There certainly is a strong argument that preventing those religous organisations who wish to exercise their relgious freedom by celebrating marriages of same sex couples would be a violation of article 9. Whereas, allowing religious groups to decide whether or not to engage in same sex marriages would be in compliance with article 9.
How can two men marry? or even two women? The idea is ludicrious. Marriage is for the continuation of the human being. Two men can’t produce a baby on their own and neither can two women. As well as creating children, marriage is about nuturing them and bringing joy to the parents of the children, as they watch them grow. That’s the real joy of sex.
Ok, i have a feeling people are gonna hate me for this, but i kind of agree. If people dont believe in a certain thing, we shouldnt force it on them xx
I agree. And this is coming from a strong anti-theist atheist haha.
Naomi, you have missed the point, No one wants to force anything on anyone. The argument is about allowing legal recognition for the same sex marriages carried out in LGBT-friendly faiths, such as Quakers.
I knew this would happen and we have got to be careful. We need to respect the rights of the religious here as well. Protestant ministers(in some or all denominations of Protestantism) have to marry any members of their congregation who ask to be married which would lead to huge problems if the minister personally holds reservations about it. And it is clear that if a same-sex couple were to approach a religious institution, ask to be married there and the institution were to refuse then some would take the institution to court for discrimination and probably win. Or the institution may say yes for fear of this. Pushing same-sex marriage into the religious world without sufficient protection for people of faith would just be a gross breach of their human rights. This is coming from a strong anti-theist.
It is a breach of human rights but unfortunately people have the right to believe in their hateful religions. You shouldn’t be able to force people to marry gay couples, interracial couples, couples who aren’t of their faith, etc. if they don’t want to. I honestly don’t care if any form of religious marriage is legalized, I would like civil marriage.
To force poor Church of England to approve marriage equality – act of incredible religious intolerance. But ban to conduct marriage ceremony for another institution as she wish – act of justice. Its so Catholic!
I only want them to do this if it makes the C4M REALLY angry. I want to rub their faces in it.
This NGO are wrong.
What’s wrong is same sex marriage not being equal, and homosexuals and bisexuals not having equal rights/being mistreated
Homophobes are the wrong ones
When I say it not being equal, I mean legal and equal to heterosexual marriages in law (like how in the US it’s not federally recognized). SSM is equal though in a moral sense.
Thanks Out4Marriage – great to see a strong and dynamic organisation speaking sense. Ensuring equal marriage builds a stronger, family friendly and cohesive society that values loving relationships.
You were the one telling me the other day that the ECHR couldn’t possibly override our governments laws regarding forcing churches into accepting gay marriages. This was PRECISELY the comment I was making, and I was knocked down for even mentioning it. Now these people say the same thing and you praise them to the skies.