749 18 Jan 2017 05:10

    I don t oppose it just because the Bible says homosexual acts are wrong, I oppose from a variety of perspectives. I simply say I don t support it. I don t go crazy and murder gays, I don t throw blood on people, I don t protest in the streets, I don t attack random groups of people. Let me ask you something; why are you so angry at Christians? You obviously encourage people to accept others (gays specifically). So why get mad at us? Hmm? You cannot pick and choose certain people to attack. Also, the Old testament does not receive much attention. So move on with your life, Christians can certainly move on with theirs.

  8. author
    Александра Герасимов 18 Jan 2017 07:21

    The Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life turns to professors Robert W. Tuttle and Ira “Chip” Lupu of The George Washington University Law School to discuss how some states are trying to reconcile these and other potential conflicts between the legalization of gay marriage and the free exercise of religion.

    Robert W. Tuttle, David R. and Sherry Kirschner Berz Research Professor of Law and Religion, The George Washington University Law School

    Has there ever been a sweeter-sounding, more goosebump-inducing phrase than ‘Freedom to marry’? Everyone likes freedom (even illiberal politicians pay lip service to liberty), and who doesn’t love a good wedding? Marry these two things together (pun intended) and you end up with an endorphin-releasing buzzphrase that will make anyone grin wildly.

    Consider France. Hundreds of thousands of French people — or ‘bigots’, as the gay-marriage lobby brands anyone who disagrees with it — marched against the legalisation of gay marriage in 2013. And they were beaten and tear-gassed by riot cops. Parisians in t-shirts celebrating traditional marriage were arrested for holding ‘unauthorised protests’. In the words of Parisian writer John Laughland, critics of gay marriage were turned into ‘ideological enemies’ of the French state. It’s a funny expansion of freedom that so violently pummels the right to protest.

    The Supreme Court ruling earlier this year legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide has continued to raise questions about how the decision will affect religious groups – especially those that remain opposed to allowing gay and lesbian couples to wed. The court’s ruling makes clear that clergy and religious organizations are not obliged to perform same-sex marriages, but some groups have expressed concerns about their tax-exempt status.

    Many of the largest U.S. religious institutions have remained firmly against allowing same-sex marriage, including the  Roman Catholic Church , the  Orthodox Jewish movement and the  Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints , as well as the  Southern Baptist Convention  and other evangelical Protestant denominations. The nation’s largest historically black church, the National Baptist Convention , and its biggest Pentecostal denomination, the Assemblies of God , also prohibit their clergy from marrying same-sex couples.

    Even before the Supreme Court’s decision granting same-sex couples a constitutional right to wed, legal scholars and others have been trying to determine how such a ruling might affect religious institutions. It has been a question on the minds of the justices, too.

    Indeed, during the April 28 oral arguments in the case, Obergefell v. Hodges , most of the justices asked about or commented on this issue. Justice Samuel Alito drew a possible parallel with Bob Jones University, a fundamentalist Christian institution that lost its nonprofit, tax-exempt status in 1983 as a result of its policy banning interracial marriage and dating.

    Jonathan AC Brown is the Alwaleed bin Talal chair of Islamic Civilization in the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown U., and associate director of the Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim Christian Understanding. His books include “Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet’s Legacy” (Oneworld, 2014).

    See More: Read Variety’s marriage equality issue, featuring Q&As, columns, features and analysis on Hollywood’s role in gay rights.

    Denying some people the option to marry is discriminatory and creates a second class of citizens. On July 25, 2014 Miami-Dade County Circuit Court… Read More

    Same-sex couples should have access to the same benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples. There are 1,138 benefits, rights and protections. Read More

    It is not practical to leave it to the public. If it were, then some couples who are brothers and sisters, fathers and daughters, etc. would marry. Such couples would be consanguineous. -- they are closely related because they share a close common ancestor. Marriage would result in genetic problems among their children. For example, when first cousins marry, their children have twice the rate of genetic defects than do second cousins.

    Even though the definition of marriage is left up to the states, etc., the U.S. Constitution places limits on whom that definition can exclude. The Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the 14th Amendment to the federal Constitutio n requires federal, state, territorial, district, and local governments to treat people equally. Thus, they must treat couples equally as well, unless there is a very good reason why some couples should be treated differently. Among the 50 states, couples are -- or have been -- prohibited from marrying on various grounds:

  9. author
    greenduck930 17 Jan 2017 23:09

    Order paper here freedom of religion and gay marriage

    Features Australia. Gay marriage and the death of freedom Rather than striking a blow for individual liberties, the dogma of gay marriage is stifling them

  10. author
     ❤°°❁ A ๔ ค г ค ❁ °° ❤ 18 Jan 2017 01:59

    The Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life turns to professors Robert W. Tuttle and Ira “Chip” Lupu of The George Washington University Law School to discuss how some states are trying to reconcile these and other potential conflicts between the legalization of gay marriage and the free exercise of religion.

    Robert W. Tuttle, David R. and Sherry Kirschner Berz Research Professor of Law and Religion, The George Washington University Law School

    Has there ever been a sweeter-sounding, more goosebump-inducing phrase than ‘Freedom to marry’? Everyone likes freedom (even illiberal politicians pay lip service to liberty), and who doesn’t love a good wedding? Marry these two things together (pun intended) and you end up with an endorphin-releasing buzzphrase that will make anyone grin wildly.

    Consider France. Hundreds of thousands of French people — or ‘bigots’, as the gay-marriage lobby brands anyone who disagrees with it — marched against the legalisation of gay marriage in 2013. And they were beaten and tear-gassed by riot cops. Parisians in t-shirts celebrating traditional marriage were arrested for holding ‘unauthorised protests’. In the words of Parisian writer John Laughland, critics of gay marriage were turned into ‘ideological enemies’ of the French state. It’s a funny expansion of freedom that so violently pummels the right to protest.

    The Supreme Court ruling earlier this year legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide has continued to raise questions about how the decision will affect religious groups – especially those that remain opposed to allowing gay and lesbian couples to wed. The court’s ruling makes clear that clergy and religious organizations are not obliged to perform same-sex marriages, but some groups have expressed concerns about their tax-exempt status.

    Many of the largest U.S. religious institutions have remained firmly against allowing same-sex marriage, including the  Roman Catholic Church , the  Orthodox Jewish movement and the  Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints , as well as the  Southern Baptist Convention  and other evangelical Protestant denominations. The nation’s largest historically black church, the National Baptist Convention , and its biggest Pentecostal denomination, the Assemblies of God , also prohibit their clergy from marrying same-sex couples.

    Even before the Supreme Court’s decision granting same-sex couples a constitutional right to wed, legal scholars and others have been trying to determine how such a ruling might affect religious institutions. It has been a question on the minds of the justices, too.

    Indeed, during the April 28 oral arguments in the case, Obergefell v. Hodges , most of the justices asked about or commented on this issue. Justice Samuel Alito drew a possible parallel with Bob Jones University, a fundamentalist Christian institution that lost its nonprofit, tax-exempt status in 1983 as a result of its policy banning interracial marriage and dating.

    Jonathan AC Brown is the Alwaleed bin Talal chair of Islamic Civilization in the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown U., and associate director of the Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim Christian Understanding. His books include “Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet’s Legacy” (Oneworld, 2014).

    See More: Read Variety’s marriage equality issue, featuring Q&As, columns, features and analysis on Hollywood’s role in gay rights.

    Denying some people the option to marry is discriminatory and creates a second class of citizens. On July 25, 2014 Miami-Dade County Circuit Court… Read More

    Same-sex couples should have access to the same benefits enjoyed by heterosexual married couples. There are 1,138 benefits, rights and protections. Read More

    It is not practical to leave it to the public. If it were, then some couples who are brothers and sisters, fathers and daughters, etc. would marry. Such couples would be consanguineous. -- they are closely related because they share a close common ancestor. Marriage would result in genetic problems among their children. For example, when first cousins marry, their children have twice the rate of genetic defects than do second cousins.

    Even though the definition of marriage is left up to the states, etc., the U.S. Constitution places limits on whom that definition can exclude. The Due Process and Equal Protection clauses of the 14th Amendment to the federal Constitutio n requires federal, state, territorial, district, and local governments to treat people equally. Thus, they must treat couples equally as well, unless there is a very good reason why some couples should be treated differently. Among the 50 states, couples are -- or have been -- prohibited from marrying on various grounds:

    Sign up today for our newsletter: Christianity Today Direct. Receive daily headlines from Christianity Today, the leading evangelical news and contemporary issues magazine in print and online.

  11. author
    silvergoose864 18 Jan 2017 05:27

    .Gay Marriage Religion, Scotus Doma, Gay Rights, Gay Marriage Religious Freedom, Doma. LGBT Rights, Religion, Religion and Sexuality, Gay Marriage.

  12. author
    smallfrog658 18 Jan 2017 08:21

    Catholic

  13. author
    User1489538800 18 Jan 2017 03:31

    The Pew Research Center’s Forum on Religion & Public Life turns to professors Robert W. Tuttle and Ira “Chip” Lupu of The George Washington University Law School to discuss how some states are trying to reconcile these and other potential conflicts between the legalization of gay marriage and the free exercise of religion.

    Robert W. Tuttle, David R. and Sherry Kirschner Berz Research Professor of Law and Religion, The George Washington University Law School

  14. author
    User1491003970 17 Jan 2017 21:55

    I only found one reference in the bible about homosexuality but bible readers and believers like to pick and choose what they take figuratively and what they take literally. That one they take stone cold literally the ones about stoning your neighbors who work on Sundays and children who don’t behave they take figuratively. I think that gay marriage is a legal thing and has nothing to do with the church. I look at it this way. Lets say you’ve been with someone for 20 years and they were in a car accident and where in a hospital bed in a comma. If you married you can be with them if you’re not it is up to the family or next of kin if your allowed in the room. So if you’re gay and their family doesn’t like you may never get the chance to say good bye to that person. That’s the kind of rights we want. We don’t care if we can say our vows in your church we want legal recognition as a couple. And the story above happened to my friend his partner died after a wreck they were in and his partner’s sister was a homophobe who hated him and wouldn’t let him in the room to say good bye.