Originally Posted by Sircry
I agree with the government 's action.
The difference I'm seeing is that in Scripture, it doesn't, as far as I know, question interracial relations, as King Solomon married a woman of different race. Though, to be fair, he wasnt a model of perfect behavior.
I'm not saying or implying gay marriage is basically wrong. What I'm trying to get at is that a church, mosque, or any religious institution shouldn't be forced to accept a decision which violates their basic written beliefs, the exception being groups like WBC who invent or interpret in a way that specifically is targeted for hate.
If a church openly accepts the marriage and sanctions it of their own accord, fine. The members that don't like it can leave. But institutions shouldn't have THEIR rights infringed upon just as homosexuals shouldn't have theirs. In my church, the pastor rejects marriages at times that he doesn't believe fit the sanctity of the beliefs the MLS follows.
I like this discussion board. Its stimulating and this is opening my mind a bit. Giving me a new way to see it and think about it.
I am not necessarily addressing Christianity, but we cannot rely purely on one interpretation of scripture. There are several instances in which people of another race are abused within the majority of religious texts, so is that morally justifiable?
Why not? The government has every right to withhold the tax exemption until they comply with basic social rules. How is it any different from the Mormon's refusal of interracial marriages and black members?
You act as though, as long as it is religion, it is exempt from federal or state laws. Let me ask you, do you believe the federally instituted ban on polygamy is justified? And do they have the right to impose it on religious institutions? If so, why?