 | | Re: polygyny in "biblical times" —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | (...) I'm not sure this is how it should be in the US with our legal precident. If sexual preference is a fully protected non-discrimination item, then private churches won't be able to refuse to marry them. Maybe this is what folks like John are (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: polygyny in "biblical times" —David Laswell
|
| | | | (...) Marital status is a non-discrimination item, but that doesn't prevent the Catholic church from refusing to marry a divorced person. They can't be required to perform the ceremony if they can't be required to recognize the union, and forcing (...) (21 years ago, 21-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: polygyny in "biblical times" —Christopher L. Weeks
|
| | | | (...) Could they, hypothetically speaking deny marriage to blacks by not recognizing their legal status or somesuch? Chris (21 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: polygyny in "biblical times" —David Laswell
|
| | | | (...) I'll admit that it's pretty thin, but there is a distinction nonetheless. By refusing to perform same-sex marriages, the Church is not refusing to perform weddings for gays at all. They're just refusing to perform weddings between them. (...) (21 years ago, 22-Jul-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| | | | |
