|
Aren't we saying the same thing ?
The point is the 'marriage' seems to have been appropriated by the church as unique between man and woman.
If it is indeed, purely a religious ceremony outside of the lawful contract then its up to the churches to decide if they want to change their rules.
In a registry office, a man and woman get married and it says so on our certificate. I can't remember if God ever comes up ? If it doesn't, then its not a religious ceremony and simply a contract, in which case its only an ignorant law that needs changing, but that shouldn't apply to a church unless they want to comply. They can rightly claim not to uphold that marriage is desirable between same sexes and accept the consequences of that decision.
It does seem to be stirring up the same old grumblings from the homophobes. They are entitled to their opinion, but should not be taken into account in a matter of contractual law as it is used within the context of marriage. If it is clearly not a religious ceremony then civil partnerships are marriages. |
|