Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Flying Dice]

the only time a clergyman should be forced to perform a marriage they do not believe in is if their own church authority decides to force them, like some churches are doing. episcopals in the us. anglicans in canada. etc.

saying the left wants to make the church perform same-sex marriage has always been a falsehood, that's never been any mainstream position. only about extending the same (civil) rights to same sex couples as 'traditional' couples. most of the reason people are against civil unions is a) "separate but equal" doesn't work, and b) they are not the same thing; some rights are extended only to "marriages" and not civil unions

Just one point to make here, a civil marriage and a civil union are not the same thing. Civil unions, agreed, are bullshit, for the same reason as all separate-but-equal measures. Don't think anyone was talking about them here either.

Like, my folks had a civil ceremony attended by the county clerk conducting it and two friends, everyone in ratty street clothes. That's a marriage exactly the same as some $20k travesty in a megachurch in every way that matters. This is why we shouldn't really need to give a shit about church marriages, they're not a requirement to be legally married and

Having the right to marry doesn't mean you have the right to marry at a specific venue.

I'd posit that if your church is shitty enough to not marry a member of its congregation you should probably find a better church. At this point a lot of the more reasonable denominations have already recognized and accepted same-sex marriage, too. Leave the rest of the fuckers to rot just like we have every other time they dug their heels in because of tradition and bronze-age superstition.

[misko27]

I'd posit that if your church is shitty enough to not marry a member of its congregation you should probably find a better church. At this point a lot of the more reasonable denominations have already recognized and accepted same-sex marriage, too. Leave the rest of the fuckers to rot just like we have every other time they dug their heels in because of tradition and bronze-age superstition.

More broadly you are already under a lot of restrictions under many churches regarding marriage and divorce, and so it's always been true that you can't get married and divorced everywhere. Catholics can't divorce at all barring extenuating circumstances, which goes against US law saying divorce is a-ok (Unfun fact: NY was the last state in the Union to not have "no-fault divorce" laws, meaning that divorces often occurred for highly trivial reasons just to pass that test). But the US doesn't force the Catholic Church to let you get divorced and if it's that much of a problem for you then maybe you need to take a better look at whether the Catholic Church is right for you. I mean obviously the church feels very strongly about the issue; why be part of that church in the first place if your views and its views are irreconcilable?

[hector13]

why be part of that church in the first place if your views and its views are irreconcilable?

Not really that simple though. If you've essentially been brainwashed from childhood to believe that the church is the most awesome entity ever, it's quite difficult to extricate yourself from it, especially if your entire social being revolves around people from the church, or you have family pressures too.

[Rose]

I've been brainwashed from childhood to believe in a cult, but it didn't stick.

[pisskop]

I wanted to get the zombie.  Skele is good too.

[Dozebôm Lolumzalěs]

I believe that some criminals have no business still having their heads attached. And why on earth would one bother with that lethal injection jiggerypokery, if it is so complicated and liable to malfunction when a guillotine would do?
I also believe that it is a ridiculous idea to mistreat and discriminate homosexuals, or indeed any other trait that does no harm whatsoever.
Further, the stability of the environment and the long-term survival of mankind is far more important than the interests of business and commerce. If it cannot be done any other way, then there is no option but to apply substainable development by force. A state, or indeed a species, cannot wait and hope for a few traces of benevolence and mercy to emerge by themselves from the corporate sector who has not shown any such signs before.
However, borders must be maintained and carefully guarded, and migrants examined and sorted, their needs and their contributions weighed and measured. The Good Thing to Do might appear to throw open the doors and aid each and every one, but that is not any help that will last at length. Disrupting and endangering your own house to aid a stranger will only harm both. If one's boat is upset because you tried to get someone else on-board, both will be wet, cold and not very likely to be grateful.

...And so on, and so on. It is quite fascinating, talking politics with someone who is firmly set down in one particular wing or party. Confusion tends to mount, and in some cases, it's a long game of "Find the Deal-Breaker".
I believe that, if anything, I am a mean old statist. If this connection to the big, mean gubbamint makes me a liberal by default or not, I cannot tell.

As for gay marriage, I'd say that it is fair for a clergyman to refuse, but it falls to the authorities concerned to find someone who will, so that the wedding still takes place. Rather like how midwives should not be forced to take part in abortion procedures, but the authorities are forced to find a replacement.
(Come to think of it, I wouldn't really have any trouble at all wedding a gay couple. If nothing else works out, I can always go to America, take to the cloth and become a travelling back-up priest.)

That's the kind of political ideology that I can respect and understand. To me, that matters much more than the left-right thing.

[misko27]

why be part of that church in the first place if your views and its views are irreconcilable?

Not really that simple though. If you've essentially been brainwashed from childhood to believe that the church is the most awesome entity ever, it's quite difficult to extricate yourself from it, especially if your entire social being revolves around people from the church, or you have family pressures too.

Sure but that problem is not at all limited or focused around the issue of marriage (one could presumably break over any number of issues, such as fornication, being a woman wishing to become a priest, or even just the concept of Papal Infallibility). And not everything has to be brainwashing you know: I imagine it would be much harder for someone who genuinely believed in the values of a church, saves for one issue on which your views are irreconcilable, then for someone who has been merely tricked into believing the church and could be unbrainwashed by exposure to other parts of the world. One's heart must go out to the woman who strongly wishes to become a priest because of her love of the Church of St. Peter. And finally, what is the government supposed to do about that situation? Ban churches who disagree with current US law? Force them into compliance? Even from a practical point of view, that's only going to make them stronger, let alone the legitimate backlash against a flagrant violation of the First amendment.

The issue is essentially cultural, and while I strongly support open-mindedness and willingness to accept new ideas, new converts, and allowing old ones to leave, much of that is simply beyond the reach of the government. The best solution to the problem is to not support churches that are irreconcilable with your views or needs. Is that easy? No. Depending on your circumstances, it could be one of the hardest things in the world. And yet is a necessary journey. There will always be people born into situations that do not and cannot fit with who they are, and that is unpreventable. But to attempt to abolish it from existence entirely would be wrong-headed and impossible.

[Descan]

Yeah, they aren't the same thing, and civil marriage and traditional marriage are the same thing in the eyes of the law. Which is why I was talking about the only two that actually DO have a difference, and where people might get confused on which one people are displeased by.

[Shadowlord]

I believe that some criminals have no business still having their heads attached. And why on earth would one bother with that lethal injection jiggerypokery, if it is so complicated and liable to malfunction when a guillotine would do?

I respect your opinion here, but want to point out that there are solid reasons for not using the guillotine.

The real reason for not using the guillotine is the effect on the execution party, not the condemned.

We used to use firing squads, which seem relatively humane, but I don't know their effect on the executioners.

Personally I'm opposed to the death penalty in most cases because in our (american) justice system we have a tendency to convict innocent people, and some even end up on death row. You can't undo an execution if someone turns out to be innocent. You can't give someone back the years they spent in jail either, but at least they're not dead.

Another issue is that the death penalty in the USA is more expensive than life without parole. (This was the first google result. Google also suggested a Forbes article, but when I clicked it, it took me to Forbes' homepage so I guess Forbes doesn't care if anyone actually reads their stuff)

In the case of someone like the boston marathon bomber, or any other mass murderer or terrorist for whom there is incontrovertible evidence of their guilt, I am still pro-execution.

I am also in favor of housing terrorists, people who support(ed) ISIS, etc, separately from other inmates, so that they don't have the opportunity to convert them to their ideology (which has been a problem in Europe). Also nazis and such, because we don't need that to spread either, but apparently there are a lot of nazis in our prisons already.

[martinuzz]

When do the beavers end?!

Just had my 4th wave of alpha beavers assault my woods. Within 2 seasons. My fridges are completely full with meat and beaver corpses now.

Also wtf, why is the Rimworld thread locked?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The Rimworld thread is locked because of #drama, please uninstall Rimworld from your computer or the death squids will be deployed.

[martinuzz]

Death squids? Sounds more like Clockwork empires then like Rimworld.

[Akura]

This song just came up on the classic oldies station. I started paying attention to the lyrics. It's a song about... jailbait? At least he's saying "no".

[pisskop]

It turns out a LOT of songs are about not-so SFW things.  Or fridge horroresque.


Take 'Born in the USA'  Holy crap is that song like the most misused song ever.
Or 'cats in the cradle' - song about a father who neglects his child and then that child doing the same to his own child

Or, I heard 'relax' on the radio at my doctors the other day.  :|

[Shadowlord]

Try listening to the lyrics in https://soundcloud.com/dieform/die-form-zoopsia

It sounds beautiful (to me) but the lyrics are pure horror.

(So I "listen to the music, not the song"