Pope Francis backs same-sex civil unions

[stevevw]

Please give an example of this, where a church has been forced to host a same sex marriage, ceremony or reception against their will.

It’s not just churches but also any representative of the church or religion as well and it’s not just about being forced to do the actual ceremony but being attacked for not doing the ceremony. It is these attacks that are eroding the rights of religious representatives to hold and practice their belief. IE This is only a small exmaple of cases.

Gay couple files complaint for refusal of wedding
A United Methodist pastor is facing a complaint under church law because he declined to officiate at a same-sex wedding.
https://www.umnews.org/en/news/gay-couple-files-complaint-for-refusal-of-wedding
Millionaire gay fathers to sue the Church of England for not allowing them to get married in the church
Barrie Drewitt-Barlow said that he wants to marry partner Tony in a church
Said that the only way forward is to challenge the church in court
Millionaire gay fathers to sue the Church of England for not allowing them to get married in the church | Daily Mail Online
Ohio minister challenges law forcing her to officiate, write for same-sex weddings
Lawsuit challenges county law forcing officiant to create vows, pray over same-sex weddings if she celebrates marriage between one man and one woman. The law also forbids Stokes from explaining on her company’s website or social media “that she can only provide wedding services consistent with her religious views on marriage and gender.”
Ohio minister challenges law forcing her to officiate, write for same-sex weddings
City threatens to arrest ministers who refuse to perform same-sex weddings
Two Christian ministers who own an Idaho wedding chapel were told they had to either perform same-sex weddings or face jail time and up to a $1,000 fine, according to a lawsuit filed Friday in federal court. "The government should not force ordained ministers to act contrary to their faith under threat of jail time and criminal fines," Tedesco said. ," we are living in a day when those who support traditional marriage are coming under fierce attack.
City threatens to arrest ministers who refuse to perform same-sex weddings
Swedish P.M. Vows to Force All Priests to Perform Same-Sex Marriages Even If Their Faith Tells Them Not To
Sweden's Prime Minister has vowed to force all priests working for the Church of Sweden to perform same-sex marriages even if their faith tells them not to.
https://www.christiantoday.com/arti...f.it.goes.against.their.conscience/110471.htm
Episcopal Bishop William Love announces resignation in response to hearing panel ruling
A bishop of The Episcopal Church announced that he'll be stepping down from office weeks after the denomination’s disciplinary panel ruled that he violated canon law by refusing to allow same-sex marriages in his diocese.
Episcopal Bishop William Love announces resignation in response to hearing panel ruling
California Raids Christian School, Seeks to Change Its Beliefs or Shut It Down
The school fears that it would not be able to uphold its rules reflecting traditional Christian teaching on marriage and sexuality. Among other things, the school stresses that it could be forced to accommodate religious rituals that are inconsistent with the Christian faith
“In 25 years of practice, I have never seen this level of aggressive, militant, and ideologically-driven conduct by a State agency against a religious institution,”
https://www.pacificjustice.org/pres...-seeks-to-change-its-beliefs-or-shut-it-down/
2 Gay Students Are Suing a Seminary. Here’s Why It Matters.
A man and a woman, both in same-sex marriages, have sued Fuller Theological Seminary for discrimination after it expelled them over their same-sex marriages.
2 Gay Students Are Suing a Seminary. Here’s Why It Matters. | The Stream
Evangelical Church Threatened With Being Set on Fire Amid LGBT Outrage at Marriage Billboard
A pastor at an evangelical church in Brisbane, Australia, has said the church has received serious threats online, including one vowing to burn it down, after it posted a billboard defending the definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
Evangelical Church Threatened With Being Set on Fire Amid LGBT Outrage at Marriage Billboard
Canadian School District Quits Operation Christmas Child Over Gay Marriage Stance
A school district in Canada has ended its participation in the Samaritan's Purse children's charity program Operation Christmas Child after complaints were received about the Franklin Graham-led evangelical organization's stance on human sexuality.
Canadian School District Quits Operation Christmas Child Over Gay Marriage Stance
Bishop will appeal restriction on punishing priests for same-sex marriages, challenge convention action
An Episcopal Church bishop who was punished for refusing to allow gay marriages in his diocese has stated that he plans to appeal the punishment.
Bishop will appeal restriction on punishing priests for same-sex marriages, challenge convention action

This doesnt count the many of cases that are mounting all the time where individuals are forced to go against their conscience and belief to support same sex marriage. There are to many to name but we have heard about some of them IE the Cakes shops, the Tshirt guy who was asked to print a Tshirt supporting same sex marriage, the flower shops ect. Activists aim is to destroy anyone opposed to SSM and they are relentless in their persuits which has caused many businesses financial ruin and to close down.

Christian gallery forced to close for refusing to host same-sex marriage reopens as church
While that case involved the provision of camping services rather than wedding services, there are a number of similarities: the event in question was clearly conveying a message contrary to the religious beliefs of the business owner (the camp was avowedly about “normalising” homosexual activity), and the business owner was said (by the court) not to be a religious organisation.
https://www.christiantoday.com/arti...same-sex-marriage-reopens-as-church/69398.htm

'It's not okay to vote No': Boss fires worker over same-sex marriage views
Sims even admits that her firing of Madeline was "bigoted."
"What I did was bigoted," she said. "But is it worse for me to be a bigot fighting for the rights of homosexuals or is it worse for her being a bigot telling people they can't have equality?"
Boss fires worker over same-sex marriage views

This Farmer Won’t Host Same-Sex Weddings at His Orchard. Now a City Has Banned Him From Its Farmers Market.
This Farmer Won’t Host Same-Sex Weddings at His Orchard. Now a City Has Banned Him From Its Farmers Market.

It may not be obvious at first as some say the best way to achieve this is for the government to penalize Charities and religious organisations by denying their charity status or removing their tax exempt status. This all chips away at religious freedom and may eventually cause everyone to go along with the SSM laws. Afterall some say because its LAW (anti-descrimination) then no one should have the right to oppose it. If believers and religious entities are being held accountable and attacked then how long before the church itself is made to conform.

Beto O’Rourke says churches should lose tax-exempt status for opposing same-sex marriage
Former Texas representative and 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke said Thursday that churches, charities and other religious institutions that oppose same-sex marriage should lose their tax exempt status. And if he becomes president, this is a policy that he will seek to quickly enforce by executive action
“The LGBT radicals are determined not merely to achieve ‘tolerance’ and ‘acceptance’ – they will brook no dissent whatsoever: anyone who believes in marriage as the union of one man and one woman must be silenced pushed from the public square. And if it’s a charity, Church, or institution, it must be shut down.”
Beto O’Rourke says churches should lose tax-exempt status for opposing same-sex marriage

Robert Jeffress: Supreme Court Has 'Declared Open Season' on Christians Who Oppose Same-Sex Marriage
if the government can remove the tax-exempt status of religious schools who "violate" a civil rights law by not allowing a married same-sex couple to stay in the same dorm room, why couldn't the government do the same for churches that refuse to honor same-sex marriages?
"Once you enshrine gay marriage as a civil right, which is what the court did today, then anyone who opposes gay marriage will be guilty of a civil rights violation,"
Robert Jeffress: Supreme Court Has 'Declared Open Season' on Christians Who Oppose Same-Sex Marriage

As many of Christians are saying there seems to be good reason to be concerned about religious freedom and the way things are going. Its certainly no scaremongering.[/quote][/QUOTE]

 

[Tinker Grey]

*snip*

The first one was a wedding chapel owned by a Christian couple. This was not a church. It was a commercial wedding venue to serve the public. The gay couple wanted to buy the service of using the venue. NO PASTOR WAS BEING FORCED TO OFFICIATE.

As a commercial venue, they were required to serve the public without discrimination much like a diner must serve all races. NOTE: I say 'were' because they sold the venue to a church presumably so that this wouldn't happen again.

FAIL.

I imagine all the rest are similar.

BTW: Your formatting sucks.

 

[Speedwell]

It’s not just churches but also any representative of the church or religion as well and it’s not just about being forced to do the actual ceremony but being attacked for not doing the ceremony. It is these attacks that are eroding the rights of religious representatives to hold and practice their belief. IE This is only a small exmaple of cases.

Gay couple files complaint for refusal of wedding
A United Methodist pastor is facing a complaint under church law because he declined to officiate at a same-sex wedding.
https://www.christiantoday.com/arti...same-sex-marriage-reopens-as-church/69398.htm
Millionaire gay fathers to sue the Church of England for not allowing them to get married in the church
Barrie Drewitt-Barlow said that he wants to marry partner Tony in a church
Said that the only way forward is to challenge the church in court
Millionaire gay fathers to sue the Church of England for not allowing them to get married in the church | Daily Mail Online
Ohio minister challenges law forcing her to officiate, write for same-sex weddings
Lawsuit challenges county law forcing officiant to create vows, pray over same-sex weddings if she celebrates marriage between one man and one woman. The law also forbids Stokes from explaining on her company’s website or social media “that she can only provide wedding services consistent with her religious views on marriage and gender.”
Ohio minister challenges law forcing her to officiate, write for same-sex weddings
City threatens to arrest ministers who refuse to perform same-sex weddings
Two Christian ministers who own an Idaho wedding chapel were told they had to either perform same-sex weddings or face jail time and up to a $1,000 fine, according to a lawsuit filed Friday in federal court. "The government should not force ordained ministers to act contrary to their faith under threat of jail time and criminal fines," Tedesco said. ," we are living in a day when those who support traditional marriage are coming under fierce attack.
City threatens to arrest ministers who refuse to perform same-sex weddings
Swedish P.M. Vows to Force All Priests to Perform Same-Sex Marriages Even If Their Faith Tells Them Not To
Sweden's Prime Minister has vowed to force all priests working for the Church of Sweden to perform same-sex marriages even if their faith tells them not to.
https://www.christiantoday.com/arti...f.it.goes.against.their.conscience/110471.htm
Episcopal Bishop William Love announces resignation in response to hearing panel ruling
A bishop of The Episcopal Church announced that he'll be stepping down from office weeks after the denomination’s disciplinary panel ruled that he violated canon law by refusing to allow same-sex marriages in his diocese.
Episcopal Bishop William Love announces resignation in response to hearing panel ruling
California Raids Christian School, Seeks to Change Its Beliefs or Shut It Down
The school fears that it would not be able to uphold its rules reflecting traditional Christian teaching on marriage and sexuality. Among other things, the school stresses that it could be forced to accommodate religious rituals that are inconsistent with the Christian faith
“In 25 years of practice, I have never seen this level of aggressive, militant, and ideologically-driven conduct by a State agency against a religious institution,”
https://www.pacificjustice.org/pres...-seeks-to-change-its-beliefs-or-shut-it-down/
2 Gay Students Are Suing a Seminary. Here’s Why It Matters.
A man and a woman, both in same-sex marriages, have sued Fuller Theological Seminary for discrimination after it expelled them over their same-sex marriages.
2 Gay Students Are Suing a Seminary. Here’s Why It Matters. | The Stream
Evangelical Church Threatened With Being Set on Fire Amid LGBT Outrage at Marriage Billboard
A pastor at an evangelical church in Brisbane, Australia, has said the church has received serious threats online, including one vowing to burn it down, after it posted a billboard defending the definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
Evangelical Church Threatened With Being Set on Fire Amid LGBT Outrage at Marriage Billboard
Canadian School District Quits Operation Christmas Child Over Gay Marriage Stance
A school district in Canada has ended its participation in the Samaritan's Purse children's charity program Operation Christmas Child after complaints were received about the Franklin Graham-led evangelical organization's stance on human sexuality.
Canadian School District Quits Operation Christmas Child Over Gay Marriage Stance
Bishop will appeal restriction on punishing priests for same-sex marriages, challenge convention action
An Episcopal Church bishop who was punished for refusing to allow gay marriages in his diocese has stated that he plans to appeal the punishment.
Bishop will appeal restriction on punishing priests for same-sex marriages, challenge convention action

This doesnt count the many of cases that are mounting all the time where individuals are forced to go against their conscience and belief to support same sex marriage. There are to many to name but we have heard about some of them IE the Cakes shops, the Tshirt guy who was asked to print a Tshirt supporting same sex marriage, the flower shops ect. Activists aim is to destroy anyone opposed to SSM and they are relentless in their persuits which has caused many businesses financial ruin and to close down.

Christian gallery forced to close for refusing to host same-sex marriage reopens as church
While that case involved the provision of camping services rather than wedding services, there are a number of similarities: the event in question was clearly conveying a message contrary to the religious beliefs of the business owner (the camp was avowedly about “normalising” homosexual activity), and the business owner was said (by the court) not to be a religious organisation.
https://www.christiantoday.com/arti...same-sex-marriage-reopens-as-church/69398.htm

'It's not okay to vote No': Boss fires worker over same-sex marriage views
Sims even admits that her firing of Madeline was "bigoted."
"What I did was bigoted," she said. "But is it worse for me to be a bigot fighting for the rights of homosexuals or is it worse for her being a bigot telling people they can't have equality?"
Boss fires worker over same-sex marriage views

This Farmer Won’t Host Same-Sex Weddings at His Orchard. Now a City Has Banned Him From Its Farmers Market.
This Farmer Won’t Host Same-Sex Weddings at His Orchard. Now a City Has Banned Him From Its Farmers Market.

It may not be obvious at first as some say the best way to achieve this is for the government to penalize Charities and religious organisations by denying their charity status or removing their tax exempt status. This all chips away at religious freedom and may eventually cause everyone to go along with the SSM laws. Afterall some say because its LAW (anti-descrimination) then no one should have the right to oppose it. If believers and religious entities are being held accountable and attacked then how long before the church itself is made to conform.

Beto O’Rourke says churches should lose tax-exempt status for opposing same-sex marriage
Former Texas representative and 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke said Thursday that churches, charities and other religious institutions that oppose same-sex marriage should lose their tax exempt status. And if he becomes president, this is a policy that he will seek to quickly enforce by executive action
“The LGBT radicals are determined not merely to achieve ‘tolerance’ and ‘acceptance’ – they will brook no dissent whatsoever: anyone who believes in marriage as the union of one man and one woman must be silenced pushed from the public square. And if it’s a charity, Church, or institution, it must be shut down.”
Beto O’Rourke says churches should lose tax-exempt status for opposing same-sex marriage

Robert Jeffress: Supreme Court Has 'Declared Open Season' on Christians Who Oppose Same-Sex Marriage
if the government can remove the tax-exempt status of religious schools who "violate" a civil rights law by not allowing a married same-sex couple to stay in the same dorm room, why couldn't the government do the same for churches that refuse to honor same-sex marriages?
"Once you enshrine gay marriage as a civil right, which is what the court did today, then anyone who opposes gay marriage will be guilty of a civil rights violation,"
Robert Jeffress: Supreme Court Has 'Declared Open Season' on Christians Who Oppose Same-Sex Marriage

As many of Christians are saying there seems to be good reason to be concerned about religious freedom and the way things are going. Its certainly no scaremongering.

Robert Jeffress? FWI, the Rev. Robert Jeffress was Trump's advisor on Christian issues and in that capacity denied the authenticity of the Christian faith of anyone who didn't support Trump. "Just pretending to be Christians," he said.

 

[stevevw]

The first one was a wedding chapel owned by a Christian couple. This was not a church. It was a commercial wedding venue to serve the public. The gay couple wanted to buy the service of using the venue. NO PASTOR WAS BEING FORCED TO OFFICIATE.

As a commercial venue, they were required to serve the public without discrimination much like a diner must serve all races. NOTE: I say 'were' because they sold the venue to a church presumably so that this wouldn't happen again.

FAIL.

The point is private operators like the cake shops, florists, photogrpahers have won their cases so I am not sure what the go is. It seems to be hit and miss.

I imagine all the rest are similar.

No there are definite religious ministers being forced to conform or else and facilities owned by religious entities which are extentions of the church. The law is very ambiguious and seems to be up to the judge interpreting the situations. The point a religious entity such as a school, camp, seminary, ect or representative attached to a religion such as a Chaplin or minister are still part of the religion and should have protection by extention.

But it seems that there are many situations where that protection is not extended. That is why I say though the church itself is not being forced or penalised the way the law is being interpreted and applied it seems that it will not be too long before it creeps into this area as well.

BTW: Your formatting sucks.

I know sorry but the thing is if I leave gaps between each link then the post will be too long. I colour the quotes in the longs blue to differentiate them from what I have written. Perhaps you have some advice.

 

[Speedwell]

The point is private operators like the cake shops, florists, photogrpahers have won their cases so I am not sure what the go is. It seems to be hit and miss.

No there are definite religious ministers being forced to conform or else and facilities owned by religious entities which are extentions of the church. The law is very ambiguious and seems to be up to the judge interpreting the situations. The point a religious entity such as a school, camp, seminary, ect or representative attached to a religion such as a Chaplin or minister are still part of the religion and should have protection by extention.

But it seems that there are many situations where that protection is not extended. That is why I say though the church itself is not being forced or penalised the way the law is being interpreted and applied it seems that it will not be too long before it creeps into this area as well.

I know sorry but the thing is if I leave gaps between each link then the post will be too long. I colour the quotes in the longs blue to differentiate them from what I have written. Perhaps you have some advice.

Sounds like a bunch of disgruntled Evangelicals whining and wringing their hands because they're losing the culture war. Get back to me when, say, a Catholic Priest is forced to marry a gay couple. Then I'll join your cause.

 

[stevevw]

Robert Jeffress? FWI, the Rev. Robert Jeffress was Trump's advisor on Christian issues and in that capacity denied the authenticity of the Christian faith of anyone who didn't support Trump. "Just pretending to be Christians," he said.

Don't know him, but the quote I have linked makes a lot of sense and is alos mentioned by other perhaps more reliable sources. The government has already targeted tax emptions for some religious entities so it is a tool at their exposal if they want to penalize religions.

It is certainly logical that if the SSM is a civil rights law then anyone including religions is in violation of civil rights. That makes a big dilemma for the State where those who feel their civil rights are violated regardless of religious freedom are going to continually object and make life hard for religious entities and the Government. So something has to give.

 

[Tinker Grey]

I know sorry but the thing is if I leave gaps between each link then the post will be too long. I colour the quotes in the longs blue to differentiate them from what I have written. Perhaps you have some advice.

I was referring mostly to the quote within a quote instead of your text being separate. I see you fixed that. Thanks.

 

[Speedwell]

Don't know him, but the quote I have linked makes a lot of sense and is alos mentioned by other perhaps more reliable sources. The government has already targeted tax emptions for some religious entities so it is a tool at their exposal if they want to penalize religions.

It is certainly logical that if the SSM is a civil rights law then anyone including religions is in violation of civil rights. That makes a big dilemma for the State where those who feel their civil rights are violated regardless of religious freedom are going to continually object and make life hard for religious entities and the Government. So something has to give.

I don't know how it is in Australia, but because of the US Constitution no civil rights law in the US could allow anyone to demand the administration of a Sacrament by a religion of which he was not a member.

 

[stevevw]

Sounds like a bunch of disgruntled Evangelicals whining and wringing their hands because they're losing the culture war. Get back to me when, say, a Catholic Priest is forced to marry a gay couple. Then I'll join your cause.

So your saying that there is no issue regarding religious freedom. Why a Catholic Priest. Why doesnt Ministers from other religions count. Dont they have a right as a religious entity to the protection of religious freedoms.

Whenever a group was denied or eventually ostracized it didnt start with a complete ban on the obvious people involved. It begins with the reprograming of the society through changing the thinking. That is exactly what is happening now with the attacks on private citizens and religious entities on the fringes of the main religions and churches. Originally the Catholic church was completely opposed to SSM. Now the Pope is willing to bless SSM civil unions. Some individual churches and priests are pushing for SSM.

Some mainstream churches outside the Catholic religion are warming to the idea and others are beginning to perform SSM which would not have happened 10 years ago. By the time the Catholic church and priests are forced to perform SSM it will be too late for you to join the cause. Your position is already stated, you would not join the ause even if it did happen.

 

[stevevw]

I don't know how it is in Australia, but because of the US Constitution no civil rights law in the US could allow anyone to demand the administration of a Sacrament by a religion of which he was not a member.

And many are members. They want to dispute their churches position. Some churches may allow priests to decide based on their conscience whether they want to perform SSM. But any priest that decides against performing same sex marriages is being attacked and forced to go along. Though they may stand firm they cop a lot of flack and this is causing disharmony within the church. I would imagine for these churches they will probably eventually accept SSM completely. But it will probably destroy the church.

This is why I am saying that its not just a case that the the bigger churches are being forced at the moment but rather it is these smaller religious entities and representatives being forced and they either conform, struggle to survive because of the harm being caused or they close down.

This will eventually leave a small core of churches and miniters/priests who stand firm. But they will be subjected to a lot of attacks and ridecule and be forced into a small corner of society more or less ostrisized.

 

[Speedwell]

So your saying that there is no issue regarding religious freedom. Why a Catholic Priest. Why doesnt Ministers from other religions count. Dont they have a right as a religious entity to the protection of religious freedoms.

Whenever a group was denied or eventually ostracized it didnt start with a complete ban on the obvious people involved. It begins with the reprograming of the society through changing the thinking. That is exactly what is happening now with the attacks on private citizens and religious entities on the fringes of the main religions and churches. Originally the Catholic church was completely opposed to SSM. Now the Pope is willing to bless SSM civil unions. Some individual churches and priests are pushing for SSM.

Some mainstream churches outside the Catholic religion are warming to the idea and others are beginning to perform SSM which would not have happened 10 years ago. By the time the Catholic church and priests are forced to perform SSM it will be too late for you to join the cause. Your position is already stated, you would not join the ause even if it did happen.

You're right. I really don't care what happens to "clergymen" who offer marriage ceremonies or venues as a business subject to public accommodation laws and then balk at selling their services to homosexuals. I don't care if any Christian denominations decide to accept homosexuals as members and offer them the Sacraments (including Holy Matrimony). It's none of my business, really.

 

[stevevw]

You're right. I really don't care what happens to "clergymen" who offer marriage ceremonies or venues as a business subject to public accommodation laws and then balk at selling their services to homosexuals.

Yet you should be concerned with free speech and Free Exercise of religious beliefs. Yet even private citizens who have balked at selling their services to homosexuals have won their case when some tried to force them to go against their conscience and belief. IE

Supreme Court vacates ruling against Christian bakers punished for not making gay wedding cake
The United States Supreme Court vacated a ruling against a Christian couple forced to pay $135,000 for refusing to make a gay wedding cake.
Supreme Court vacates ruling against Christian bakers punished for not making gay wedding cake

But it financially ruined them

Christian Farmer who happened to just voice support for traditional marriage on Facebook was banned from the Farmers Market where he made his livlihood which could have ruined him. Luckily the City realised the stupidity of their actions
Banned farmer allowed to return to farmer's markets for rest of season
Banned farmer allowed to return to farmer's markets for rest of season

Minister of religions was being forced to write pro SSM vows, and do SSM. Thankfully courts realized how this was a denial of religious freedom and conscience.
Facing lawsuit, Ohio county agrees not to force minister to officiate, write for same-sex weddings
adflegal.org › press-release › facing-lawsuit-ohio-count...

I don't care if any Christian denominations decide to accept homosexuals as members and offer them the Sacraments (including Holy Matrimony). It's none of my business, really.

Yet you were interested enough to step in and comment on this issue.

 

[Speedwell]

Yet you were interested enough to step in and comment on this issue.

Because you, for some reason, think it's your business.

 

[Kylie]

Gay couple files complaint for refusal of wedding
A United Methodist pastor is facing a complaint under church law because he declined to officiate at a same-sex wedding.
Gay couple files complaint for refusal of wedding | United Methodist News Service

This isn't a case of a church being forced to do something, though, is it? In fact it was precisely because the church DIDN'T do it that there are people upset.

Millionaire gay fathers to sue the Church of England for not allowing them to get married in the church
Barrie Drewitt-Barlow said that he wants to marry partner Tony in a church
Said that the only way forward is to challenge the church in court
Millionaire gay fathers to sue the Church of England for not allowing them to get married in the church | Daily Mail Online

Again, this church was not actually forced to perform the wedding. (In the future, it might help if you look at cases where it's the Church saying, "we shouldn't have to do this" instead of cases where its people saying, "The church SHOULD have to do this.")

Ohio minister challenges law forcing her to officiate, write for same-sex weddings
Lawsuit challenges county law forcing officiant to create vows, pray over same-sex weddings if she celebrates marriage between one man and one woman. The law also forbids Stokes from explaining on her company’s website or social media “that she can only provide wedding services consistent with her religious views on marriage and gender.”
Ohio minister challenges law forcing her to officiate, write for same-sex weddings

And the result of her challenge was that she should not be forced to perform such weddings. https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/CovenantWeddingsProposedJudgmentEntry.pdf

City threatens to arrest ministers who refuse to perform same-sex weddings
Two Christian ministers who own an Idaho wedding chapel were told they had to either perform same-sex weddings or face jail time and up to a $1,000 fine, according to a lawsuit filed Friday in federal court. "The government should not force ordained ministers to act contrary to their faith under threat of jail time and criminal fines," Tedesco said. ," we are living in a day when those who support traditional marriage are coming under fierce attack.
City threatens to arrest ministers who refuse to perform same-sex weddings

And again, the result of this was that it was found that they did not have to perform marriages against their will, and indeed, the city paid them for their lost business. Coeur d’Alene wedding chapel suit ends in $1,000 judgment

Swedish P.M. Vows to Force All Priests to Perform Same-Sex Marriages Even If Their Faith Tells Them Not To
Sweden's Prime Minister has vowed to force all priests working for the Church of Sweden to perform same-sex marriages even if their faith tells them not to.
https://www.christiantoday.com/arti...f.it.goes.against.their.conscience/110471.htm

While same sex marriage is legal in Sweden, I haven't been able to find anything to show that priests in the Church of Sweden are forced to perform same sex marriages if they don't want to. All I can find is the reports of the PM saying he will do it, but laws don't get passed like that. Can you find a source that shows that a priest in that church is forced to do so against their will?

Episcopal Bishop William Love announces resignation in response to hearing panel ruling
A bishop of The Episcopal Church announced that he'll be stepping down from office weeks after the denomination’s disciplinary panel ruled that he violated canon law by refusing to allow same-sex marriages in his diocese.
Episcopal Bishop William Love announces resignation in response to hearing panel ruling

He wasn't the one being forced to perform the marriage though, was he? Seems like the problem here was that he was saying, "I don't want to have to perform same sex weddings, and I don't want anyone else to either." It seems like it's a case of no one is saying he has top perform them, but he isn't allowed to stop others from doing them.

California Raids Christian School, Seeks to Change Its Beliefs or Shut It Down
The school fears that it would not be able to uphold its rules reflecting traditional Christian teaching on marriage and sexuality. Among other things, the school stresses that it could be forced to accommodate religious rituals that are inconsistent with the Christian faith
“In 25 years of practice, I have never seen this level of aggressive, militant, and ideologically-driven conduct by a State agency against a religious institution,”
https://www.pacificjustice.org/pres...-seeks-to-change-its-beliefs-or-shut-it-down/

What is this about? It's a SCHOOL. Are the students getting married in the school? Is the school being told to perform same sex weddings or else? This example has nothing to do with what we are talking about.

2 Gay Students Are Suing a Seminary. Here’s Why It Matters.
A man and a woman, both in same-sex marriages, have sued Fuller Theological Seminary for discrimination after it expelled them over their same-sex marriages.
2 Gay Students Are Suing a Seminary. Here’s Why It Matters. | The Stream

Again, this is not about anyone being forced to conduct a same sex wedding against their will.

Evangelical Church Threatened With Being Set on Fire Amid LGBT Outrage at Marriage Billboard
A pastor at an evangelical church in Brisbane, Australia, has said the church has received serious threats online, including one vowing to burn it down, after it posted a billboard defending the definition of marriage as a union between one man and one woman.
Evangelical Church Threatened With Being Set on Fire Amid LGBT Outrage at Marriage Billboard

And again. This is not about anyone being forced to conduct a same sex marriage against their will.

Canadian School District Quits Operation Christmas Child Over Gay Marriage Stance
A school district in Canada has ended its participation in the Samaritan's Purse children's charity program Operation Christmas Child after complaints were received about the Franklin Graham-led evangelical organization's stance on human sexuality.
Canadian School District Quits Operation Christmas Child Over Gay Marriage Stance

Did you forget what the topic was?

Bishop will appeal restriction on punishing priests for same-sex marriages, challenge convention action
An Episcopal Church bishop who was punished for refusing to allow gay marriages in his diocese has stated that he plans to appeal the punishment.
Bishop will appeal restriction on punishing priests for same-sex marriages, challenge convention action

Let's be fair here: This is not a guy saying that he doesn't want his church performing same sex weddings. Because the order to let the wedding be performed is coming from the guy who actually runs the church. The guy in question, William Love, does not run the church in question. The person who DOES run the church, Presiding Bishop Michael Curry, has said what he wants his church to do. This is the only example where you have anything close to a legitimate argument, and the person you are criticising is not the government, nor atheists, but the Presiding Bishop who runs the church in question.

This doesnt count the many of cases that are mounting all the time where individuals are forced to go against their conscience and belief to support same sex marriage. There are to many to name but we have heard about some of them IE the Cakes shops, the Tshirt guy who was asked to print a Tshirt supporting same sex marriage, the flower shops ect. Activists aim is to destroy anyone opposed to SSM and they are relentless in their persuits which has caused many businesses financial ruin and to close down.

And, of course, Christians NEVER do that to people who don't share their views, do they? Of course not!

Christian gallery forced to close for refusing to host same-sex marriage reopens as church

While that case involved the provision of camping services rather than wedding services, there are a number of similarities: the event in question was clearly conveying a message contrary to the religious beliefs of the business owner (the camp was avowedly about “normalising” homosexual activity), and the business owner was said (by the court) not to be a religious organisation.
https://www.christiantoday.com/arti...same-sex-marriage-reopens-as-church/69398.htm

'It's not okay to vote No': Boss fires worker over same-sex marriage views
Sims even admits that her firing of Madeline was "bigoted."
"What I did was bigoted," she said. "But is it worse for me to be a bigot fighting for the rights of homosexuals or is it worse for her being a bigot telling people they can't have equality?"
Boss fires worker over same-sex marriage views

This Farmer Won’t Host Same-Sex Weddings at His Orchard. Now a City Has Banned Him From Its Farmers Market.
This Farmer Won’t Host Same-Sex Weddings at His Orchard. Now a City Has Banned Him From Its Farmers Market.

It may not be obvious at first as some say the best way to achieve this is for the government to penalize Charities and religious organisations by denying their charity status or removing their tax exempt status. This all chips away at religious freedom and may eventually cause everyone to go along with the SSM laws. Afterall some say because its LAW (anti-descrimination) then no one should have the right to oppose it. If believers and religious entities are being held accountable and attacked then how long before the church itself is made to conform.

Beto O’Rourke says churches should lose tax-exempt status for opposing same-sex marriage
Former Texas representative and 2020 Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke said Thursday that churches, charities and other religious institutions that oppose same-sex marriage should lose their tax exempt status. And if he becomes president, this is a policy that he will seek to quickly enforce by executive action
“The LGBT radicals are determined not merely to achieve ‘tolerance’ and ‘acceptance’ – they will brook no dissent whatsoever: anyone who believes in marriage as the union of one man and one woman must be silenced pushed from the public square. And if it’s a charity, Church, or institution, it must be shut down.”
Beto O’Rourke says churches should lose tax-exempt status for opposing same-sex marriage

Robert Jeffress: Supreme Court Has 'Declared Open Season' on Christians Who Oppose Same-Sex Marriage
if the government can remove the tax-exempt status of religious schools who "violate" a civil rights law by not allowing a married same-sex couple to stay in the same dorm room, why couldn't the government do the same for churches that refuse to honor same-sex marriages?
"Once you enshrine gay marriage as a civil right, which is what the court did today, then anyone who opposes gay marriage will be guilty of a civil rights violation,"
Robert Jeffress: Supreme Court Has 'Declared Open Season' on Christians Who Oppose Same-Sex Marriage

As many of Christians are saying there seems to be good reason to be concerned about religious freedom and the way things are going. Its certainly no scaremongering.

Irrelevant. You are trying to change the subject in an effort to bolster your own position by posting things that are not related to the topic at hand, just intended to provoke a sense of outrage. But we are not talking about anything except churches being forced to perform same sex marriages when they don't want to. You have failed to provide any legitimate examples of where a church was forced to perform a same sex wedding when it initially refused to.

 

[stevevw]

Because you, for some reason, think it's your business.

So you not interested enough to support or comment on Christians who may have their religious rights denied but are willing to have a go at a Christian on this forum who may be concerned about Christians having their rights denied. Seems a little inconsistent.

 

[stevevw]

This isn't a case of a church being forced to do something, though, is it? In fact it was precisely because the church DIDN'T do it that there are people upset.

As I clarified earlier this wasn’t just happening to churches but is also to individual priests. As you point out when it happens to the priest it also happens to the church. Because the church gives priests the choice to do SSM and this priest doesn't want to do it but a gay couple are complaining that he should. So the church itself are denying his right to follow his conscience due to the pressure from some members. As I stated if this continues the church will be forced to allow SSM in all their churches. So in the end it is forcing the hand of the church and priests.

Again, this church was not actually forced to perform the wedding. (In the future, it might help if you look at cases where it's the Church saying, "we shouldn't have to do this" instead of cases where its people saying, "The church SHOULD have to do this.")

You’re missing the point. I put this in there to show how it is the continual pressure of people and in this case rich people who can afford to test the ruling in court. This is what will eventually cause things to change. But in the meantime its the pressure, disruption, financial cost and other consequences that fall onto the church that is not being acknowledged which can cause damage to the church. A damaged church is more vulnerable and subject to attacks.

And the result of her challenge was that she should not be forced to perform such weddings. https://adfmedialegalfiles.blob.core.windows.net/files/CovenantWeddingsProposedJudgmentEntry.pdf

Yes I pointed this out before. But why are they being taken to court in the first place. It is this lack of respecting religious rights that is doing the damage in the meantime thus undermining the position of the religion she represents and making them more supceptible to SSM. This lady has had her livelihood and reputation harmed. Plus there are many others who either don't succeed legally or just struggle along or close down as a result.

And again, the result of this was that it was found that they did not have to perform marriages against their will, and indeed, the city paid them for their lost business. Coeur d’Alene wedding chapel suit ends in $1,000 judgment

Yep but once again it’s the damage caused in the meantime. Why take them to court in the first place. As the lawyers said
"The government should not force ordained ministers to act contrary to their faith under threat of jail time and criminal fines,"

The fact that these people are being taken to court in the first place shows the thinking out there in society that governments and others want to bring down religious entities and individuals over this situation. Because it is perceived as a breach of civil rights people are testing the law all the time and sometimes winning. Eventually there will be no more wins and people will be forced to conform.

While same sex marriage is legal in Sweden, I haven't been able to find anything to show that priests in the Church of Sweden are forced to perform same sex marriages if they don't want to. All I can find is the reports of the PM saying he will do it, but laws don't get passed like that. Can you find a source that shows that a priest in that church is forced to do so against their will?

I can't see how you missed it. That was the article. The Swedish PM has now decided that all priests in the State Church have to do SSM. In the past they had a choice based on their conscience. Now they have no choice. The PM likened it to Midwives having to do abortions so priests have to perform SSM. The bid difference Midwives are not priests who have to follow their beliefs in performing their duties so its a false analogy. This would be like forcing the Church of England to perform SSM

Swedish Church forced into gay marriages
“If you work as a midwife you must be able to perform abortions, otherwise you have to do something else. It is the same for priests who do not want to perform same-sex marriages,” he added.
Swedish Church forced into gay marriages

He wasn't the one being forced to perform the marriage though, was he? Seems like the problem here was that he was saying, "I don't want to have to perform same sex weddings, and I don't want anyone else to either." It seems like it's a case of no one is saying he has top perform them, but he isn't allowed to stop others from doing them.

No he was being forced to perform SSM or else. The Episcopal Church allows civil SSM by priests but they can choose based on their conscience. Then in 2018 they decided all priests must perform SSM. So this priest said he did not want to and disagreed. He was then disciplined and he resigned.

This is a clear case that a priest was being forced to perform SSM against his conscience and a good example of how the pressure to conform to SSM is infiltrating the church where it has gradually caused them to relinquish their original belief due to pressure from SSM groups.

What is this about? It's a SCHOOL. Are the students getting married in the school? Is the school being told to perform same sex weddings or else? This example has nothing to do with what we are talking about.

Yeah it’s a bit different but if you read the article you will see that the State was trying to question its religious status thus forcing it to conform to State legislation which meant that the school would have to teach that SS relationships and thus marriage was OK.

The lawsuit stresses that the Community Care Facilities Act would give students the right “[t]o be free from acts that seek to change his or her sexual orientation, including efforts to change his or her gender expressions or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex.”
Christian school raided by California gov't as religious freedom concerns cloud future

Again, this is not about anyone being forced to conduct a same sex wedding against their will.

It’s not just about performing SSM. It is also about whether a religious Seminary has the right to teach that traditional marriage is the only form of marriage they recognise. It goes to the heart of the matter in that if the school is forced to accept SSM then this weakens any religious entities from refusing to perform SSM. As the article says it would strip religious organisation of their ability to be true to their convictions because it would then be a breach of the law to not teach or perform SSM.

You seem to be taking a limited view of what is happening here. Like I said making people do something doesn’t start with just making the most obvious religions entities like the Catholic church or priests conform. It begins with attacks and changes to the fringes of other churches and religions who dont have as much power and changing the discourse in society through activism. If these fringe attacks are not stopped then this will have an impact on the bigger churches and priests and eventually forced them to conform.

If this lawsuit succeeds, it would set a new and worrisome precedent that organizations like Fuller can no longer expect to operate according to their consciences. It could strip Christian colleges and seminaries of the ability to be true to their convictions and foster a faithful Christian community.
Christian school raided by California gov't as religious freedom concerns cloud future

And again. This is not about anyone being forced to conduct a same sex marriage against their will.

You’re not seeing the bigger picture here. The Church simply expressed their belief that marriage was between a man and women on Facebook and then they had threats against them for doing so even to the point of death and burning their church down. The point is this is pressure to conform and it is this type of action that causes harm to those who resist and ostracises them. It creates a perception that the church has done something wrong and this then goes towards building the case that they should conform to SSM.

Did you forget what the topic was?

Once again you’re not seeing the bigger picture. The Christian school which is an extension of the Church was attacked for stating their position on SSM which caused conflicts with some involved in an event they were participating in so they pull out as a result. In other words people were putting pressure on the school to conform to SSM if they wanted to be a part of the event that they had been involved with for years. So this is an indirect way they are trying to force the religion and its church to conform to performing SSM.

The move comes as Samaritan's Purse requires volunteer leaders who represent the organization to sign a statement of faith that expresses that marriage is only a union between a man and a woman.

Let's be fair here: This is not a guy saying that he doesn't want his church performing same sex weddings. Because the order to let the wedding be performed is coming from the guy who actually runs the church. The guy in question, William Love, does not run the church in question. The person who DOES run the church, Presiding Bishop Michael Curry, has said what he wants his church to do. This is the only example where you have anything close to a legitimate argument, and the person you are criticising is not the government, nor atheists, but the Presiding Bishop who runs the church in question.

The point I am making isn’t about any specific person or government forcing believers to perform SSM. It is the fact that believers are being forced to accept and perform SSM. It doesn’t matter if it’s the church itself as it is still someone forcing a person to go against their belief and conscience. The fact that a church is doing it may even be worse as they should know better and be the ones supporting those whose conscience forbids them.

But even the fact that the church is now saying SSM is OK seems a problem as they never agreed about this until recently and this seems to go against the majority of religions. So this only means that some churches have given in to the pressure from mainstream society and are now forcing their own to conform.

And, of course, Christians NEVER do that to people who don't share their views, do they? Of course not!

And 2 wrongs don't make a right.

Irrelevant. You are trying to change the subject in an effort to bolster your own position by posting things that are not related to the topic at hand, just intended to provoke a sense of outrage. But we are not talking about anything except churches being forced to perform same sex marriages when they don't want to. You have failed to provide any legitimate examples of where a church was forced to perform a same sex wedding when it initially refused to.

No I clarified that it wasn’t just about churches but also the associated facilities and other religious persons in positions of authority that represent the religion being made to accept SSM. Why would these have any less religious freedom. They still represent the church or religion and have a conscience? According to this I have more than supported this.

But what your also not seeing is the fundamental issue going on that is dividing society about marriage in general that doesn’t just apply to churches. This issue applies to private individuals and private entities being made to accept and promote SSM against their conscience or being attacked from merely expressing that marriage is between a man and women when under the constitution and human rights they have a right to express their beliefs and conscience.

As I pointed out attacking and diminishing those who oppose SSM and making out that traditional views amount to bigotry is what is gradually undermining the Church and religious authorities. The more people and entities are attacked and the propaganda of SSM is pushed the more this causes damage and weakens the church and religions position. It doesn’t have to begin with the church itself but by chipping away at the edges. That's how any strategy to undermine the the opposing camp is designed and not by a full frontal attack. That is how the activists are playing the game and that is their agenda.

 

[Speedwell]

So you not interested enough to support or comment on Christians who may have their religious rights denied but are willing to have a go at a Christian on this forum who may be concerned about Christians having their rights denied. Seems a little inconsistent.

I'm not concerned about Christians having their rights denied because I don't think that's happening. Christians who offer wedding services or venues to the general public aren't having their rights denied if they have to adapt to public accommodation laws. Controversy within a church about whether to marry gays has nothing to do with denying rights, in fact that such a controversy can exist is evidence that the government is not imposing itself on the situation. Your example from Sweden is only evidence of what happens when a religion voluntarily relinquishes its rights in order to became a state church.

 

[stevevw]

I'm not concerned about Christians having their rights denied because I don't think that's happening. Christians who offer wedding services or venues to the general public aren't having their rights denied if they have to adapt to public accommodation laws.

Then why have some of those Christians won their case against being forced to adapt to those public accommodations (SSM laws). This means that they do have a right to not follow the SSM laws if this is against their conscience and belief. I posted several examples on this. That also means all those who never got the chance to make it to court or just didnt bother to fight against being forced have been denied their rights.

Controversy within a church about whether to marry gays has nothing to do with denying rights,

That is illogical as it is more or less saying just because someone belongs to a church they don't have the same rights as the rest of people in society to live by their conscience and belief. Everyone according to Human Rights has the right to express and live by their beliefs and conscience. The fact that it is the church that is doing it makes it even worse as they should know better.

in fact that such a controversy can exist is evidence that the government is not imposing itself on the situation.

That doesnt make sense. The same situation is happening throughout society and the government is not always involved. In fact most of the cases where people have been denied their religious rights have not been initiated by the government but private citizens, organisations or activist groups. The matter is usually settled in court if it gets that far.

The main role I see regarding the government is that it has created the situation by making the law and then it is up to the courts to apply that law and so far it is being applied inconsistently and thats because the government has not clarified religious freedoms properly and this has created problems out in society.

Your example from Sweden is only evidence of what happens when a religion voluntarily relinquishes its rights in order to became a state church.

No the State religion has not relinquished their authority to the State. You don't understand what a State church means. A state church simply means that this is the church and religion the State has chosen to use as opposed to other churches. Just like in Britain it is the Chrurch of England.

The Swedish State church is the Evangelical Lutheran church and their official position of SSM is that a priest should have the right to decide whether they perform SSM. the fact that the Swedish PM is stepping in now and making all priests perform SSM shows he is forcing some who oppose to do it against their conscience.

The Church of Sweden "offers" both heterosexual and homosexual marriage ceremonies. Even though it is not against gay marriage, the church's official stance is that "no priest should be obliged to officiate at the wedding of a same-sex couple,"
Swedish P.M. Vows to Force All Priests to Perform Same-Sex Marriages Even If Their Faith Tells Them Not To

 

[Kylie]

As I clarified earlier this wasn’t just happening to churches but is also to individual priests. As you point out when it happens to the priest it also happens to the church. Because the church gives priests the choice to do SSM and this priest doesn't want to do it but a gay couple are complaining that he should. So the church itself are denying his right to follow his conscience due to the pressure from some members. As I stated if this continues the church will be forced to allow SSM in all their churches. So in the end it is forcing the hand of the church and priests.

Your assumptions about what the future will hold are just that - assumptions.

You’re missing the point. I put this in there to show how it is the continual pressure of people and in this case rich people who can afford to test the ruling in court. This is what will eventually cause things to change. But in the meantime its the pressure, disruption, financial cost and other consequences that fall onto the church that is not being acknowledged which can cause damage to the church. A damaged church is more vulnerable and subject to attacks.

Your point seems to be changing a lot. First your point was that churches ARE being forced to conduct SSM against their will. Now it's that they are being criticised for not performing SSM.

Yes I pointed this out before. But why are they being taken to court in the first place. It is this lack of respecting religious rights that is doing the damage in the meantime thus undermining the position of the religion she represents and making them more supceptible to SSM. This lady has had her livelihood and reputation harmed. Plus there are many others who either don't succeed legally or just struggle along or close down as a result.

Nonetheless, this kind of result shows that the thing you were so worried about in your last example just isn't going to happen.

Yep but once again it’s the damage caused in the meantime. Why take them to court in the first place. As the lawyers said
"The government should not force ordained ministers to act contrary to their faith under threat of jail time and criminal fines,"

The fact that these people are being taken to court in the first place shows the thinking out there in society that governments and others want to bring down religious entities and individuals over this situation. Because it is perceived as a breach of civil rights people are testing the law all the time and sometimes winning. Eventually there will be no more wins and people will be forced to conform.

Wait, now you claim the government wants to bring down religious institutions about this? Where in the world did you get that idea when it's private citizens who are leading the call for this?

I can't see how you missed it. That was the article. The Swedish PM has now decided that all priests in the State Church have to do SSM. In the past they had a choice based on their conscience. Now they have no choice. The PM likened it to Midwives having to do abortions so priests have to perform SSM. The bid difference Midwives are not priests who have to follow their beliefs in performing their duties so its a false analogy. This would be like forcing the Church of England to perform SSM

Swedish Church forced into gay marriages
“If you work as a midwife you must be able to perform abortions, otherwise you have to do something else. It is the same for priests who do not want to perform same-sex marriages,” he added.
Swedish Church forced into gay marriages

The Prime Minister is not a king. He can't pass a law by just saying, "This is how things are going to be from now on." So just because the PM says that the church can't refuse to perform SSM, doesn't mean it is now a law there. The article only says the PM made the claim. I couldn't find a single reference to it actually being passed into being an actual law in that country.

No he was being forced to perform SSM or else. The Episcopal Church allows civil SSM by priests but they can choose based on their conscience. Then in 2018 they decided all priests must perform SSM. So this priest said he did not want to and disagreed. He was then disciplined and he resigned.

This is a clear case that a priest was being forced to perform SSM against his conscience and a good example of how the pressure to conform to SSM is infiltrating the church where it has gradually caused them to relinquish their original belief due to pressure from SSM groups.

Where does it say he was the one being forced to perform the actual wedding?

And again, it was the CHURCH making the decision that it would perform SSM. If they reached the decision to perform SSM all by themselves, you can't turn around and complain that they were being forced into it.

Yeah it’s a bit different but if you read the article you will see that the State was trying to question its religious status thus forcing it to conform to State legislation which meant that the school would have to teach that SS relationships and thus marriage was OK.

The lawsuit stresses that the Community Care Facilities Act would give students the right “[t]o be free from acts that seek to change his or her sexual orientation, including efforts to change his or her gender expressions or to eliminate or reduce sexual or romantic attractions or feelings toward individuals of the same sex.”
Christian school raided by California gov't as religious freedom concerns cloud future

And thus totally irrelevant to the point you were making. Or do you think it's appropriate to waste my time?

It’s not just about performing SSM. It is also about whether a religious Seminary has the right to teach that traditional marriage is the only form of marriage they recognise. It goes to the heart of the matter in that if the school is forced to accept SSM then this weakens any religious entities from refusing to perform SSM. As the article says it would strip religious organisation of their ability to be true to their convictions because it would then be a breach of the law to not teach or perform SSM.

You seem to be taking a limited view of what is happening here. Like I said making people do something doesn’t start with just making the most obvious religions entities like the Catholic church or priests conform. It begins with attacks and changes to the fringes of other churches and religions who dont have as much power and changing the discourse in society through activism. If these fringe attacks are not stopped then this will have an impact on the bigger churches and priests and eventually forced them to conform.

If this lawsuit succeeds, it would set a new and worrisome precedent that organizations like Fuller can no longer expect to operate according to their consciences. It could strip Christian colleges and seminaries of the ability to be true to their convictions and foster a faithful Christian community.
Christian school raided by California gov't as religious freedom concerns cloud future

No. You are shifting the goalposts. I specifically asked you to provide examples of where churches were being forced to perform same sex marriage, ceremony, or reception when they did not want to. I asked for specifically that in post 798. So yes, at the moment, our discussion IS just about performing SSM.

You’re not seeing the bigger picture here. The Church simply expressed their belief that marriage was between a man and women on Facebook and then they had threats against them for doing so even to the point of death and burning their church down. The point is this is pressure to conform and it is this type of action that causes harm to those who resist and ostracises them. It creates a perception that the church has done something wrong and this then goes towards building the case that they should conform to SSM.

You're not seeing picture that I asked you to provide examples of churches being forced to perform SSM when they didn't want to, and instead are posting things that do not address the actual question.

Once again you’re not seeing the bigger picture. The Christian school which is an extension of the Church was attacked for stating their position on SSM which caused conflicts with some involved in an event they were participating in so they pull out as a result. In other words people were putting pressure on the school to conform to SSM if they wanted to be a part of the event that they had been involved with for years. So this is an indirect way they are trying to force the religion and its church to conform to performing SSM.

The move comes as Samaritan's Purse requires volunteer leaders who represent the organization to sign a statement of faith that expresses that marriage is only a union between a man and a woman.

Ah, but again, you're not seeing the picture.

Did I ask you for examples of churches being criticized for their position on same sex marriage? No.

I asked you for examples of churches actually being forced to perform same sex marriages against their will. You showing me that a school is being criticized because the administrators of the school don't agree with SSM is completely irrelevant to that.

The point I am making isn’t about any specific person or government forcing believers to perform SSM. It is the fact that believers are being forced to accept and perform SSM. It doesn’t matter if it’s the church itself as it is still someone forcing a person to go against their belief and conscience. The fact that a church is doing it may even be worse as they should know better and be the ones supporting those whose conscience forbids them.

You have not been shown any cases where any individual has been forced to perform a same sex marriage against their will.

But even the fact that the church is now saying SSM is OK seems a problem as they never agreed about this until recently and this seems to go against the majority of religions. So this only means that some churches have given in to the pressure from mainstream society and are now forcing their own to conform.

So? Times change, and so do opinions. There was once a time when divorce was seen as a terrible thing, and it was never tolerated. Now, it's seen as something which, while unfortunate, is perfectly acceptable. Are you so surprised that a similar change in attitude is taking place regarding SSM?

And 2 wrongs don't make a right.

So you agree that it's wrong when Christians do it. Then why are you here making the case that they shouldn't be forced to do something when you agree that not doing it is wrong?

Or is it that when someone says, "You can't force someone to do something if they think it's wrong to do that" it only applies if they are talking about forcing Christians to do it, but not when they're talking about forcing same sex couples to live without the right to marry the person they love?

No I clarified that it wasn’t just about churches but also the associated facilities and other religious persons in positions of authority that represent the religion being made to accept SSM. Why would these have any less religious freedom. They still represent the church or religion and have a conscience? According to this I have more than supported this.

But what your also not seeing is the fundamental issue going on that is dividing society about marriage in general that doesn’t just apply to churches. This issue applies to private individuals and private entities being made to accept and promote SSM against their conscience or being attacked from merely expressing that marriage is between a man and women when under the constitution and human rights they have a right to express their beliefs and conscience.

As I pointed out attacking and diminishing those who oppose SSM and making out that traditional views amount to bigotry is what is gradually undermining the Church and religious authorities. The more people and entities are attacked and the propaganda of SSM is pushed the more this causes damage and weakens the church and religions position. It doesn’t have to begin with the church itself but by chipping away at the edges. That's how any strategy to undermine the the opposing camp is designed and not by a full frontal attack. That is how the activists are playing the game and that is their agenda.

Say what you will, the fact remains that I specifically asked you to give me examples of churches who were forced to perform a same sex marriage when they did not want to, and you couldn't give me a single example. Instead, you had to pad your response with cases where it didn't actually happen, or tangential claims that are nothing more than a slippery slope argument.

 

[stevevw]

Your assumptions about what the future will hold are just that - assumptions.

But it’s not an assumption as it is already happening.

Your point seems to be changing a lot. First your point was that churches ARE being forced to conduct SSM against their will. Now it's that they are being criticised for not performing SSM.

Actually I clarified that it was not the church but the fringe entities and representatives that were being forced to conform. But nevertheless your creating an ‘EITHER and OR’ fallacy. Why can't both be happening. It seems logical that if people are being forced to conform to SSM they are also being criticised along the way. They both go hand in hand.

Nonetheless, this kind of result shows that the thing you were so worried about in your last example just isn't going to happen.

Yes in this example it has not but there are other examples I have shown it has happened. The religious person or entity has not succeeded in winning their case or stopping those imposing SSM on them because they didn’t fight it for whatever reason and as a result were sacked, resigned or were forced to close down their service or were unfairly found guilty.

Wait, now you claim the government wants to bring down religious institutions about this? Where in the world did you get that idea when it's private citizens who are leading the call for this?

Once again you are creating an ‘EITHER and OR’ fallacy. Both are happening. In some situations it is private citizens such as church management, SSM activists or those wanting to get marriage doing the forcing. In other situations it is the State as in the situation with the marriage celebrate being forced to conform to SSM by the City or the school being forced to teach SSM by the State.

The Prime Minister is not a king. He can't pass a law by just saying, "This is how things are going to be from now on." So just because the PM says that the church can't refuse to perform SSM, doesn't mean it is now a law there. The article only says the PM made the claim. I couldn't find a single reference to it actually being passed into being an actual law in that country.

From what I can find it appears the PM is trying to force all priests in the State church to conform to SSM. Even if it’s only a threat the PM is determined to change things and the threats show the bias of the government against the church. It shows that some governments are doing everything they can to force people to conform to SSM. We have already seen this with governments imposing tax penaties on religions and destroying individual marriage representatioves and businesses.

When we look at the track record of governments penalising and forcing organisations and individuals to conform to these ideologies such as with forced speech laws and denials of free speech and religious freedoms we begin to see there is a pattern of denial and bias and that this is a real threat that will inevitably happen.

Where does it say he was the one being forced to perform the actual wedding?

It does have to always say. The fact that the priest was discplined and not allowed to stay in the church and follow his conscience shows he was forced to conform or else.

And again, it was the CHURCH making the decision that it would perform SSM. If they reached the decision to perform SSM all by themselves, you can't turn around and complain that they were being forced into it.

Of course you can. Just because its a church doesnt mean people cannot protest that their rights are being denied or that the church is not doing something wrong within society. Like if the church was sacrificing babies on the alter does that mean no one can complain that its wrong. You seem to think just because its a church that everyone must bow down to what actions or positions they take. AS I mentioned earlier the fact its a church doing the forcing makes it even worse.

And thus totally irrelevant to the point you were making. Or do you think it's appropriate to waste my time?

It’s not totally irrelevant. My point was that the religious entities which included schools were being forced to conform to SSM. IMO part of this is schools being conformed to teach SSM which would then cause the church to have to teach and follow SSM as they are part of the same religious entity.

No. You are shifting the goalposts. I specifically asked you to provide examples of where churches were being forced to perform same sex marriage, ceremony, or reception when they did not want to. I asked for specifically that in post 798. So yes, at the moment, our discussion IS just about performing SSM.

Yes but if you carefully read that post I clarified that it may not be happening in the church at this stage but rather happening to the associated entities and representatives on the fringes of the church. So you’re asking me for something I have not made a claim about.

You're not seeing picture that I asked you to provide examples of churches being forced to perform SSM when they didn't want to, and instead are posting things that do not address the actual question.

As pointed out above I clarified that it was not necessarily happening in the church as this stage. Though I have shown that it has. We just disagree on what being forced means. As with the above the church suffered a consequence of expressing their position on SSM and were threatened to have the church set on fire if they did not retract that belief. To me that am being forced to concede event if they chose not to its still saying stop promoting your beliefs and conform to SSM. The meaning of force is being compelled or coerced to do something. That seems to fit the description.

Ah, but again, you're not seeing the picture.
Did I ask you for examples of churches being criticized for their position on same sex marriage? No.
I asked you for examples of churches actually being forced to perform same sex marriages against their will. You showing me that a school is being criticized because the administrators of the school don't agree with SSM is completely irrelevant to that.

As explained your request is irrelevant because I did not make the claim you want me to provide evidence for. But I agree that this example is not exactly showing a fringe religious entity being forced to perform SSM. The reason I this example was to show how it can indirectly force a church to conform to SSM. If a school if force to teach SSM then that would also put pressure on the church that runs the school to conform to SSM.

You have not been shown any cases where any individual has been forced to perform a same sex marriage against their will.

This comes down to how we perceive what being forced to do something means. You say they have to actually perform the SSM to be forced. I am saying that if they are forced into a situation where if refuse to perform the SSM they will suffer consequences then they are still being forced. For example on this forum people are told they cannot swear or support certain activities that are against Christian values.

I mean what would you call it when someone is made to do something they don’t want to do and perhaps lose their job as a consequence. It seems some of the articles agree with the language they use. For example
Baker Forced to Make Gay Wedding Cakes
Stokes said Northeast Ohio is home to many diverse viewpoints, “and I’m simply asking that my county also respect me, my business, and my freedoms as an American citizen instead of forcing me to write or speak messages that contradict my beliefs.”
Wedding officiant sues Ohio county over law forcing ministers to officiate same-sex weddings

So? Times change, and so do opinions. There was once a time when divorce was seen as a terrible thing, and it was never tolerated. Now, it's seen as something which, while unfortunate, is perfectly acceptable. Are you so surprised that a similar change in attitude is taking place regarding SSM?

The Bible is not totally against divorce so it’s not a case of changing times. The bible allows divorce on the grounds of infidelity and desertion. Besides just because secular society is promoting divorce all the time doesn’t mean that this has become acceptable to Christians or the right thing to do in all situations. Your assuming a lot.

But there is a very small number in Christianity that allow SSM in the church and even the Pope has clarified its unacceptable. The churchs that do allow SSM are on the fring and have a history of rebelling against mainstream teachings. So no times are changing within the mainstream church and thats what matters.

So you agree that it's wrong when Christians do it. Then why are you here making the case that they shouldn't be forced to do something when you agree that not doing it is wrong?
Or is it that when someone says, "You can't force someone to do something if they think it's wrong to do that" it only applies if they are talking about forcing Christians to do it, but not when they're talking about forcing same sex couples to live without the right to marry the person they love?

Do what. I was agreeing that it was wrong for Christians to push their beliefs onto others generally and not that they are wrong in standing up for their beliefs and following their conscience on SSM. Both Christians and non Christians are wrong to push their beliefs on to others.

The important thing is that everyone has the right to hold and express their views and belief and follow their conscience. But at the moment regarding SSM we are seeing more SSM advocates and activists trying to push their views and ideology onto Christians. In fact it has got that bad that a CHristian cannot even express their support for traditional marriage without being attacked which I find crazy as only a couple of years ago just about everyone accepted the right to support traditional marriage. What has changed.

Say what you will, the fact remains that I specifically asked you to give me examples of churches who were forced to perform a same sex marriage when they did not want to, and you couldn't give me a single example. Instead, you had to pad your response with cases where it didn't actually happen, or tangential claims that are nothing more than a slippery slope argument.

First once again I have clarified in post 798 that it may not be happening in the church at the moment. You have obviously misunderstood things. Second even if we go along with your request it all comes down to what interpretation you put on forced. You say that someone losing their job or suffering damages as a result of being forced into a corner to either perform SSM or else if not being forced to perform SSM.

I disagree and say it is. You don’t have to actually do the act to be forced to do the act. It is also about being denied the choice not to do the act. I have given examples and think they show people are being force. Even the people and artciles state this. But despite all this your missing the point. The original issue was that SSM supporters are imposing their views onto Christians in one way or another. This is a denial of religious freedom and people following their conscience. Forced or not this is wrong. Trying to narrow the arguement down to specifics doesnt change that.