(03-31-2012, 12:34 AM)kandrathe Wrote: This is where religion becomes intransigent. It's in the book. Those religious groups who have "tolerated" gayness are seen as going against commonly held doctrine.
As in other things, 'common doctrine' has to adapt and change, and I think this is another area where the time has come to modify it. As I mentioned in another post, 50 years ago, it was 'common doctrine' for churches to deny interracial marriage, and the government participated, too. Is anyone here going to argue that 'common doctrine' of that time should be upheld now?
Social change takes time, and it's coming on this issue. Just a question of when at this point.
As an aside, many would say, and I agree at this point, that churches shouldn't be forced to marry gay couples. They do have the freedom to do that if they wish, since there are other outlets for that service. However, (and I don't have the ultimate answer to this conundrum) with the parallels to racial issues, would people go nuts if a church refused to marry an interracial couple now? I think they would. In 50 years, will gay marriages be viewed the same? I don't have those answers. Just musing on that a bit.
(03-31-2012, 12:34 AM)kandrathe Wrote: The opposition to gayness from religious groups is based on Judaic law and that it is outright declared sinful in the Bible.
As usual, those passages are subject to interpretation, of course. And, the bible had editors with an agenda. Was that actually the holy word, or just the word of the editors' political agenda at that time?
I won't go any deeper than that, I don't want to start a religion thread, too.
--Mav