Hmm, concerned for the future of the church. who knows what will happen, I mean look what happened when Civil Partnerships were introduced. the same people predicted that people would be lining up to marry their pets. They weren’t exactly spot on with that one!
You are right there, and if the decision had gone the other way I am sure there would still have been many who “seemed seriously demoralised and deeply apprehensive about future.” It generally works that way, the losers don’t like it – not really a revelation lol.
So the ones that are upset are the ones who want to control and limit the choices made by individual congregations. Sounds like the fundamentalist ethos.
It is suggested in various reports up to 4,300 minister will leave the church. So far only 2 have done so — 4,298 turkeys still to go.
tHE CHURCH IN SCOTLAND IS DOING THE RIGHT THING BY STANDING UP TO BIGOTS AND RACIST AND STANDING UP FOR CIVIL RIGHTS AND EQUAL RIGHTS, DO YOU WANT RACIST AND BIGOTS WHO ARE TERROISTS, AND HARRASSERS, TO R;UN OVER THE NATION AND COUNTRIES ABUSING PEOPLES FAMILIES AND CHILDREN LIKE THEY; HAVE BEEN , OR DO YOU WANT PEACEFUL PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE IN CIVIL RIGHTS AND EQUAL RIGHT , TO IMPLACE FAIRNESS AND KIND TREATMENT TO ALL PEOPLE FAMILIES BACK INTO THIS NATION, ANND WALK IN HARMONY; LOVE AND HUMANITY , THIS SHOULD BE A NO BRAINER , PEOPLE WAKE THE HELL UP RACIST AND BIGGOTS CARE FOR NO ONE THEY ARE MALICIOUS AND VINDICTIVE PEOPLE WHO CAUSE TROUBLE FOR ALL OTHERS, GET A CLUE. YOU MARCH FOR HUMANITY AND HUMAN RIGHTS LIKE THE PRESEDENT SAID , ITS THE RIGHT THING TO DO , DO YOU LOVE YOUR CHILDREN , THEN LOVE OTHER PEOPLE CHILDREN AND KNOW THEY; SHOULD LOVE THEIR TOO A;ND WISH THEM WELL
Whoa, wall of text. *Goes cross-eyed*
Must admit, when anyones shouting I don’t very often want to listen.
Good, get rid of all the ‘fundies’ who make so many lives miserable with their hatreds and discriminations!
That we should cause such debates just because of how we’re born…
I hope this tension destroys the Kirk,.
Christianity (and islam and judaism and hinduism etc etc) are characterised by hatred, bigotry, intolerance and division.
Anything that damages this toxic cults should be celebrated.
David, your attitude has gone past irritating and is actually into vaguely threatening. On an article about a church proving that it is not characterised by hatred, you continue to insist that it is. The Kirk will go on, accpeting gay ministers, hopefully performing gay weddings and accepting its gay congregation quite happily. If you can’t see that, I feel very sorry for you, because you are clearly blinded by your bigotry and are everything you profess to hate.
Look in a mirror.
Why is it ‘threatening” to point out that religion is defined by hatred and division when it is patently true?
Religion (irrespective of what religion it is) positions itself as being the interpretation of the word of a fictiional ‘god’ and thereby it elevates its own members to a special status because they claim that their adherents have the inside scoop.
That is divisive.
And when you consider the grotesque levels of cancerous homophobia still displayed by most organised religjons how on EARTH can you claim that relligion is a force for good.
If the Kirk in Scotland wants to ordain gay clergy then whoopee doo for them.
I still regard the Kirk as a haven for exclusion and bigotry and am delighted that the issue of gay clergy is splitting the churcn.
Anyone with a level of intelligence can see that damaging religion is good for society as a whole.
In the 21st century belief in a fictional, malevolent sky fairy is a sign of either wilful stupidity or mental illnes
> Religion (irrespective of what religion it is) positions itself as being the interpretation of the word of a fictiional ‘god’ and thereby it elevates its own members to a special status because they claim that their adherents have the inside scoop.
This is incorrect and demonstrates, again, a complete lack of any learning of theology or philosophy.
David’s comments are always angry and often bigoted. Had he been born in other circumstances, he would now be intoning about the evil of gays with the same nastiness.
“Church of Scotland’s stance on accepting practising gay ministers” ….does the practising bit mean gay ministers that actually have gay sex or only celibate ones?
If anybody should be judging on this, and I think noone should be, then it should be the people in the pews and not the kirk…At least the MPs are supposed to vote on behalf of their constituency, does this general assembly represent anyone?
Celibate L&G people can be ministers in the Church of Scotland. The recent debate is on whether people in same-sex relationships (so, yes, “practising”), can be.
The Church of Scotland is relatively democratic, and did a major consultation before debating this issue in May and deciding to move in the direction of allowing ministers in same-sex relationships – certainly much more detailed consultation through its individual churches on this issue than most MPs ever do of their constituents on any issue!
Amazing that PN hasn’t picked up on a major story over at the Christian Legal Centre. 4 people that lost cases here to gay equality laws are trying to trump our rights and establish the right to discriminate at the European Courts. Is anyone representing our interests in those cases? The government has already opposed gay marriage in the European Court, so what steps could be taken to ensure our case is put forward properly?
Yes, it is amazing!. It was reported in the Telegraph on Sunday as well
I wonder if they can just say nothing (ie not defend it or oppose it) and let the European courts decide?
I am always worried about leaving political decisions like these to judges. I hope that the ECHR follows the previous decisions of the English courts.
Look out for the Christian terrorist.