So when some atheists moan and complain that Christians public prayer outside of Churches somehow curtails there freedom and rights and make out a harmless prayer is "creeping fundelmentalism out to force religion upon us", have they got a "persecution complex"?
Which atheists? I'd say, yes, yes they do. Private space.
Oh wait, let me guess, it doesnt work that way around, thats somehow diffrent, like it always is.
Well.....yes. One can own a private space and pray outside of it or pray in a public space without being a representative of the state. Registrars for a wedding, however, are acting on behalf of the state and thus are bound by the laws of the state, including those involving equality.
(If you don't want to have it pointed out that the situations you've chosen are different, don't choose different situations. Simple.)
Its amazing how you actually act like its unreasonable for Christians to be against gay marriage within Churches, regardless of if its choice, where does the line stop, now its within the Church itself we're so called infringing the secular world.
It's unreasonable because if Cameron's suggestion goes ahead, then the religious will have the ability to discriminate as registrars (representatives of the state) against a protected class under equality legislation (homosexuals). Not only is this discriminatory against homosexuals, it is also discriminatory against the non-religious, who will not be able to discriminate as they please just because they happen to hold a particular belief.
Again - don't whine about persecution when this idea would actually give you more privileges than the homosexuals and non-religious people you claim are persecuting you.
Whos going to decide its okay for the gays to marry in Church?
Did you miss what David Cameron suggested? The churches themselves that want to.
The whole things a mockery, the notion of being married in a Church shouldnt even be getting this kind of priviledge.
Then churches can forfeit the right to act as registrar and just perform religious ceremonies that celebrate the wedding according to whichever tradition they prefer, but which are not legally binding (registry office part can be done separately).
It's not like Christians, for example, need to be the ones legally recognising the marriage. My kingdom is not of this world, and all that.
Gay marriage within the secular, civil world, thats a diffrent story, but this about Churches, its laughable.
Again - as registrars, religious institutions are already acting on behalf of the secular civil world. If they want to discriminate, drop the notion of being a registrar. If they want to be registrars, then drop the discrimination.
