Would you get married in a church?

[dj357]

having already made the mistake to get married in the first place, and having had it fall apart like a ripe egg all over my face, though it was thankfully not done in a church, I will most certainly NOT be getting married again, and it would NEVER happen in a church. If I happened to fall in love with a theist, we would have a very long discussion about things like child-rearing etc... and as callous as it sounds, she would have to take her beliefs and shove them, because there is no way I would allow (if I could at all prevent it) a child of mine to be brought up with only ONE set of lies to listen to, and there would most certainly be no baptism, the zealous in-laws be damned!!

[KinGTR]

Ill Never Marry in a Church. Not only that ill never marry in Ireland as the Catholic Church holds way too much sway over our Schools, Broadcasters, politicians ,social events, local sports and most of all our backwards social Laws. Having to spend four years apart to Divorce is obviously an attempt to placate the evil overlords of this country!! to put it in perspective a friend of mine married a Polish girl in Poland Obviously an ultra catholic country (even more so than Ireland in may ways) However when they parted ways it only took €150 and a half hour visit to the lawyers who had the whole divorce completed that day. If they can do it why cant we? Not only would I refuse to marry in a church I make a point of NOT attending any church occasions involving minors (confirmation and communion etc) as I see it as child abuse something I make quite clear to the Adult responsible. Any way the point is moot as I would be never be able to marry a hard line theist as I would argue with her constantly!

[lostexpectation]

there was debate on the civil union bill on q&a last night and david quinn was on, he was complaining about the ff/pd/gp bill giving 95% of what marriage currently gives, if he's unhappy with, it makes me worry less about the bill, i not so worried about it because i think when it comes down to it, the state cares more about money and taxes, and hs its own civil state identity.

a gay rights advocate angrily but sharply called DQ out for putting his ideology above the rights of children of gay parents. dq likes pretend gay people don't have children. although i think he has a good point about all people having a male and female parent no matter what(except death).

brady and co have tried to use the issue of relationships like two elderly sisters,but if the bill gives rights of next of kin and inheritance etc to strong relationships then, then a long term parent of their partners gay child should be able to get these rights of kin from that relationship. although i don't know what would happen the biological parent died.

there doesn't seem to be much disagreement when it comes to cohabitation, so the gay civil union seems to get focused on, when there plenty to be said about cohabition vs union.
it was good debate watch it.

[bipedalhumanoid]

there was debate on the civil union bill on q&a last night and david quinn was on, he was complaining about the ff/pd/gp bill giving 95% of what marriage currently gives, if he's unhappy with, it makes me worry less about the bill, i not so worried about it because i think when it comes down to it, the state cares more about money and taxes, and hs its own civil state identity.

a gay rights advocate angrily but sharply called DQ out for putting his ideology above the rights of children of gay parents. dq likes pretend gay people don't have children. although i think he has a good point about all people having a male and female parent no matter what(except death).

brady and co have tried to use the issue of relationships like two elderly sisters,but if the bill gives rights of next of kin and inheritance etc to strong relationships then, then a long term parent of their partners gay child should be able to get these rights of kin from that relationship. although i don't know what would happen the biological parent died.

there doesn't seem to be much disagreement when it comes to cohabitation, so the gay civil union seems to get focused on, when there plenty to be said about cohabition vs union.
it was good debate watch it.

It's very easy to undermine DQ's arguments about gay marriage. There are only two points to make...

1) If the privileges provided to marriage are really about protecting children (as he keeps saying) then those priveleges should be taken away from 'marriages' and given only to families with children regardless of the nature of the relationship of the primary carers.

2) Even if we assume that his claim that a family unit with a mother and a father is the most beneficial to the children, taking benefits away from children who are members of other kinds of family units does not benefit the those children or society in any way.

What annoys me most about this particular debate is that Quinn's fallacious arguments are virtually never challenged effectively even though they are fallacious and easily rebuked.

[ThinkForYourself]

I think i could get married in a church but I wouldnt take part in any of the communion or prayers etc. as i dnt think the best way to start a marriage is on a lie!

As for raising kids i'd try my upmost to shelter them from societies influences and explain to them that some people beleive certain things and others don't and when their older they will understand and form a belief of their own (or non-belief as the case may be)! I would not under any certain circumstances let them be baptised or take part in a religious ceremony of some kind when they are too young to understand what it means!! I'm not a fan of the whole childhood indoctrination thing!!

[pantsheadmagee]

2) Even if we assume that his claim that a family unit with a mother and a father is the most beneficial to the children, taking benefits away from children who are members of other kinds of family units does not benefit the those children or society in any way.

Actually, even that claim has been soundly debunked with some good old-fashioned research.


Oh, and there is no way that I would get married in a church. Or, for that matter, anything else- I don't plan on letting them bury me either. I have no interest in giving any support whatsoever to that institution. *shudders*

[FXR]

Denying benifits to children, no matter what choices or lifestyles their parents have made, is an attack on children.
Of course the Vatican does not think children are born innocent in the first place.

Defend society=discriminate agaisnt children.

[Covmeister]

Well, this is a strange thing, because I definitely could not get married in a church, but I have no problem with going to a funeral in one.

That said, the marraige is something that involves me directly. I dont want to be buried by the church or have a catholic funeral.

People seem to feel that atheists make concessions to the church on a lot of occasions. Well, maybe look at it another way. Atheists might just be exhibiting something that all churches say they imbue into the minds of their flock: Tolerance.

I have had occasion recently, and in the past, to visit a church. In the case of a funeral, I do not participate in the prayers and I do not participate in communion, or the kneeling and standing. I sit there and I think about the person who has died, and what they mean to me.

That is my ideal world. Where people think about eachother, and do things for eachother, and ask forgiveness of eachother, instead of muttering on their knees pleasding with various invisible sky-wizards to make everything ok again.

Seriously, it must be like Hogwarts up there.

[Covmeister]

Of course the Vatican does not think children are born innocent in the first place.

I was always so insulted, even as a child, by the idea that to merely exist is sinful. Still makes me angry thinking about it.

[Dr Raskolnikov]

A Catholic friend of mine divorced from her husband, then remarried. She then proceeded to commit some mortal sins resulting in the production of a pair of bairns.

The Church's response was to excommunicate her.

Her response was to have the young 'uns baptised as good little Catholics, because "I wouldn't want to be accused of denying them religion!"

The blood boils I tell you...