Gay marriage is about churches yes, so who does Barack have to convince...?

[cooolandrew]

The reality to make gay marrage even possible, is to change the hearts and minds of the churches. If they are the major hurdle to legislation, Barack is doing exactly what is needed to reach that eventual goal, when it comes to gay issues folks are talking of an Amerca that hasn't arrived yet that will take work and the convincing of people like McClurkin. Barack is on message as it is inclusive of all, it's the way it will get done I feel.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

1. Flawed premise.

Gay marriage has nothing to do with churches.

[bunnies]

2. One can get "married" without involving a church at all.

What needs to happen is the churches be informed of their place. Marriage is a legal contract. Nothing more. The sooner the churches realize this, the better for everyone. After all, they will still be free to discriminate as they see fit.

[rinsd]

3. WTF do churches have to do with government recognition of marriage?

Making marriage an equal premise to same sex couples will not force churches to perform marriages.

It is about the government recognition of the union and the rights that come with it which include but are not limited to hospital visitation, property inheritance, adoption, tax benefits etc.

But most importantly it removes the 2nd class citizenship one is accorded when your marriage is a civil union.

[miceelf]

20. Agree completely

But changing public opinion is a big part of getting it done, and addressing religious folk directly is a good way to do that, IMHO.

[QC]

4. Civil marriage is not a religious sacrament.

Those are two entirely different things.

[napi21]

5. No it's NOT about churches. It's about current secular laws.

It's the secular laws that recognize a church's authority to perform a recognizable marriage. A marriage license is NOT issued by a church, it's issued by your State of residence. It IS the churches who are doing the complaining about not likeing the secular law that would recognize the authority of ANYBODY to "marry" two people of the same sex. They are trying to apply church law to the state!

[bigscott]

8. I am so proud of my fellow DUers

in threads 1-7! I was beginning to think I was all alone out here!:grouphug: :yourock:

[mondo joe]

6. No. Its not about churches. Are you DAFT? Marriage is a civil contract and doesn't

depend on churches in the least.

[LostinVA]

7. Churches have NOTHING to do with marriage -- zilch

Marriage is a legal construct, NOT a religious one. It doesn't even have an inherently religious history: it has a civil one. Which is why marriage wasn't widespread in many part of the world until the Industrial Revolution and the rise of a middle class. Common Law Marriage was often the case then.

It has nothing to do with religion. Which is why you can't get "married" by clergy unless you already have that marriage license, and that clergy member has to be legally able to act as a LEGAL CIVIL REPRESENTATIVE or they can't sign your license.

DU's own Pacifist Patriot married me and Haruka in September, and she said none of us had to even say a word, all she had to do was sign the license, because it's a CONTRACT.

[cboy4]

9. Yea you stupid homos. Don't you know that America

hasn't arrived yet?

Boy. Talk about ignorance.

[demokatgurrl]

10. First for full disclosure I am not gay so I don't speak from experience

but I got married without any church. There is civil marriage, a legal ceremony, which should be available to anyone. Then there are religious ceremonies- it's up to the individual churches whether to perform them for anyone- gay or straight. Some churches won't perform marriage ceremonies if both partners are not members of their religion. That's fine, it's the church's business.
But the government should not be denying anyone the CIVIL RIGHT of LEGAL (not religious) marriage.

[LostinVA]

13. Nope, you got it right

Same sex couples in NJ got to the same municipal bureaus and fill out the same paperwork with the same requirements as heterosexual couples. The mayor could have married us, but we had a ceremony and Pacifist Patriot married us, because she is recognized as LEGAL, CIVIL OFFICIAL who can perform marriages in NJ.

We had a semi-religious ceremony, but we didn't have to.

[terrya]

11. You could also get married at City Hall.

Marriage isn't exclusively a religious concept.

[keith the dem]

12. It should be up to you and/or your church.

In the Netherlands, the government issues the legal unions, the churches do the marriages. All unions should be "civil unions" and It should be up to you and your church if you want to call it a marriage. If you don't like gay marriage, go to a church that doesn't do them.

My church sanctions gay marriage. I believe it is an infringement on my religious rights that the government does not allow gay marriage!

Incidentally Obama belongs to the same denomination.

[Duncan Grant]

14. Oh let's *do* offer appeasement to right-wing Christian ideologues. After all, we're inclusive.

If inclusiveness is what you're after, then let's see Obama make a major LGBT policy statement at an LGBT Pride event in Atlanta, Chicago, NY, SF, or LA. Better still, let him go to Topeka or Nashville.

That would be leadership; pandering and reacting to right-wing anti-gay Christian bigots simply isn't.

[hulklogan]

16. The only way you'd see Obama speak at a major LGBT event now

is if all cameras were confiscated at the door.

[Duncan Grant]

19. What explains his reluctance to be seen with us?

[IndianaJones]

15. I got married at the clerks office in downtown Vegas. Haven't been in a church in 25 years. nt.

[BlackVelvet04]

17. Well, now that everyone has refuted your premise...

anything else we can clear up for you?

[JVS]

18. No. Churches do their thing, government does its thing.