# Gay marriage advocacy goes too far **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 4, 2013, 1:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316 "2013-08-04T13:26:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/41 "2013-08-04T18:50:10Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > And shops shouldn’t be compelled to sell stuff to black people, as long as there’s other shops around. Speaking only from the US’s perspective, this simply isn’t a good analogy. There is the “minor” matter of the 1st amendment guaranteeing the free exercise of religion. You may believe this, personally, but you’ll need to pass a constitutional amendment in the US to make it valid. ---
**Author:** ![SolGrundy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bbce88/32.png) [@SolGrundy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SolGrundy)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/42 "2013-08-04T21:15:08Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > And shops shouldn’t be compelled to sell stuff to black people, as long as there’s other shops around. No, the more accurate analogy is if I went into (US women’s clothing retailer) Lane Bryant and sued them for not selling me a men’s suit. Or for that matter, sued the Church of England for not performing a bris. The legal issue is getting the marriage certified by the state. When/if I ever get married, I’m going to find a church that performs same-sex ceremonies; going to a southern Baptist church and insisting they perform the ceremony or I’ll sue is nothing more than petulant. tomndebb is right: the way to encourage the church to be more inclusive is through persuasion, not litigation. ---
**Author:** ![jlzania](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/67e7ee/32.png) [@jlzania](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jlzania)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/43 "2013-08-04T21:36:45Z")
So what? One couple does not a trend make and to imply that is does is a logical fallacy. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/44 "2013-08-04T22:14:47Z")
Does the UK have the equivalent of our 5th/14th amendment to its unwritten constitution where state actors cannot deprive certain rights based on race, religion, etc.? And if so, does sexual orientation rise to our equivalent of “strict scrutiny”? ---
**Author:** ![11811](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/1/9d8465/32.png) [@11811](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/11811)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/45 "2013-08-04T22:45:40Z")
> [@aNewLeaf](#): > > I lol’d I lolly’ed. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/46 "2013-08-04T22:53:39Z")
> [@IvoryTowerDenizen](#): > > Is the CoE an official state religion? Yes, and as I understand it, marriage in the Church of England is a **legal right** for heterosexual couples when neither person has a living former spouse. The church does not have the power to refuse to marry a Muslim woman to a Buddhist man, for example. ---
**Author:** ![11811](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/1/9d8465/32.png) [@11811](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/11811)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/47 "2013-08-04T23:10:20Z")
[QUOTE=tomndebb;] There is no question that someone in the U.S., sooner or later, will bring a suit in a state that recognizes SSM, demanding that the state compel various religious groups to perform such ceremonies. In that respect, those on the Far Right are probably correct that such demands will be made. [/QUOTE] Before the conflict over churches providing reproductive health care, it seems that most of the impetus in the US has been conservative Christians attemting to accrue more privilege to their churches rather than individuals attempting to get government to exert more power over churches. I guess maybe someone will sue for nonexistent rights, but that confirms the general stupidity rather than anything specifically about gay rights. And I agree that any such lawsuit is doomed to failure. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2013, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/48 "2013-08-04T23:34:54Z")
> [@Lord\_Feldon](#): > > The church does not have the power to refuse to marry a Muslim woman to a Buddhist man, for example. How does that work, exactly? Can the Muslim/Buddhist couple walk into the vestry and ask the rector or vicar to indulge them with a liturgical service using the Book of Common Prayer, etc.? Or does the clergyman simply use his vested powers to conduct the same service as they would encounter had they gone to the local Registrar? ---
**Author:** ![njtt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ecd19e/32.png) [@njtt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/njtt)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2013, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/49 "2013-08-05T00:07:43Z")
> [@levdrakon](#): > > Two things stand out to me: > > One, unlike the US, the CoE is a state religion. It is not (these days) a state religion in anything like the sense you seem to think it is. It is a religious denomination with some fairly loose ties to some, mostly merely ceremonial, aspects of the state’s institutions. It is not to any significant degree controlled (or paid for) by the government, it is not a service provided by the government, and it is of virtually no relevance to the lives of those British citizens, religious or otherwise, who do not freely choose to be active members of it. > [@levdrakon](#): > > Two, in the US, churches can opt out of gay marriage if they want. In the UK, churches have to opt _in_ to gay marriage. That strikes me as unfair. I really have no idea what distinction you think you are making here. In either country, particular religious organizations that perform marriages can chose to perform same sex marriages or not, as they prefer. > [@levdrakon](#): > > In the UK, marriage is for everybody, and a state church is obliged to marry everybody eligible who wants to. What makes you think that? It is simply not true. A secular registrar probably has that obligation, but the Church of England most certainly does not. For instance, not so long ago (and possibly still, for all I know) the C of E would no perform marriages for divorced people, although they certainly had a legal right to marry, and could do so in certain other churches, and in secular registry offices. > [@levdrakon](#): > > Or, they can stop being a state religion. No, the C of E as an institution does not really have that freedom. The institution of the C of E is tied up with the institution of the monarchy, and neither is free to cast of the other. Of course, any individual (apart from the sovereign) is perfectly free to stop being members of the “state religion” if they want to, and many do. (And many were ever members in the first place.) The sovereign could leave the Church too, I suppose, but tehy would have to abdicate. > [@levdrakon](#): > > Also, I think any citizen of a state with an official religion, is free to sue that religion to change, regardless if they even belong to that religion. Well yes, people are free to pursue frivolous and meritless lawsuits, aren’t they, until the court throws them out. ---
**Author:** ![njtt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ecd19e/32.png) [@njtt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/njtt)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2013, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/50 "2013-08-05T00:17:53Z")
> [@Lord\_Feldon](#): > > Yes, and as I understand it, marriage in the Church of England is a **legal right** for heterosexual couples when neither person has a living former spouse. The church does not have the power to refuse to marry a Muslim woman to a Buddhist man, for example. Do you have any cite for this? I very much doubt that it is true, and even if it is technically the law, in practice I am sure many Anglican clergy would kick up a hell of a stink if asked to provide a church wedding for people who were openly representing themselves as non-Christians, or even just as non-Anglicans. I bet the clergyman would get a lot of support, too. Heck, I’d be on their side, and I’m an atheist. All the fuss might even lead to this law (if it really exists) getting changed. ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2013, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/51 "2013-08-05T00:19:34Z")
> [@blindboyard](#): > > [http://www.essexchronicle.co.uk/Gay-dads-set-sue-church-sex-marriage-opt/story-19597954-detail/story.html](http://www.essexchronicle.co.uk/Gay-dads-set-sue-church-sex-marriage-opt/story-19597954-detail/story.html) > > “Gay dads set to sue over church same-sex marriage opt-out” > > You may remember mad right wingers being made fun of for suggesting legalising gay marriage might lead to marriages to animals and polygamy and churches being forced to go gay. These idiots seem to have taken that as a suggestion. > > “The slave begins by demanding justice and ends by wanting to wear a crown.” > > - Camus It is just so god damn scary when a group you and your like have successfully marginalized finally achieve equal rights with you. For me it’s just delicious. Please, continue the tantrums. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2013, 12:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/52 "2013-08-05T00:32:09Z")
> [@njtt](#): > > Do you have any cite for this? > **[Your Church Wedding | The Church of England](https://www.churchofengland.org/life-events/your-church-wedding)** > > Welcome! Discover all you need to know about Church of England weddings and blessings. Marrying in church is personal, meaningful, spiritual and beautiful, just as you want it to be. > [@](#): > > Congratulations! You’re welcome to marry in church whatever your beliefs, whether or not you are christened and whether or not you regularly go to church. > **[Search results | The Church of England](https://www.churchofengland.org/search-results?keys=our%20views%20marriage%20family%20sexuality%20issues%20marriage%20more%20choice%20of%20church%20wedding%20marriage%20measure%202008%20aspx)** > [@](#): > > The Marriage Measure does not affect the existing rights of parishioners. A couple continue to have the right to be married in the parish church of a parish where one or both of them are resident or entered on the electoral roll. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2013, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/53 "2013-08-05T00:37:37Z")
Thing is, like in the Catholic church, there are some requirements to get married in the Church. Obviously, you have to be Catholic, duh. Well, at least one spouse-to-be does, but the non-Catholic has to agree, for example, that you raise any children you might have in the Church. (You want to marry in the Church, you gotta EARN it, pal!) A marriage in the Church isn’t just seen as oh, just another wedding, like going to a civil marriage. You’re not just renting out the building. It’s one of the Seven Holy Sacrements. Srs biznizz, people. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2013, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/54 "2013-08-05T01:49:34Z")
> [@Lord\_Feldon](#): > > [Your Church Wedding | The Church of England](http://www.churchofengland.org/weddings-baptisms-funerals/weddings.aspx) > > Congratulations! You’re welcome to marry in church whatever your beliefs, whether or not you are christened and whether or not you regularly go to church. Reading over the actual text, it seems to be a statement that you are permitted to use the building as the location for the wedding. It does not appear to be a statement that the local vicar or rector will actually officiate at the ceremony or that the ceremony will be conducted according to the CoE rites. From the site: > [@](#): > > In all cases involving church services - i.e. going to normal church services, baptism, confirmation or marriage - this applies only to Church of England services. Even if you cannot demonstrate any of the above connections, we want to help you explore whether it may still be possible for you to marry in your special church. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2013, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/55 "2013-08-05T02:00:41Z")
The paragraph you quoted was about marrying in a church other than the one you’re entitled to marry in. The church has to marry you (if you’re not an icky divorced or gay person), but only in your local parish church. > **[Your Church Wedding | The Church of England](https://www.churchofengland.org/life-events/your-church-wedding)** > > Welcome! Discover all you need to know about Church of England weddings and blessings. Marrying in church is personal, meaningful, spiritual and beautiful, just as you want it to be. > [@](#): > > “Can a Vicar from a different church do our wedding?” > > **Yes, so long as they are a Church of England Vicar** , and the Vicar of your marrying church is happy to arrange it. Discuss your plans with them early on. > **[Your Church Wedding | The Church of England](https://www.churchofengland.org/life-events/your-church-wedding)** > > Welcome! Discover all you need to know about Church of England weddings and blessings. Marrying in church is personal, meaningful, spiritual and beautiful, just as you want it to be. > [@](#): > > **It is your Vicar’s duty to marry you** , but also their privilege. When you choose to marry in a church, you are the hosts and the church is your guest. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2013, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/56 "2013-08-05T02:37:37Z")
Jesus fucking Christ, just get married at the official governmental level. WHy do you have to convince some Neolithic sheepherders that they should perform your wedding ceremony? Don’t like that they won’t marry you? Well, suck it up and get married somewhere else. Why are you so eager to be member in club that doesn’t want you as a member? Start your own damn club! ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2013, 12:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/57 "2013-08-05T12:54:57Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > No, I’m saying that refusing to provide a _Catholic_ marriage to two Muslims should be considered discrimination. Same as refusing to serve coffee to someone because they were black, or in a wheelchair, for example. If you offer a service you should offer it equally. It’s not “a service”, it’s a _sacramental rite_. But you know that. You just scorn the very concept and wish for society to grant it no consideration whatsoever. This is why I like the system in some Civil Law countries, where the “real” marriage is the one formalized before the Notary Clerk, and the church ceremony is exclusively that: ceremonial. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2013, 1:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/58 "2013-08-05T13:08:56Z")
> [@Lord\_Feldon](#): > > Yes, and as I understand it, marriage in the Church of England is a **legal right** for heterosexual couples when neither person has a living former spouse. The church does not have the power to refuse to marry a Muslim woman to a Buddhist man, for example. I’d be very interested in a cite for this claim. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2013, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/59 "2013-08-05T13:25:34Z")
Well, if the C of E gives out documentation of some kind that legalizes or helps legalize a marriage, fine. But to make someone perform a ceremony against their will… that’s just rude. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2013, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316/60 "2013-08-05T13:29:20Z")
> [@Lord\_Feldon](#): > > Yes, and as I understand it, marriage in the Church of England is a **legal right** for heterosexual couples when neither person has a living former spouse. The church does not have the power to refuse to marry a Muslim woman to a Buddhist man, for example. Your cite made reference to the “Church of England Marriage Measure 2008,” of which Section 3 appears to say that a person can exercise the right to be married in any parish if: > [@](#): > > that person was baptised in that parish (unless the baptism took place in a combined rite which included baptism and confirmation) or is a person whose confirmation has been entered in the register book of confirmation for any church or chapel in that parish; > (b)that person has at any time had his or her usual place of residence in that parish for a period of not less than six months; > (c)that person has at any time habitually attended public worship in that parish for a period of not less than six months; > (d)a parent of that person has during the lifetime of that person had his or her usual place of residence in that parish for a period of not less than six months or habitually attended public worship in that parish for that period; or > (e)a parent or grandparent of that person has been married in that parish. But Section 1 says that you have only the same right for any of those parishes as you would for your own parish of residence or ordinary place of worship: > [@](#): > > A person intending to be married shall have the like, but no greater, right to have the marriage solemnized in a parish church of a parish with which he or she has a connection specified in subsection (3) below (in this Measure referred to as a “qualifying connection”) as that person has to have the marriage solemnized in the parish church of the parish in which he or she resides or which is his or her usual place of worship. I don’t read this law, in other words, as saying that the CoE must agree to marry a Muslim woman and Buddhist man. This law says, in effect, “Whatever right you already had to marry in your parish of residence, or parish you habitually attend, you ALSO have for the parish in which you were baptised and the parish at which your parents or grandparents married.” This law does NOT say what circumstances give you the right to marry in your own parish in the first place. Of course, I’m not a UK lawyer or a CoE canon lawyer (although I do have a licentiate in Roman Catholic canon law). But I welcome correction from someone who can shed more detailed light on the issue. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/gay-marriage-advocacy-goes-too-far/665316.md?page=4)