Gay Marriage Ceremonies/Priests' Property Rights

[theestevearnold]

A noble cause like getting governments to recognize the legitimacy of gays marrying seems to have an immoral element that should be removed. (It's the same type of thing that AR spoke of regarding the Civil Rights Act, & unfortunately it set a bad precident):

Criminalizing discrimination in the private sector.

There are gay marriage advocates who want the government to force priests (rabbi's, etc.) to perform ceremonies against their will.

Are there any Congressmen who are

in favor of gay marriages but are also insisting a priest's right to property should be protected?

[Hairnet]

  This is what happens when political discourse is Egalitarianism vs Protestantism. 

 

  However, I do not think that any priest's rights have been infringed upon. While progressives will regulate racial issues for sure I do not think they will go very far with religion.  

 

  Even if some gay rights advocates are that irrational, the establishment would never allow for it. 

[softwareNerd]

I doubt priests will ever be forced to perform gay marriages (yes, it would be wrong to force them to do so). It is more likely that some churches will start to perform such marriages. The Church of England will be there soon enough. I'm not sure which church will go that route in the U.S. Perhaps the Episcopal or some such more liberal denomination?

[Devil's Advocate]

The effective rebuttal to those "Christians" who object to gay marriage is to invite them to cite any comments Jesus made on the subject...

 

The issue isn't so much what priests may be forced to do, as to what they cannot legally impede while enjoying a tax free status.  It's always important to remember that religious freedom is predicated on the freedom from religious coercion, which is what validates a separation of church and state in the first place.  There are several churches in America that already acknowledge gays and the union of gays, e.g., Episcopals, Lutherans, and Unitarians.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_views_on_same-sex_marriage

Edited January 24, 2014 by Devil's Advocate

[JASKN]

The effective rebuttal to those "Christians" who object to gay marriage is to invite them to cite any comments Jesus made on the subject...

This just brings on a change of subject in order to evade clarity. I think it's fair to say that no Christian understands the true meaning of his religion on any level, on any topic. At least, I haven't met one.

[Devil's Advocate]

This just brings on a change of subject in order to evade clarity. I think it's fair to say that no Christian understands the true meaning of his religion on any level, on any topic. At least, I haven't met one.

 

It's certainly fair to acknowledge religious contradictions, which is about as far as I care to stray from the topic of this thread.

[Leonid]

A noble cause like getting governments to recognize the legitimacy of gays marrying seems to have an immoral element that should be removed. (It's the same type of thing that AR spoke of regarding the Civil Rights Act, & unfortunately it set a bad precident):

Criminalizing discrimination in the private sector.

There are gay marriage advocates who want the government to force priests (rabbi's, etc.) to perform ceremonies against their will.

Are there any Congressmen who are

in favor of gay marriages but are also insisting a priest's right to property should be protected?

I thought that religion is separated from the state. Am I wrong?

[Devil's Advocate]

I thought that religion is separated from the state. Am I wrong?

 

Not according to the 1st Amendment...

 

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

 

However, there remains an ever-present effort to insert religious views legislatively.  Recent political acknowledgements like, In God We Trust, and One Nation Under God, are used to build upon questionable government endorsements of religious sentiments.

[theestevearnold]

I thought that religion is separated from the state. Am I wrong?

In theory, you're correct.

Example of the reality: Obamacare forced Catholic institutions to violate their moral code by purchasing employee health insurance plans that cover birth control.

Equality under the law means government may not descriminate. But Man's right to property includes the right to descriminate in regards to the disposal of his property (who he wants to trade with).

As evil as descrimination and religion are, if a gay couple wants a wedding in a particular church, and the priest of that church refuses to allow it, the government should not force him.

Besides legislation, the US government threatens to revoke churches' and colleges' tax-exempt status if they don't comply with the whims of bureaucrats. As in the last presidential election, where government officials forced pastors to refrain from endorsing a presidential candidate during their sermons.