When does Equality become Inequality? Where is the fine line

[Cannabis Islands]

I don't really think American Christians don't really understand the situation in Denmark. In Denmark and other European countries, there is still an official state run churches. Meaning that it run by the state. Even though the population might be indifferent or have a dislike of religion, this does not change the fact that it has a de jure state sect. As for secular nations and privately run churches, no, the State should not force anyone to preform a religious wedding to anyone. And yes, I would include that their should be a right to deny interracial couples(I'm multi-racial by the way).

[United North Atlantic States]

I believe that both extremes should exist simultaneously.
How?
There would be two economies rather than one. There would be a state-controlled economy, which people could choose to take part in at their own will, and there would be a citizen-controlled economy (not to be confused with a state-enforced, collectivistic economy) for which there would be no purely economic regulations whatsoever—not even a standard currency. This, I believe, is the only way in which to simultaneously insure complete economic freedom and egalitarian economic treatment (as well as sufficient resources provided to each citizen) under the law.

So basically, we should decriminalize the black market?

Yes; that would be included in the laissez-faire economy.

Wait, how'd homosexuality turn into this?

Because I made it turn into this.

[Dakini]

This is the ultimate goal of the gay agenda, and why it has to be stopped. It's not going to stop in their bedroom, they're going to take it out, into church, and force people to marry them. That's what they're already doing in the courts - forcing the government to marry them.

It's not really the gay agenda- more homosexuals getting butthurt because some conservative church which they CHOSE to be a member of wouldn't wed them and their partner. The church is an establishment run according to the religious doctrines of the people running it- if you don't like it, tough bikkies, find another church.

Except that no gay people are saying churches should be forced to marry them.

Indeed, the only article anyone found where someone was claiming to want to force churches to perform gay marriages is a satirical piece from a conservative author who was purporting to point out the hypocrisy in the gay community.

[European Socialist Republic]

Forcing churches to marry same-sex couples doesn't go far enough. Only same-sex couples should be allowed to marry. Heterosexual couples can get civil unions if they want.

[Ifreann]

Anti-church, very amusing.

Nothing you've said so far about this makes any sense (unless you've been meaning to post non-sequiturs).

I find your characterisation of those you disagree with as anti-church to be very amusing, because we're not arguing against churches at all. We are arguing that there is no movement to forcibly change the policies of religious organisations. What is anti-church about that? Do you believe that we are all actually trying to cover up the secret machinations of such a movement? That I might be taken for some manner of covert agent of the Homosexual Agenda, Anti-Church Division when all I do is talk shit on NSG in my free time is a very amusing notion to me.

So this isn't a state church you've been talking about?

It is. What are you talking about?

Unless it were a state church, in which case the politicians running the country in question are obviously in charge of the state church as much as they are in charge of any other state body.

The politicians in charge of the country are obviously in charge of all the institutions in the country, state body or not. That doesn't make them the same thing as the church, so as to make their decisions somehow the church's decisions. They pass laws, and the institutions in the country obey or face punishment.

So would you also say that the government of Denmark is forcing other state bodies to collect taxes or enforce the law or change the bulbs of street lights or otherwise do any of the things their state bodies do? Of course not. That is simply the nature of their relationship with their government. So it is silly to point to state churches being made to adhere to the policies of their government as if it is an example of governments disregarding the freedom of churches to practice their religion. State churches are obviously a different case from other independent sects and religions.

[Infected Mushroom]

Most forms of equality are inevitably exercises in inequality to some degree because they require greater sacrifice from some parts of society than from others.

[Ifreann]

Most forms of equality are inevitably exercises in inequality to some degree because they require greater sacrifice from some parts of society than from others.

Empty nonsense.

[Ethel mermania]

(Image) I dunno, a few people I know have talked to me about it. It's been eating at me and I had to ask what your opinions were.

I would wager that the people talking to you about this are trying to scare you into opposing gay rights. They're either lying or have themselves been lied to. Again, no one is trying to force churches or any other kind of religious organisation to perform their marriage ceremonies against their wishes.

What about the wedding chapel in idaho? The city did Back down, but the original position was they had too Perform marriages against their religious conviction.

[Ifreann]

I would wager that the people talking to you about this are trying to scare you into opposing gay rights. They're either lying or have themselves been lied to. Again, no one is trying to force churches or any other kind of religious organisation to perform their marriage ceremonies against their wishes.

What about the wedding chapel in idaho? The city did Back down, but the original position was they had too Perform marriages against their religious conviction.

Because at the time they were held to be operating as a business, and as such subject to the same regulations as other businesses. I believe this has been elaborated on and explained already in this thread.

[Libacur]

The only form of inequality, is trying to make the inequal the equal.

[Ethel mermania]

What about the wedding chapel in idaho? The city did Back down, but the original position was they had too Perform marriages against their religious conviction.

Because at the time they were held to be operating as a business, and as such subject to the same regulations as other businesses. I believe this has been elaborated on and explained already in this thread.

The point is, there are folks who are threatening to make pastors preform same sex weddings they don't want too. Which is the opposite of your claim.

[Ifreann]

Because at the time they were held to be operating as a business, and as such subject to the same regulations as other businesses. I believe this has been elaborated on and explained already in this thread.

The point is, there are folks who are threatening to make pastors preform same sex weddings they don't want too. Which is the opposite of your claim.

That is a disingenuous summation of events, but you are welcome to your pedantry if you enjoy it. I sometimes do.

[Ethel mermania]

The point is, there are folks who are threatening to make pastors preform same sex weddings they don't want too. Which is the opposite of your claim.

That is a disingenuous summation of events, but you are welcome to your pedantry if you enjoy it. I sometimes do.

It's a fairly accurate summation. And Truth be told, i agree with the cities initial position. that said if someone is worried about the state forcing pastors to preform same sex marriage in the us, it is a reasonable concern.

[Zakuvia]

Read the OP, not the title. The OP was being suckered by homophobes to think that the separation of church and state was being infringed by militant gay-rights folks.

This is only given shrift due to the recent sensationalist headlines of disrespectful gay rights activists misleading religiously minded business owners, like the famous bakery incident, into looking like bigots.

Don't think of me the wrong way, I believe that homosexuals deserve all the rights, protections, and privileges that heteros do, barring ones that are physically impossible. But I will say that a lot of the time, people could be a bit nicer on both ends of the spectrum on how to discuss it.

[Vekalse]

As a homosexual member of the church... Uh, no...

This isn't what we want. I never asked for that. I asked for individual freedoms.

[New Werpland]

Churches shouldn't be forced to abandon their values and become liberal and pluralistic against their will.

[Ifreann]

Churches shouldn't be forced to abandon their values and become liberal and pluralistic against their will.

So if the Pope were to make the Roman Catholic Church more liberal and pluralistic by way of his papal infallibility without taking a referendum of the clergy and lay Catholics, you would see that as being wrong?

[Genivaria]

So now I'm caught up.
Wow that Christian persecution complex is really powerful if they think states don't have a right to tell a state church what to do.
And why am I seeing The Blaze used as a source.
Right wing trash run by Glenn Beck.

[Genivaria]

This is the ultimate goal of the gay agenda, and why it has to be stopped. It's not going to stop in their bedroom, they're going to take it out, into church, and force people to marry them. That's what they're already doing in the courts - forcing the government to marry them.

It's not really the gay agenda- more homosexuals getting butthurt because some conservative church which they CHOSE to be a member of wouldn't wed them and their partner. The church is an establishment run according to the religious doctrines of the people running it- if you don't like it, tough bikkies, find another church.

Outside of your persecution fantasy noonre is seriously calling for any such thing.

[Dakini]

Because at the time they were held to be operating as a business, and as such subject to the same regulations as other businesses. I believe this has been elaborated on and explained already in this thread.

The point is, there are folks who are threatening to make pastors preform same sex weddings they don't want too. Which is the opposite of your claim.

Sauce.

[Dakini]

But I will say that a lot of the time, people could be a bit nicer on both ends of the spectrum on how to discuss it.

Yes. People who are being oppressed should always be nice and deferential to their oppressors.

[Pragia]

The line is when mandates are made against people and organizations. Quotas are abhorrent attempts at "equality through profiling" other than that, not much I could think of beyond obvious dangers (religious tolerance towards sacrifices is one)

[Dakini]

The line is when mandates are made against people and organizations. Quotas are abhorrent attempts at "equality through profiling" other than that, not much I could think of beyond obvious dangers (religious tolerance towards sacrifices is one)

What the fuck is this and what does it have to do with the thread?

[Pragia]

The line is when mandates are made against people and organizations. Quotas are abhorrent attempts at "equality through profiling" other than that, not much I could think of beyond obvious dangers (religious tolerance towards sacrifices is one)

What the fuck is this and what does it have to do with the thread?

Sorry, thread name? Same applies to the church/gay marriage. Afaik there is no movement to force churches to allow it, and any move to require it would be stupid.

[The New Sea Territory]

Marriage should be legally abolished, and we should stop getting married in a religious sense.

Problem solved.