New Controversial 'Marriage Question'
 

Thank you, Friday13thFan...You caused me to think about this...



If our country TRULY practices 'freedom of religion' and 'separation of church and state'...Why aren't Pagan, Wiccan, Native American, and all other 'ritualistic' forms of marriage accepted?

What I mean is...If EVERYONE'S religion, is relevant and respected...WHY are only 'Christian' marriage ceremonies accepted by LAW?

We've had the 'Gay Marriage' debate a million times.....This is completely different...

It seems to me that in a 'democracy' where all people are considered equal, and we are permitted to practice whatever religion we choose, that the binding rituals we perform to unite ourselves to one another according to OUR religious beliefs, should be just as legitimate, LEGALLY BINDING, and afford the exact same recognition and benefits as the Christian marriage ceremony...

Don't you find it a little odd that we can't have prayer in school, or post the ten commandments anywhere NEAR a government facility...BUT, the only LEGAL form of marriage that is recognized by our 'Religion-Free Government' is CHRISTIAN???

I cannot believe that it never occured to me to question this before...

just because you're allowed to practice whichever religion you choose, doesn't mean it's going to be one that's recognized. are you sure that the religions you listed are recognized by the USA? i'm not so sure the answer is going to be yes

in any case, you're right, technically there should be a seperation of church and state, but as you can see there isn't one.

however, that fact doesn't really matter. what does matter is that the churches that perform marriages are overwhelmingly christian. good luck trying to get a wiccan married in a christian church. they wouldn't allow that, and as far as i know they have a right to refuse their services

in any event, i'd treat this the same way as i treat the gay marriage debate. hell, i consider homosexuals to still be in a worse situation than those of different religions. why? because they still can't get married.

people of ANY religious practice can go to court and be married, gays still can't.

if you really want to be married, go to court, get your marriage license, then have a party aftewards with your rituals, or whatever you want to do

in a democracy its pretty much 'majority rules'

you guys in the USA havent exactly separated Church and State.
It is a Christian majority in the USA by far and they arent willing to recognize anything else .. and you always have a good god fearing christian in the whitehouse to keep the status quo.

this isnt right .. but its the way it is.

the day that wiccans or pagans or keebler elfs can elect a majority government of their own kind .. you'll see those marriages happen ..

dont hold your breath.

great minds ... or eyes .. whatever.. think alike :)

What Wiccan would WANT to be married in a Christian church?...That's part of my point...

One of the MAJOR reasons that this country was even FOUNDED was because we left England to 'Flee from Religious Persecution'

Why should people of other religions be FORCED to carry out Christian ceremonies, just to be 'legally married'?......What if a Christian was told that THEIR marriage 'didn't count' unless it was performed the same way that another religion may consider valid?...Christian marriage ceremonies would actually be 'blasphemous' in the face of other religions, would they not?

I believe that you can be married under "any" type of religious service as long as the person perfoming the ceremony is licensed to perform a marriage....does not have to be a priest....you can hire a justice of the peace to marry you wherever and however you like...

This is true...BUT, how likely are you to find a 'justice of the peace' that knows the ways of each individual religion?....Most other religions consider 'marriage' to be sacred, and only allow those among themselves to perform these ceremonies...And while the ceremonies ARE performed, all the time in this country, they are NOT recognized as legitimate...That's the problem I'm having with it...

To be perfectly honest...I'm not really 'religious'...I have my own beliefs but, I'm not taking anyone's 'side'

For me, this question isn't even about RELIGION.......It's really only to address the blatant HYPOCRISY of it all........It's bullshit...

heh, better question, who aside from christians would want to be married in a christian church? :P

yes, to flee from religious persecution, but of what religion were those who fled? christians :P christians fled from religious persecution to remain christian. i'm sure the founding fathers never imagined that so many religious practices would be around today. you can't judge this on something that occured 250 years ago :P

and there's not point in asking these "what if" questions. ask them all you like, it's not going to change anything. the fact of the matter is that christians hold the majority, as they probably always will, and that's how things are

fact stands, that the religions you want to be recognized aren't, and they probably never will be. does it suck? yes. can you do anything about it? nope.

christians are hypocrits, i know it all too well. unfortunately there isn't much to be done about it =/

as i said, you're allowed to perform whatever rituals you want, they're just not going to be legally binding. if you want that, go to court and get a license.

be thankful you can at least get married :rolleyes:

A justice will "read" just about anything you put in front of him for you...

Hypocrisy is what this country was founded on in the first place....we went to war over a 3 cent tax increase!(on tea!)

This country was founded by white slave owners who wrote
"all men are created equal"

i can go on and on....but my blood pressure tends to go up...

LMAO....Can't argue with that...So, I guess I'm done....

And as Rotting Eye stated, nothing can be done about it......Now, I'm wondering whatever happened to the 'We can accomplish ANYTHING' mentality.....Damn, this country sucks on so many levels.....But, we all have to admit that we're STILL better off than most OTHER countries....Which, kinda makes it even more sad.....

i used to have that mentality, for a while anyway. someday you just have to accept reality for what it is :P i know arguments can be brought up about slavery, civil rights, etc etc.. "well what if they hadn't done anything about it?" well, there is a slight difference in the matters :P

i wouldn't say this country sucks on SO many levels. that's kinda taking it to the extreme... i will agree that some things about the USA suck, but you have to admit for the most part, we have a lot of good things going for us here. you can't make EVERYONE happy at all once. just because you're unhappy with the way something is going, means someone somewhere else is happy with the way things are going

/shrug, i wouldn't knock on america until you've been elsewhere to learn how good things are here.

cept maybe in europe or canada heh. but i'm sure they have problems just as we do

Not "knocking", just jabbing a little...I DID say, "But, we all have to admit that we're STILL better off than most OTHER countries"...And I DO recognize America's 'good qualities'......I'm not talking about a desire for Eutopia here, just for a little justice, equality, understanding, and acceptance...It seemed that I read somewhere that we ALL had a right to 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness'...I could have been mistaken...



And now, I am REALLY gonna stop, because I'm agreeing with Rotting Eye....AND it's freaking me the hell out...


:p

mm, well as you said, compared to MOST other places, we are equal here. can't always appease everyone.

and yes, the constitution does say "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" but based on the founding fathers perspectives. but times change, and republicans need to recognize that fact heh

hey, yea i've calmed down since i used to post here huh? :p

that's cuz i made the best decision of my life last may heh. before then i was a vehement prick

Hmm...A new man, huh?........This should be interesting.....



*waits for the 'instigators' to test that introspection*....lol



;)

OOOO...he just went there....

This thread went straight from religion to politics......i won't touch this one..

no need to drag the Dems through any more mud....

Re: New Controversial 'Marriage Question'
 

I was having a similar debate with a friend one time and he brought up the point that "Seperation of church and state' is the biggest myth around. It doesn't say that anywhere in the Constitution or the Bill of Rights."

Well, after he said that I decided to look into it, and you know what? He was right. It doesn't say it in there anywhere. (At least not that I could find.) Anyone know where in our country's documents, it actually says this passage?

Quote:

What I mean is...If EVERYONE'S religion, is relevant and respected...WHY are only 'Christian' marriage ceremonies accepted by LAW?

It is because the term marriage is a Christian term. Wiccans can either get legally married by a justice of the peace or they could even start up their own tradition of something along the lines of marriage, but 'marriage' is, and has always been, a Christian sacrament/term.

How that Christian sacrament came to double as a legal definition is beyond me, but it happened. (This is where sep. of church & state would be nice. Religious terms should not double as legal definitions. It can only create problems... like the one we are presently discussing.)

religion and politics, the two seem to go hand in hand anyway, so eh

new man? i guess you could say that. more kicked back and relaxed. don't get me wrong, i still love a good debate, but intellectual debates are so much more fun :p and what's the use in being a prick, having friends is better than making enemies. for the most part anyway heh




anyway, does any document say seperation of church and state? i dunno, and now that you bring it up i wonder myself where it came from. although it was pushed on everyone all throughout school, that's all i remember

as for marriage being a christian term, i don't know, but as for the concept of marriage, that predates the formation of christianity by a longshot. hell, all of christianity is one giant ripoff of portions of everything else that predates it.

for example, i don't remember the entire history, but the fish that christians use? that's actually the symbol of a goddess from another religion, i believe she was the sex/fertility goddess. flip the fish on its side, and what does it look like? :P

it became a legal term because christians have their tendrils in anything and everything. -_- unfortunately

the fish sign the christians use is sometimes accompanied with PAX inside which i believe means Peace and/or Jesus.

I'm a bit rusty on my religious studies :)

Love to copy & paste


The fish outline is a logical symbol for the early Christian church to adopt. Fish play a major roll in the gospels. For example:
bullet Mark 1:17: "Come after Me, and I will make you become fishers of men."
bullet Matthew 12:40: "...Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth."
bullet Matthew 14:17: "And they said to Him, 'We have here only five loaves and two fish.'"
bullet Luke 5:6: "And when they had done this, they caught a great number of fish, and their net was breaking."
bullet Luke 24:42: "So they gave Him a piece of a broiled fish and some honeycomb."
bullet John 21:6: "And He said to them, 'Cast the net on the right side of the boat, and you will find some.' So they cast, and now they were not able to draw it in because of the multitude of fish."
bullet 1 Corinthians 15:39: "All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fish, and another of birds."

Some Christians believe that a second link between their religion and the fish symbol is seen in the Greek word for fish (ichthus, spelled: Iota Chi Theta Upsilon Sigma). That is an acrostic for "Jesus Christ, of God, the Son, the Savior" [Iesous (Jesus) CHristos (Christ) THeou (of God) Uiou (the Son) Soter (the Savior)]. An acrostic is an "arrangement of words in which the first letter of each line ordinarily combines with others to form a word or words or the alphabet." 1

The Apostles were often referred to as "fishers of men". Followers of Christianity were called Pisciculi; the root of this Latin word is "fish". The symbols of "sacremental fish, with wine and a basket of bread represents the Eucharist and the Last Supper in Christian art." 2 The symbol was simple to draw and was often used among Christians as a type of password during times of persecution by the Roman government. If two strangers met and were unsure whether each other was a Christian, one would draw an arc in the earth like:). If the other were a Christian, they would complete the symbol with a reverse arc: (), forming the outline of a fish.

In modern times, the fish outline symbol is experiencing a comeback. It is commonly seen in the form of a bumper sticker or casting mounted on the trunk lids of cars. The body of the symbol may be empty, or may contain a name ("Jesus" or "ICTUS"). This has inspired some Secularists, Atheists and promoters of the theory of evolution to mimic the Christian fish symbol with one of their own. It usually has "DARWIN" in the body of the fish, and little legs underneath. This has prompted "fish wars" between supporters of the secular and religious symbols. Reference 3 contains a humorous expose of the battle between the Darwin and Christian fish. It displays some new species such as the "Evolve Fish" (a fish with "EVOLVE" on its body and a wrench in one of its forepaws) and the "Shark Jesus Fish" (a shark that eats all types of Jesus Fish).

We also found a satirical essay "Experts concerned about backward Jesus fishes" which suggested, with tongue in cheek, that fish swimming to the right is "a duplicitous tool of Satan, the Lord of Lies...Our children are viewing these fish and are losing their grip on morality....These backwards fishes, and all their inherent evils could destroy a society." 13

i'm not really here to debate religion and go on and on about how i think it's a crock.

what i can do is point everyone in the direction of where you can go, if you're so inclined

http://www.iidb.org/vbb/index.php

forum loaded with scholars, educated people, etc etc.

but since i did bring up the subject of the fish, i'm only relaying what i've read. i'm sure there's plenty out there that contradicts it, just as newb has posted. but what i read said that christians stole the symbol of this goddess, flipped it on its side, filled it with letters, and called it their own.

believe what you want

i believe the christmas tree was origionally a pagan fertility symbol ..

or am i way off on that one too ?

Newb, do your thing :)

Germany is credited with starting the Christmas tree tradition in the 16th century when devout Christians brought decorated trees into their homes. Some built Christmas pyramids of wood and decorated them with evergreens and candles if wood was scarce.
The Christmas tree custom gradually became popular in other parts of Europe. In England Prince Albert, husband of Queen Victoria made Christmas trees fashionable by decorating the first English Christmas tree at Windsor castle with candles and a variety of sweets, fruits and gingerbread in 1841. Of course, soon other wealthy English families followed suit, using all kinds of extravagant items as decorations. Charles Dickens described such a tree as being covered with dolls, miniature furniture, tiny musical instruments, costume jewelry, toy guns and swords, fruit and candy, in the 1850s.
Most of the 19th century Americans found Christmas trees an oddity. The first record of one being on display was in the 1830s by the German settlers of Pennsylvania. They put one on show to raise money for a local church. In 1851 a tree was set up outside of a church. The people of the parish thought it such an outrage and a return to paganism and asked the minister to take it down.
By the 1890s Christmas ornaments were arriving from Germany and Christmas tree popularity was on the rise around the U.S. It was noted that Europeans used small trees about four feet in height, while Americans liked their Christmas to reach from floor to ceiling.
The early 20th century saw Americans decorating their trees mainly with homemade ornaments, while the German-American sect continued to use apples, nuts, and marzipan cookies. Popcorn joined in after being dyed bright colors and interlaced with berries and nuts.
Electricity helped introduce Christmas lights making it possible for Christmas trees to glow for days on end. With this, Christmas trees began to appear in town squares across the country. All important buildings, private and public, signaled the beginning of the Christmas holiday with the tree ceremony.
Early Christmas trees had, in place of angels, figures of fairies - the good spirits, though horns and bells were once used to frighten off evil spirits.
In Poland, Christmas trees used to be decked with angels, peacocks and other birds as well as many, many stars. In Sweden, trees are decorated with brightly painted wooden ornaments and straw figures of animals and children. In Denmark, tiny Danish flags along with mobiles of bells stars, snowflakes and hearts are hung on Christmas trees. Japanese Christians prefer tiny fans and paper lanterns. Lithuanians cover their trees with straw bird cages, stars, and geometric shapes. The straw sends a wish for good crops in the coming year. Czechoslovakian trees display ornaments made from painted egg shells.
A Ukrainian Christmas tree has a spider and web for good luck. Legend has it that a poor woman with nothing to put on her children's tree woke on Christmas morning to find the branches covered with spider webs turned to silver by the rising sun.

LMAO...Don't encourage him :D

newb where are you getting this information?

and please don't let it be a christian biased website :rolleyes:

Re: Re: New Controversial 'Marriage Question'
 

I think your question, Bloody, is bass ackwards. One should be asking, if there's a supposed seperation between church and state, why does the gov. recognize Christian or Jewish marriages at all? Pagan, Wiccan, and the rest are the ones who've got it right.

google

Re: Re: Re: New Controversial 'Marriage Question'
 

Sam, it says "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion".

That is basically saying there can be no national religion.

While it is along the right lines, it doesn't call for a complete seperation of church and state. What I am asking is where did this term 'Seperation of church and state' come from? Why is that term tossed around like it's in the Constitution and we are all owed it?

Another point of interest, those guys that wrote the Bill of Rights, were primarily Christian. They followed the Ten Commandments, they printed our money with 'In God we trust' and the pledge of allegiance was made with 'One nation under God.' It is safe to say this country was founded on Christian principles. I'd also wager to guess that all of this wasn't exactly what they had in mind when they wrote that, and if they knew where it would eventually end up, they probably would have been a bit more specific.

Re: Re: Re: New Controversial 'Marriage Question'
 

What I mean is...Marriage affords people certain benefits...As in Health Insurance, Taxes, Social Security, etcetera...Sooo...Since they DO recognize Christian Marriage as qualification for these benefits, why not ALL religious unions?...

The irony is, if they DID accept the unions of all religions, there would actually BE a separation of church and state, as the qualifications for 'marriage benefits' would no longer BE based on ANY religion, but only on the union itself.......Hmm...Not sure if you guys are gonna understand that...I don't know how else to put it, and I know what I mean...lol

Re: Re: Re: Re: New Controversial 'Marriage Question'
 

It would cover marriage, too. Marriage is a religious practice, so technically the government shouldn't have much, if any, say in it.

And it would also rule out making laws based on things in the bible

Not to get too deep here or anything, but I say...

FUCK MARRIAGE ALTOGETHER!

:cool:

I only bothered to read your initial post bloodrayne,too many long posts to read in my drunken state, but my view is.....


marriage was always seen as a wholesome brining together of a couple...man and woman, as natural part of life. as things are today and with many other things, there are always changes and dfferneces that people are expected to accept... but the point is, and one that I agree with completely, is that marriage should be between two concenting adults man and wife. I also disagree with arrange marriages aswell.

heh drunken people bring you comedy even when they're halfway across the world

go shanks!! :cool:

I'm not married yet, but some womanm somewhere is gone get scare ota their wots when the see me at the end of thenisle, when the get married. :D

Nice post, Sweetheart...But, it had absolutely nothing to do with the subject:p

loll well I wish soem would tell me what its about then... btw whats it about then sexey legsd

LMAO.....It's about the fact that all 'partner binding rituals' practiced by ANY religion, should be recognized just the same as those performed in Christian marriage ceremonies...and afforded the exact same benefits...


Does that help?

so you saying we can marry what we like thne?

I swear I wish you could hear me laughing here...lol.....Just give up on this one, Baby Doll...I'll explain it to you tomorrow....OR, send me your phone number in a PM, so that you can hear me laughing at you and I can hear your drunken rambling...hahaha

.
 

drunk shanks is awesome... :p

i'm starting to think that Modestas is really Shanks drunken alter ego !