Scotland to bring in gay marriage

[Krumbia]

We seem to have gone slightly off topic. Back to my original point, why is a civil partnership not enough in Scotland?

[Shard_Head]

You have a major misunderstanding of the UK. Protestantism isn't the national religion of the UK. Only the Church of England is an established church.

When I click on the wikipedia article for state religion, the first thing I notice is the bit that says "also called an official religion, established church or state church".

Did you notice the bit where the Church of Scotland, Wales and Ireland are all disestablished?

[Divair]

We seem to have gone slightly off topic. Back to my original point, why is a civil partnership not enough in Scotland?

Because "separate but equal" is not truly equal.

[New Azura]

This is begging for a Kilt joke, but damned if I'm going through seventy posts to see if someone beat me to the punch.

[Kaikohe]

Good job, Scotland!

[Krumbia]

When I click on the wikipedia article for state religion, the first thing I notice is the bit that says "also called an official religion, established church or state church".

Did you notice the bit where the Church of Scotland, Wales and Ireland are all disestablished?

Yes I did, and I apologise for assuming this and incorrectly informing anyone who read it.

[Cill Airne]

We seem to have gone slightly off topic. Back to my original point, why is a civil partnership not enough in Scotland?

Because last time I checked "Separate but Equal" tends to work out as "Separate and far from Equal." You can claim it is equal all you want, but if it is than what is wrong with just using the same thing? If you think something separate is needed for anyone to use, than you clearly do not think of them as equal.

[Krumbia]

We seem to have gone slightly off topic. Back to my original point, why is a civil partnership not enough in Scotland?

Because "separate but equal" is not truly equal.

Fair enough.

[Milks Empire]

I'm awful at debating. Couldn't do it for the life of me. You must note, that Protestantism is the national religion of the UK. More specifically the Church of England, Scotland and Ireland (iirc). To add to this, HM Elizabeth II is the Head of the Church of England. Theoretically, this shouldn't pass. But it will.

You have a major misunderstanding of the UK. Protestantism isn't the national religion of the UK.

The Church of England is established in England only (as in, it is not in Scotland, Wales, or Northern Ireland). Seeing as the Church of Scotland was never an established church à la the Church of England, it could be said that Scotland disestablished in 1560 (although there is the mess that led to the Scottish Episcopal Church as a distinct entity). Northern Ireland (all of Ireland at the time) has no state church as of 1871 and Wales has no state church as of 1920

[Kulverint]

...And that kind of situation would be completely wrong.

Why?

Because for the opinions of a religious organisation to take control of every issue is wrong. In every case.

[Shard_Head]

You have a major misunderstanding of the UK. Protestantism isn't the national religion of the UK.

The Church of England is established in England only (as in, it is not in Scotland, Wales, or Northern Ireland). Seeing as the Church of Scotland was never an established church à la the Church of England, it could be said that Scotland disestablished in 1560 (although there is the mess that led to the Scottish Episcopal Church as a distinct entity). Northern Ireland (all of Ireland at the time) has no state church as of 1871 and Wales has no state church as of 1920

What the fuck is up with the echos in NSG.

[Milks Empire]

The Church of England is established in England only (as in, it is not in Scotland, Wales, or Northern Ireland). Seeing as the Church of Scotland was never an established church à la the Church of England, it could be said that Scotland disestablished in 1560 (although there is the mess that led to the Scottish Episcopal Church as a distinct entity). Northern Ireland (all of Ireland at the time) has no state church as of 1871 and Wales has no state church as of 1920

What the fuck is up with the echos in NSG.

I was merely elaborating on how that came to be so as to head Krumbia off at the pass, if you will. There's no need for you to be rude like that.

[Krumbia]

The Church of England is established in England only (as in, it is not in Scotland, Wales, or Northern Ireland). Seeing as the Church of Scotland was never an established church à la the Church of England, it could be said that Scotland disestablished in 1560 (although there is the mess that led to the Scottish Episcopal Church as a distinct entity). Northern Ireland (all of Ireland at the time) has no state church as of 1871 and Wales has no state church as of 1920

That was really quite informative. Thank you for that. I will be sure to get my facts straight next time I try to debate anything to do with the national religion of the UK.

This post may be atleast somewhat relevant.

[The UK in Exile]

Why shouldn't this pass? The UK isn't a theocracy, even if it has a "state religion".

For the reasons I stated. If the state religion opposed a bill so passionately, and if the head of the state religion was also the Head of State, and if he/she also opposed the bill, then it should not pass.

In an alternate country, and the situation was the same, but the Head of State actually had some power, the bill wouldn't pass.

we have a state religion so that religion might better serve the state. not the state, religion.

[Krumbia]

For the reasons I stated. If the state religion opposed a bill so passionately, and if the head of the state religion was also the Head of State, and if he/she also opposed the bill, then it should not pass.

In an alternate country, and the situation was the same, but the Head of State actually had some power, the bill wouldn't pass.

we have a state religion so that religion might better serve the state. not the state, religion.

But why not? Shouldn't that also be the case? And if the state doesn't support the religion, the religion may not feel inclined to support the state.

[Shard_Head]

I was merely elaborating on how that came to be so as to head Krumbia off at the pass, if you will. There's no need for you to be rude like that.

Next time address it to the poster in question. It really will help.

[Leepaidamba]

I'm awful at debating. Couldn't do it for the life of me. You must note, that Protestantism is the national religion of the UK. More specifically the Church of England, Scotland and Ireland (iirc). To add to this, HM Elizabeth II is the Head of the Church of England. Theoretically, this shouldn't pass. But it will.

The same or similar argument could have been made in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Canada and Spain. All have legalized same sex marriage now.

[Ifreann]

Why shouldn't this pass? The UK isn't a theocracy, even if it has a "state religion".

It doesn't

I couldn't say I'm all that up on the exact legal status of the Church of England, thus the scare quotes.

---

Why shouldn't this pass? The UK isn't a theocracy, even if it has a "state religion".

For the reasons I stated. If the state religion opposed a bill so passionately, and if the head of the state religion was also the Head of State, and if he/she also opposed the bill, then it should not pass.

Except the Church of England doesn't run Scotland, so their opinion doesn't actually matter. Like I said, not a theocracy.

---

We seem to have gone slightly off topic. Back to my original point, why is a civil partnership not enough in Scotland?

Because it isn't marriage and gay people should be allowed to get married. Simples.

[Sevco 5508]

If straight people have to go through the torture of marriage then it's only fair that gay people are subjected to it too.

[Shard_Head]

If straight people have to go through the torture of marriage then it's only fair that gay people are subjected to it too.

Fucking hilarious.

[Unchecked Expansion]

But why not? Shouldn't that also be the case? And if the state doesn't support the religion, the religion may not feel inclined to support the state.

Good. If they don't like this, we don't need their support.
The UK is does not expect you to be Anglican. It does not even expect you to be Christian. As such, there is no reason why laws should be based on the Whims of a Church.
Besides, a Church founded to undermine the sanctity of marriage should probably keep it's mouth shut about this.

[The UK in Exile]

we have a state religion so that religion might better serve the state. not the state, religion.

But why not? because a religion is typically hierachical, elitist and unrepresentative.

Shouldn't that also be the case? no

And if the state doesn't support the religion, the religion may not feel inclined to support the state. thats up to it. of course some would argue that its tax status and established status and seats in the house of lords is support enough without actually letting them dictate how people live. if the church wishes to be dis-established, it only need ask.

edit: spelling, yes, it took four attempts. don't judge me.

[Nadkor]

You have a major misunderstanding of the UK. Protestantism isn't the national religion of the UK. Only the Church of England is an established church.

When I click on the wikipedia article for state religion, the first thing I notice is the bit that says "also called an official religion, established church or state church".

Yes, and only the Church of England is an official, established, or state church. In England, only.

[Krumbia]

But why not? because a religion is typically hierachical, elitist and unrepresentative.

Shouldn't that also be the case? no

And if the state doesn't support the religion, the religion may not feel inclined to support the state. thats up to it. of course some would argue that its tax status and established status and seats in the house of lords is support enough without actually letting them dictate how people live. if the church wishes to be dis-established, it only need ask.

edit: spelling, yes, it took four attempts. don't judge me.

From what I understand, Buddhism and Hinduism are meant to be equality all round. I can't vouch for Shinto, but I expect they aren't particularly elitist or unrepresentative, because they can't afford to be. I know Taoism isn't. Now, I don't know about Sikhism or Islam, but I know that Judaism and Christianity generally fall under the three categories you stated.

"no". Okay. Makes sense.

I'm sure it will, if it wants.

[Krumbia]

When I click on the wikipedia article for state religion, the first thing I notice is the bit that says "also called an official religion, established church or state church".

Yes, and only the Church of England is an official, established, or state church. In England, only.

I have realised this, and I will now apologise to you like I did to several others about my lack of prior knowledge on the subject, and the fact I didn't bother to research it. Sorry.

EDIT: Too many commas. Commas getting everywhere.