That summarises in a nutshell the reason why so few understand the CofE's position. They believe a marriage can only be between a man and a woman, so by their and they would argue society's definition, it is simply impossible for a marriage between two people of the same sex to exist. Their view is that discrimination under the law has been removed by civil partnerships.
My view is that their view shouldn't influence civil law.
I've heard christians say that the purpose of marriage is for the conception and raising of children and therefore only a male-female marriage is a marriage.
This manages to ignore all the married heterosexual couples who can't, or choose not to, have children as well as all the unmarried heterosexual couples who do have children. Plus, the advancements that have been made in fertility medicine.
"When asking questions like this to a general sampling of the population, it is important to note that people's definition of 'sin' may differ based upon their religious background and beliefs. We intentionally used the word, but also know it means different things to different people," said Scott McConnell, director of LifeWay Research. McConnell noted that in 2011, Gallup's annual Values and Beliefs poll approached the question of homosexuality asking if it was "morally acceptable.""While we find 44 percent believe homosexuality is a 'sin,' Gallup reports 56 percent of Americans consider gay and lesbian relations morally acceptable," McConnell said.
As 56+44=100, this would seem to suggest that any bias from use of the word 'sin' would be minimal.
There was a woman on the radio last week who made what I thought was an excellent point - "If you don't believe in same sex marriage" she said "don't marry someone of the same sex".
My view is that their view shouldn't influence civil law.
The problem is we don't have a separate civil law in this country as we have an established church and the canons of that church are incorporated into the laws of this country. You may not like this, but it is the status quo and therefore any change in the law should take this fact into account.
The official CofE position is broader than merely limiting the purpose to procreation.
A large percentage of 8% is at worst going to skew the stats by something under eight percent.
Some of the other 92% may have rejected the premise of 'sin' as you suggest
I think you (or maybe me) are misreading the stats there.
They said that, within the population of people who don't go to church, just 8% of that population felt that homosexuality was "a sin".
But for all we know, 91% of that group might still think homosexuality is "wrong", but just don't believe in "sin".
Meanwhile within the church-going population it is generally taught that wrong = sin = wrong.
Hence why it can skew the poll.
The second Gallup poll seems clearer.
There was a woman on the radio last week who made what I thought was an excellent point - "If you don't believe in same sex marriage" she said "don't marry someone of the same sex".
Or..
Lifeway Research http://www.lifeway.com/LifeWay-Research/c/N-1z13wgl
whose strapline is "Enlightening todays Church with Relevant Insight"
😕
No Singletracked, not an assumption.
you mean you hadn't assumed i was brought up in a Catholic environment?
So you support it, or do you just think it should be legal despite your personal feelings?
I'm not trying to avoid the issue, but I'm not sure those are the only options. I guess I'm not clear on what it means to 'support' gay marriage. But i certainly think it should be allowed, and those [i]are [/i]my personal feelings
How many Catholic churches actually do that? I strongly suspect the number is so few as to make it pretty much irrelevant.
No but it is existence proof that the catholic church will bless same sex unions
The fact is that the vast majority of Christians do believe homosexuality is a sin, and that gay marriage is wrong.This is based on my experience of being brought up a Christian, in a Christian country, having listened to the pronouncements of various Christian leaders, and knowing a fair bit about Christianity in certain parts of Africa through some work I've done.
No, basing on your experience makes it opinion. Finding and presenting the data on it would make it fact. But of course it would have to be true first.
Yes that doesn't apply to every single Christian but it's a reasonable generalisation to make - otherwise the concept of Christianity at all is meaningless.
No, it is not a reasonable generalisation, because it is not one of the characteristics which unifies that group. Generalisations which reference some unifying definition of the group would be a reasonable assumption
Do you think it's also unfair to generalise that most Christians believe Jesus is the son of God,
No, 'cos that's pretty much one of the things that defines them as Christian.
or that they believe in the concept of hell?
dunno about that one, but i'd be surprised if all Christians had the [i]same [/i]concept of hell
No but it is existence proof that the catholic church will bless same sex unions
Saying 'the Catholic Church will bless same sex unions' (examples please?) rather disingenuously makes it sound like that's the official line of the Catholic Church. Whereas it's actually as follows:
Homosexual acts are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
So any Catholic Church that does do that is going against mainstream Catholicism.
No, basing on your experience makes it opinion. Finding and presenting the data on it would make it fact. But of course it would have to be true first.
You mean like this data I already posted?
Seventy-one percent of those who attend a church service once weekly or more believe it is a sin, compared to a mere 8 percent who never attend a church service.Among evangelical, fundamentalist or born again Christians, 82 percent say homosexuality is a sin while only 14 percent say it is not a sin. This is compared to the 29 percent of those from other religions who say homosexuality is sinful.
Whatever the flaws in the survey might be, it still clearly shows (as I claimed) that an overwhelming majority of christians (surveyed in America) believe that homosexuality is a sin. This is backed up by own experience. Trying to claim otherwise is really pretty daft.
[b]The problem is we don't have a separate civil law in this country as we have an established church[/b] and the canons of that church are incorporated into the laws of this country.
Exactly my point too 🙂
Whatever the flaws in the survey might be, it still clearly shows (as I claimed) that an overwhelming majority of christians (surveyed in America) believe that homosexuality is a sin.
No that's right, but it's not what you initially claimed is it?
Wikipedia
During the 1990s, a discussion began in the Roman Catholic Church about blessings for same-sex unions. In the Roman Catholic Diocese of Aachen in Germany, five same-sex unions received a blessing in German town of Mönchengladbach.[83] In 2007, one same-sex union received a blessing in German town of Wetzlar in the Roman Catholic Diocese of Limburg.
The fact that this can happen shows that there is no Catholic doctrine on this, as such there is no Mainstream Catholicism in this context, there is a 'majority', but so what?
nah but that what they think 🙂 bit woolly on catholic stuff but pretty sure original sin means we're all going to hell by default, you've got to opt out at somepoint. IIRC CoE are more along the lines of "reasonably everyone sins at some point in their life so you are going to the big fire anyway unless you redeem yourself" not a massive difference.Never been told by a Xtian ( of any sort ) that I'm going to burn in hell. Btw
Of course you could turn it all around at the last minute and repent, might be worth a shot. But that brings me to death bed confessions, always seemed a bit crap to me, you can be as much of a git as you want your whole life aslong as you say sorry (and mean it) right at the end. That and the "eye of a needle" thing always struck my cynical mind as a bit of a money earner for the churches.
Exactly my point too
As I alluded to in my post, that doesn't surprise me but it does mean that creating what you want is considerably more complicated than a straightforward change in law as it fundamentally changes the nature of our present constitutional settlement.
But that brings me to death bed confessions, always seemed a bit crap to me, you can be as much of a git as you want your whole life aslong as you say sorry (and mean it) right at the end. That and the "eye of a needle" thing always struck my cynical mind as a bit of a money earner for the churches.
How would these generate money for the church?
.
No that's right, but it's not what you initially claimed is it?
What did I initially claim then?
The fact that this can happen shows that there is no Catholic doctrine on this, as such there is no Mainstream Catholicism in this context, there is a 'majority', but so what?
*sigh* - that's just patently untrue, where do you think this quote comes from? 🙄
Homosexual acts are contrary to the natural law. They close the sexual act to the gift of life. They do not proceed from a genuine affective and sexual complementarity. Under no circumstances can they be approved.
A tiny number of isolated cases doesn't change that.
It's utterly ridiculous to claim that, in general, christians aren't at the very least disapproving of homosexuality. And you know it.
What did I initially claim then?
this...
The fact is that the vast majority of Christians do believe homosexuality is a sin, and that gay marriage is wrong.
It's utterly ridiculous to claim that, in general, christians aren't at the very least disapproving of homosexuality. And you know it.
Oh right, yes that's a much more convincing argument! 🙄
Let me try
It's utterly ridiculous to claim that, in general, Christians as a single group, share very much in common at all. And you know it.
*sigh* - that's just patently untrue, where do you think this quote comes from?
Dunno, tradition?
What do they mean by 'natural law'?
It's utterly ridiculous to claim that, in general, Christians as a single group, share very much in common at all. And you know it.
How about that they're all.. You know... Christian?
Singletracked.
My quote regarding assumptions didn't relate to you, as you well know.
You accused me of making assumptions - I was relating personal experience.
However I did assume you were a Catholic. Am I wrong?
If so, I apologise.
Adds weight to my argument re sense of humour though. 🙂
I like how the argument is continuing but I am no longer involved.
[url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christian_denominational_positions_on_homosexuality ]List of Christian denominational positions on homosexuality[/url]
TLDR: Most Christian denominations do not allow gay marriage and consider homosexuality to be sinful.
EDIT: Shall I make a pivot table?
EDIT: Shall I make a pivot table?
DO IT!
A pivotable what?
A pivotable what?
They're more powerful than God. [s]Seriously[/s]. 😉
It's utterly ridiculous to claim that, in general, Christians as a single group, share very much in common at all. And you know it.
I found [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/beliefs/basics_1.shtml ]a list of what christians believe[/url]!
Oooh! look!
A 2011 report based on telephone surveys of American Catholics conducted by the Public Religion Research Institute found that 43% support same-sex marriage, 31% support civil unions, and 22% oppose any legal recognition of a same-sex relationship. 56% believe that sexual relations between two people of the same sex are not sinful. 73% favor anti-discrimination laws, 63% support the right of gay people to serve openly in the military, and 60% favor allowing same-sex couples to adopt children.[6][44] A 2012 Pew Forum survey which asked American Catholic respondents if they supported or opposed same-sex marriage found that 52% supported it and 37% opposed it.[45] C[b]atholic support of gay rights is thus higher than that of other Christian groups and of the general population[/b]
As I alluded to in my post, that doesn't surprise me but it does mean that creating what you want is considerably more complicated than a straightforward change in law as it fundamentally changes the nature of our present constitutional settlement.
If the church isn't homophobic, we can change the law.
Can we change the law?
Catholic support of gay rights is thus higher than that of other Christian groups and of the general population
But you can't say that christians aren't homophobic, just because catholics aren't 😉
That survey proves that not only are the church leadership out of touch with the general public, they're out of touch with their members.
Adds weight to my argument re sense of humour though
Perhaps, but then we all look dull and lugubrious when compared to the sparkling wit and repartee you have displayed
Personal Belief ? Religious Doctrine ? Organised Religious Views.
Let's all stop mixing these up.
That survey proves that not only are the church leadership out of touch with the general public, they're out of touch with their members.
True, but I don't think the Catholic church is led by the views of its flock. I'm pretty sure it's not a democracy or run by referendum
Personal Doctrine ? Religious Views? Organised Religious Belief .Let's all stop mixing these up.
Yes, I agree!
Personal Belief ? Religious Doctrine ? Organised Religious Views.
I've been trying for years, but I think some people enjoy the sport too much.
Summary so far:
At least half of the population are in favour of same-sex marriage irrespective of their religious beliefs or lack thereof, at least based on statistics from the US.
However, most organised religions are against it by policy and thus don't accurately represent the views of their respective flocks.
How am I doing so far?
So, the Christian faiths either need to update their doctrine to reflect modern values, or they need to educate their followers as to where they're going wrong.
History would suggest that the latter is more likely to happen. I'd really like it if this weren't the case, which is why we atheists keep raising it as a topic of discussion.
I'm not trying to avoid the issue, but I'm not sure those are the only options. I guess I'm not clear on what it means to 'support' gay marriage. But i certainly think it should be allowed, and those are my personal feelings
"In favour of," maybe. I'm not asking if you're likely to be out on the streets with a harshly worded placard. (-:
Assuming you're not being deliberately evasive then that answers my question I think. Thank you.
The fact that this can happen shows that there is no Catholic doctrine on this
Does it? Or does it just show that some people choose to ignore it sometimes?
If you're looking at Catholicism as a whole, six couples isn't proof of anything, it's statistical error.
I like how the argument is continuing but I am no longer involved.
So do I. (-:
EDIT: Shall I make a pivot table?
Only if it's going to be used by a man and a woman in a consenting, loving relationship.
I found a list of what christians believe!
Hmm, that's a pretty sketchy list (thats a slight on the BBC, not on you by the way!)
Bit on Saints is purely a Catholic belief not a general Christian one.
God loves everyone unconditionally ([b]though people have to comply with various conditions in order to achieve salvation[/b]) - just plain wrong. The WHOLE point of Christianity is that there is nothing WE can do to be saved. Again, this is something that creeps into Catholicism, but not generally Christianity.
Human beings can get to know God through prayer, worship, love, and mystical experiences - Haha, ok, get their point, but apalling wording!
The middle one is the biggy - Christianity is not a salvation by works type deal. This kind of goes with the comment above about deathbed salvation - yes, it is possible that if someone on their deathbed truly repents then it doesn't matter what they have done during their life. A sin is a sin is a sin in God's eyes - one of the slightly more difficult to grasp bits of doctrine, but an important one!
I think you have it,
So, the Christian faiths either need to update their doctrine to reflect modern values, or they need to educate their followers as to where they're going wrong.
I think we would have more faith in the integrity of churches if they did the latter, even if it went against our own views, rather than change their teachings to ingratiate themselves with the masses (npi)
History would suggest that the latter is more likely to happen. I'd really like it if this weren't the case, which is why we atheists keep raising it as a topic of discussion.
The middle one is the biggy - Christianity is not a salvation by works type deal. This kind of goes with the comment above about deathbed salvation - yes, it is possible that if someone on their deathbed truly repents then it doesn't matter what they have done during their life. A sin is a sin is a sin in God's eyes - one of the slightly more difficult to grasp bits of doctrine, but an important one!
What happens to the eternal souls of all those born pre-Christ?
What happens to the eternal souls of all those born post-Christ who never hear of christianity?
Does it? Or does it just show that some people choose to ignore it sometimes?
it does, because if it didn't then ignoring it would make the ceremony meaningless
The WHOLE point of Christianity is that there is nothing WE can do to be saved.
Really? Wow.
I thought the whole point of Christianity was because it provided a moral compass on how to live your life (as has been asserted on STW previously). If the whole thing is ultimately pointless than that would seem to be something of a contradiction?
