same sex marriage-in church

Jesus was accepting of all including the controversial figures of his day. Gay couples have had a lot of prejudice put on them in the past and the church should follow Jesus's example and treat them like anyone else. I am delighted the Church in Scotland has decided this, so they should

Agree Twice - all that should matter to the church is that the two people concerned are serious about the marriage and that they love and are committed to each other.

Agree absolutely!

I agree as well. I also think that all couples should be able to have a civil partnership if they wish not just same sex couples.

Agree sodapop. I really can’t understand why the Government won’t allow it - there can’t be a cost implication.

A register office marriage is a civil version of the traditional church wedding, open to all. When same-sex marriages were first made legal, that was the 'thin end of the wedge ' until denominations began to allow them in church.

Well thats what I thought at first but apparently a civil partnership is not quite the same and they are not officially 'married' -however they will have the legal rights of spouses for example when one of them dies. Apparently some people prefer this looser relationship.

Love is love and to be celebrated in churches and out - there is little enough of it around.

It is the decision of each denomination

Its precisely because civil partnerships are NOT marriage that some couples want to be able to have access to one. Marriage as a concept is predicated upon a set of assumptions that not all women ( or men) accept in their relationship. It’s not about it being a ‘looser’ relationship but a different one. A way of celebrating and formalising a relationship without the historical baggage. I can’t see one reason why it’s not available

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/264844/131210___1625_SSM_and_civil_partnership_diff_table_1_.doc

I found this interesting - especially the bit that a civil partnership records the existence of your mother and not just your father.

If two people are committed enough to legally join together in a life partnership, then choosing an even 'looser' link than a non-religious register office one does seem to be hedging their bets. "I promise to stay with you until I get bored or someone better comes along".

That’s just not the case Elegran the argument is not about ‘hedging your bets’ and quite frankly I think that’s quite an insulting thing to say about the thought out position that some couples adopt. Given that about half of all marriages end in divorce there’s hardly a ringing endorsement for marriage is it and the seriousness that many couples have towards it. No one would be forced to have a civil partnership so I really cannot see the reason not to allow it as an option.

I support options I do not support this being forced onto people.

equalcivilpartnerships.org.uk/category/latest-news/

It wouldn’t be forced onto anyone. It would be an option. It will be interesting to see what the Supreme Court decides.

It is a problem for theologians to decide,because the original biblical vows says it is a union between one man & one woman.
So they whilst they may be happy to marry same sex couples, they may have misgivings about the biblical teachings of it.

I think it’s great that people of all sexuality still want to marry & commit to each other although I don’t beleive marriage makes it more or less likely that we succeed in staying together.

And also the views of the members of churches must be respected.

When you have had one or more failed marriages, marriage has unpleasant associations; speaking as someone who this applies to, I have an almost superstitious 'dread' of marriage and would be much happier to have a civil partnership which doesn't carry any baggage, so I completely agree that it should be an option for everyone.

Bridgeit, the Bible doesn't state that.

My DD is in a "same sex" marriage. the Civil Partnership Ceremony was held at the local Registry Office 8 1/2 years ago, when it became legal for a "same sex" marriage to take place they went along again to the Registry Office & went through the "formalities" just the two of them, this was just over 3 years ago. I went along with a friend but we waited in the beautiful gardens so we could take some photos. They had no desire to have a Church Service but did want the added security of being Mrs & Mrs.

I have a DD & DiL, 2 beautiful DGSs who are very happy

As far as the Established Church goes I believe the decision should be left to individual Priests (or whatever the relevant Church Leader is) & Congregation. much as is the case for marrying Divorcees in Church

I dont think Jesus said a ything about this. St Paul may have made comments about marriage but the bit about marriage being between a man and a woman comes from the prayer book I think, written 100s of years after Jesus' life &death.

Old Testament

The OT was superceded by the NT. Christians surely go by the teachings of Christ not the Jewish people thousand of years earlier! Anyway what chapter &verse are you referring to?

maryeliza54 You are being very quick to see an insult today, should I be taking umbrage and feeling offended? I hope not.
Marriage is no longer as rigid an institution as it used to be, Those vows can be tailored in a register office to fit, and the terms and dynamics of the personal relationship have always varied with the individuals anyway. I am sure many couples having any kind of wedding think deeply about the vows they make to each other, but many more make rash promises in a haze of romance and optimism.

Half of marriages ending in divorce is not the fault of marriage per se, but of people rushing into it and rushing out again when they hit a problem. It is very easy to get married and equally easy to end the marriage. If all marriages had a probationary year after which they had to be either confirmed or cancelled, then the statistics on how well confirmed ones last would be revolutionised.