It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Support and affirmation of marriage rights for same-sex couples increasingly come from those who practice progressive Christianity. Some examples of religious organizations voicing their support for marriage equality include the Metropolitan Community Church, the United Church of Christ "Marriage Equality and the UCC" ., the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), the Episcopal Church of the United States, the Anglican Church of Canada, the Evangelical Lutheran Church In America and the Unitarian Universalists church which has long supported the rights of gays and lesbians to marry both in the church and through the state. Numerous progressive congregations and organizations within mainline christian denominations, that have not yet officially voiced official support for marriage equality, have spoken out themselves in support of equal marriage rights in the church and through the state.
Even within the Roman Catholic Church, there is a bit of internal dissent. For example, while the Vatican and most of the Roman Catholic hierarchy oppose same sex marriages, there are some Catholic theologians who support gay marriages.
Members of Reform Judaism support the inclusion of same-sex unions within the definition of marriage. The Jewish Reconstructionist Federation leaves the choice to individual rabbis.
Some Conservative Jews reject recognition of same-sex unions as marriages, but permit celebration of commitment ceremonies, in part as an expression of their belief that scripture requires monogamy of all sexually active couples.
Due to the ambivalent language about homosexuality in Buddhist teachings, there has been no official stance put forth regarding the issue of marriage between members of the same gender.
There are both conservative and liberal views about homosexuality and same-sex marriages in Hinduism, similar to many other religions. A liberal view is presented by Mathematician Shakuntala Devi, in her 1977 book, The World of Homosexuals, in which she interviewed Srinivasa Raghavachariar, head priest of the Srirangam temple. He said that same-sex lovers must have been cross-sex lovers in a former life. The sex may change but the soul retains its attachments, hence the love impels these souls towards one another. In 2002, Ruth Vanita (writer/reporter for GALVA - The Gay and Lesbian Vaishnava Association, Inc.) interviewed a Shaiva priest who performed the marriage of two women; he told me that, having studied Hindu scriptures, he had concluded, “Marriage is a union of spirits, and the spirit is not male or female” (p. 147).
The majority of Muslim legal scholars cite the rulings of Muhammad and the story of Lot in Sodom as condemnation of homosexuality. Given that Islam views marriage as an exchange between two parties of protection and security for exclusive sexual and reproductive rights, same-sex marriages cannot be considered legal within the constrains of a Muslim marriage. However, this ruling does not prevent them from occurring.
When politicians say they support civil unions but not marriage for people of the same sex, what do they mean? We find three main differences between civil unions and marriage as it's traditionally viewed:
-The right to federal benefits. States that allow some type of same-sex union are able to grant only state rights. The Defense of Marriage Act passed in 1996 prohibits same-sex couples from receiving federal marriage rights and benefits.
-Portability. Because civil unions are not recognized by all states, such agreements are not always valid when couples cross state lines.
-Terminology. "Marriage" is a term that conveys societal and cultural meaning, important to both gay rights activists and those who don't believe gays should marry.
The Government Accountability Office lists 1,138 federal laws that pertain to married couples. Many in that long list may be minor or only relevant to small groups of citizens. However, a number of provisions are key to what constitutes a marriage legally in the United States:
-Taxes. Couples in a civil union may file a joint state tax return, but they must file federal tax returns as single persons. This may be advantageous to some couples, not so for others. One advantage for married couples is the ability to transfer assets and wealth without incurring tax penalties. Partners in a civil union aren't permitted to do that, and thus may be liable for estate and gift taxes on such transfers.
-Health insurance. The state-federal divide is even more complicated in this arena. In the wake of the Massachusetts high court ruling, the group Gay & Lesbian Advocates & Defenders put together a guide to spousal health care benefits. GLAD’s document is Massachusetts-specific but provides insight into how health insurance laws would apply to those in a civil union in other states. In general, GLAD says, it comes down to what’s governed by state law and what’s subject to federal oversight. If a private employer’s health plans are subject to Massachusetts state insurance laws, benefits must be extended to a same-sex spouse. If the health plan is governed by federal law, the employer can choose whether or not to extend such benefits.
-Social Security survivor benefits. If a spouse or divorced spouse dies, the survivor may have a right to Social Security payments based on the earnings of the married couple, rather than only the survivor’s earnings. Same-sex couples are not eligible for such benefits.
Marriage is a legally sanctioned contract between a man and a woman. Entering into a marriage contract changes the legal status of both parties, giving husband and wife new rights and obligations. Public policy is strongly in favor of marriage based on the belief that it preserves the family unit. Traditionally, marriage has been viewed as vital to the preservation of morals and civilization.
Originally posted by Rocks123
I personally stay away from this topic, I am not for or against same sex marriage... just being neutral to the entire thing....
There should be no issues from religious nor government organizations... It is no one's business when 2 people are together... no issues whatsoever..... BUT its not Natural.... not natural at all.... I don't know and probably no ones does, how and why we were created... but we do know that it takes only one type of relationship to reproduce... natural, miracle whatever it is... just like 2 puzzle pieces they fit together... BUT still....
Any person of faith who believes that the government has legitimate authority over sacraments either has a very high opinion of the government or a very low opinion of sacraments.
My concern about the governments role is that by taking the stance that it does with insisting it is a matter of States Rights. I don't agree that is up to the individual State. I believe that by the federal government not recognizing Civil Unions as equally as it does Marriage, has defined same sex couples as second class citizens. We are not supposed to have second class citizens in the United States of America.
Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by popsmayhem
It's none of the states business period. On federal, state, or local level.
Interpersonal affairs are just that.
Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by popsmayhem
So let the 50 people in the apartment building on your street decide whether or not you should marry the person you love.
It's the will of the majority after all.