to feel despair at the gay marriage vote

The church, in the form of those people who worship there, offers its service to God. It isn't a service (in the sense referred to) to worshippers.

No one needs to attend church or any worship gathering. It is a choice which individuals make.

A B and B on the other hand, is just like a hotel or a spa or a pub or a hospital or a place of learning, offering its services to the public. It must be open to everyone and not discriminate on the grounds of gender, race, sexual orientation or anything else.

This law has been passed by parliament and tested and refined in the courts. It is the law of the land and if it is broken, then appropriate sanctions will be imposed.

Can you imagine this kind of discrimination in any other walk of life because I cannot.

Imagine a policeman, doctor, nurse, teacher,lawyer...... (I could go on and on) deciding they did not want to offer their service to someone because of their sexuality ??????

Excellent question ginny. I would like to know, too!

I have visions of all sorts of test cases being taken though our own courts and the EU human rights system, in order to put in the fine print for every scenario.

There could be questions about the royals - a gay couple might come to the throne and have children. We might get that republic sooner than we expected!

Personally, I find it fascinating. We are talking about a basic human need for love and companionship. The invention of marriage and issues of property and inheritance have already sullied this man-made construction. I'm happy not being married and can highly recommend it.

The law will allow gay marriage. Which at the moment it doesn't'.

No church minister will be required to perform it against their wishes. The state doesn't' t have that much authority!

They don't have to offer the service if they don't want to. That's how I see it.

So, am I confused ? The church is offering a service but only some officials have to offer it ,therefore, some are allowed to discriminate. Or is this not actually a law just a guideline ? Genuine question.

No one is 'dragged' through the court. We have a justice system in this country which delivers its verdict according to the law. The law is quite clear. If a service is offerered, in this case a B & B, then the providers of that service are not allowed to discriminate.

Just a thought, If churches or singular church officials can decide according to their beliefs. How come a couple who did not want two gay men staying at their B & B were dragged through court and had to pay compensation ? Personally I don't care what a persons sexual orintation is but it does seem like ' one law for one ' and a different one for others.

Marthanne - I am also surprised by your post. Do you not believe in including everybody in your love? I thought that was the Christian message?

I have some good Christian friends and I am so glad that they are not narrow-minded and bigoted.

No problem at all. I could understand someone being upset if they, or any church they were a member of, had a course of action imposed on it which they felt to be contrary to what they believe to right. But that isn't happening.

Exactly MiceElf So what is the problem with that?

No church is being either asked or required to change its practice. But any denomination who wishes to, will now be allowed, in law, to solemnise a marriage between two same sex people.

Stuff I have been reading in the last few days leads me to suspect that for many gays the importance of this vote was in social recognition of their equal standing with heteros rather than a strong desire to be married in church.

Please NO J08

marthanne I am quite astonished at your suggestion that Gays should have their own church and ceremony

I didn't think anyone was asking the Church of England to change it rules.

Gays answer before God for themselves. What I feel is that anybody in this country can start a church so why don't the gays have their own church and ceremony. In law they are joined. Jesus can still be the head of their church-why do they need the Church of England to change its rules etc

Sorry feetlebaum. I was trying to be Miranda-ish.

j08 Sez you!

Ariadne In fact, 'Jesus' (Yeshua) was a great supporter of the Jewish laws, although he dismissed them when it was to his advantage. That's if he did anything we've been told about - there is no way of knowing.

Particularly the Old Testament, where people were severely punished by God for transgressions. I thought Jesus came to transform this, by suffering for our sins, and to teach love and tolerance? But I do accept that men (and I mean men) have interpreted it all to suit themselves over the centuries!

I can understand and to some degree sympathise with those who feel uneasy about a major change to a much cherished institution. Despair, on the other hand, seems an extreme reaction.

Feetlebaum! rude !

Dorsetpennt.

I totally agree with you. Sadly, there are those who think only their point of view is valid. I have found that they are normally the ones who actually cannot explain their view, they just have it. The only thing that make a mockery of marriage is those who make the vows, be it in church or in a civil ceremony and don't keep them.

I can't believe someone wants to leave GN because some people hold different views.
I have plenty of gay friends. One couple I know from New York met when they were in the US Army when they were 19 years old. Now in their sixties they are together still. Would you say their relationship isn't as committed as a hetrosexual couple? Why should their relationship not be recognised legally other then a 'civil arrangement' - those who practice a religion are unable to marry - why? The Bible was written thousands of years ago when mans' outlook was completely different, its about time that its' outlook was modernised.