My thoughts on I-74

[ciddyguy]

As I go through the voter's pamphlet tonight, at least part of it anyway (and there are 2 of them).

Been going through initiatives, and came upon I-74, which is to allow same sex marriage, and to preserve domestic partnerships for seniors only, but DOES allow for the right of clergy or religious organizations to refuse to perform, recognize, or

Comments

[greatbearmd]

The thing is, at least in this country, the government recognizes marriage as a legal construct, not a religious one. After all, when people get married, the first thing they need to do is obtain a license from the local jurisdiction. A religious institution is totally unnecessary to have a legal, recognized wedding in the US. A wedding can be performed by a justice of the peace, ship captains at sea, etc. "Religion" is simply trying to declare itself relevant by claiming they carry the mantle of marriage, which is false. For their own members, perhaps, but no one has to set foot in a church or have any sort of clergy perform a ceremony for it to happen. Granted, there will always be those ss couples who want a religious marriage, and they will have to seek out one of the many gay-friendly churches or clergy to have it done. I live in the mixed-marriage capital of the US, and not long ago these folks had a difficult time getting married, and there are still lots of people and locales that take a dim view on the practice to this day.

[ciddyguy]

You do have a point there Phil, that marriage is recognized as a legal construct by the Government, not a religious one, but still, it's the principal of the matter.

That said, I agree, if you accept gays/lesbians/same sex couples into your church, you won't burn in purgatory hell and collapse, but in fact, may thrive (gasp!).