Governments don’t have rights. Governments have powers. The federal government would have no power to require any church to perform any marriage/union ceremony, nor recognize any marriage or union. The federal government does have the power, if it funds programs through religious institutions, to require that those programs be open to all regardless of the beliefs of the individual religion. If that religious institution does not wish to do so, it is free not to participate in the program.
What happened when interracial marriages were upheld? How did churches react? I know, I mentioned this in another thread, but maybe someone else has the answers, as I haven’t done my research yet.
Esprix
Actually, in my “Gay Today” issue of Newsweek, it said that currently, 36% of the people in America support SSMs. Sorry, 'Sprix…looks like your majority is a while off. The title of this thread should be amended to say “What would religions do…”
I really don’t see the point to this thread, aside from satiating your need to innervate the board with as many threads relating to homosexuality as humanly possible.
“History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it.” -Winston Churchill
Oh, if I said it would take a majority before SSM’s were legalized, then I misspoke, as Vermont is already proving that wrong - it’s happening right now.
I was simply asking a question of the religiously-bent on this board. Sorry if you have a problem with that.
(Oh, rats - did I just bump this up to the top? Naughty me… :))
Esprix, who loves Rousseau very, very much
Did you really mean “innervate,” Rousseau?
Innervate means “to supply with nerves.” Sure, there are a lot of raw nerves to be touched in this forum, but I hardly think that is Esprix’s fault.
Or did you mean “enervate?” That means “to reduce the mental or moral vigor of” or “to lessen the vitality or strength of.” Now, you may think Esprix is immoral, but he certianly supplies mental vigor and vitality to this board.
Oh, you probably meant “innundate,” meaning to overwhelm or flood.
Well, Esprix does tend to dwell on the gay, but I don’t mind that.
Oh, did I just bump this back up to the top?
Oh, while he was busily bashing this thread, did Rousseau send it to the top?
Re: the OP (shocking, isn’t it?)
The religion I affiliate myself with (Reform Judaism) will be happy happy joy joy. The national organization of Reform rabbis, whatever their official title is, has come out in favor of same sex marriage. Don’t think Conservative and Orthodox movements would feel the same way, though…
As Momma always said, “Do what you know!”
(And for the record, I do post in other threads on non-gay topics.)
Esprix
Oh, I love Reform Jews - most of my Jewish friends are (surprise, surprise).
There are other religions that would also celebrate - my own UU’s, Quakers, even some Methodist and Baptist individual congregations.
I’m going to really try to do some research on interracial marriages today.
Esprix
With all the problems that heterosexuals have with marriage (expensive nasty divorces, costing megabucks), why on earth are the gays eager to get involved in this institution at all? Seems to me that better ways (than marriage) exist to formalize some kind of union.
Wait till we see some wealthy gays (actors) get divorces-can youimagine what catfights they will be?
See the “domestic partners” or “separate but equal” threads for more discussion on these topics, and many more.
For the record, Vermont is all but a signature away from having “civil unions,” which are the complete legal equivalent of a marriage.
Oh, there have already been some doozies, but they just didn’t make the press… 
Esprix
Kelly
No one goes into a marital relationship thinking ahead to when it will end (well maybe that Darva chick did, but I digress). IMHO same-sex couples will be less likely to divorce at least initially precisely because of the struggle for recognition of their unions.
Such as?
Esprix
The measure still has to pass one of the two houses before it’s ready for signature, and as it will not guarantee the federal rights I don’t think calling CUs the “complete legal equivalent of a marriage” is accurate.
Oh no, Keanu and David didn’t break up, did they? Did Keanu give back the ring? <smirk>
I misread a news item - the VT Senate judiciary committee passed it unanimously, not the Senate itself. My bad.
And, yes, you’re right - without those federal items, we’re still way short. Thank you for the clarification.
Tragic couple… {tsk tsk tsk}
Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of Bob and Rod Jackson-Paris. Talk about your heroes crumbling to dust…
Esprix
Heroes? I always thought they were kind of icky. I could never really figure out why I had this visceral reaction to them, then I read Daniel Harris’ deconstruction of them in The Rise and Fall of Gay Culture and it suddenly all made sense.
I’ll have to check that out, I guess. I met them at a book signing (lovely fellows) and bought their book, “Straight From The Heart,” which I kind of liked (although it was rather simplistic, but at least inspiring fluff). I know several young gay guys who really looked up to them. Just a shame all 'round.
Esprix
I loves a catfight. Kiss me B_line12!
WTF?
Judging from a couple of other posts I’ve seen today, I think we might have a bit of a candidate.
As a (non-observing) Quaker, I can confirm that Quakers have no problems with same-sex relationships. I couldn’t tell you from what date though - at least since the early eighties.
[minor hijack] So if you’re gay and religious, why not switch to a non-bigot variety of god-bothering?[hijack] (sorry Esprix, I’m sure that you’ve covered this, but there was just too much dross.)
picmr
Marriages like that ARE legal in Vermont.
Don’t you read the papers, or at least listen to Leno?
No apology necessary - I agree.
There are a fair number of people who feel that their orientation and their religious values are compatable, even if their governing church authorities do not. There are also some who feel they should stay within their own faith to change it to be more accepting. I would wager that most, though, do seek out other denominations, or at least seek out local congregations of the same faith that might be a little more open-minded.
And Dusy, pay attention - this thread was started way back on February 28, and a certain idiot resurrected what was, until today, a dead thread. I of all people am most certainly aware of what’s happened in Vermont.
Esprix