NOM's Communications Director Thomas Peters gave this comment to the Associated Press about the news that the National Cathedral in Washington, D.C. will offer ceremonies to same-sex partners:
"...The conservative National Organization for Marriage, which opposes same-sex marriage, said the cathedral's change was "disappointing but not surprising," given the direction of the Episcopal Church.
"The message here is that conservative Episcopalians are being pushed out," said spokesman Thomas Peters.
In light of the cathedral's national prominence, Peters called the marriage announcement "an opportunity for people to wake up to what's happening."
"It reminds us that marriage is really an all or nothing deal," he said. "Does America want to retain its marriage tradition or fundamentally give it up?" (AP)
12 Comments
Do churches have the right to decide for themselves whether they want to perform same-sex marriages or don't they? NOM seems to want religious freedom as long as that freedom is the way they think it should be and not freedom to make the choice for themselves.
No, Teri, NOM is asking any organization that calls itself a church to adhere to Scripture, not to the whims and fancies of current pop culture. Got it now?
The USA is not and has never been monolithic in its attitudes toward religion and it should not be surprising that there are so many religions and denominations in a country that values religious liberty. Like it or not, there are Christian denominations that support gay marriage and denominations that reject it. They have the right to do that within their own religious organizations but do not have a right to insist that their beliefs should apply to all US citizens. The idea of religious freedom cuts both ways: if some denominations reject gay marriage, they should be able to deny same-sex couples marriage rites in that denomination. Likewise, if a church allows gay marriage within its system, then they should be allowed to celebrate gay weddings in the way(s) they choose. But there are also millions of people who are not religious, and they should not be restricted by any religions at all. Keeping the concepts of religious and civil marriage separate is one major way of working through our current situation. Let religions define marriage within their own traditions, but allow civil marriage to be applied to any all adults, regardless of sexual orientation.
I just want to tell everyone that I'm coming out of the closet, yes, I'm a conservative & proud to be one.
FE- So Nom's definition of church is one that adheres to a certain interpetation of scripture? You told teri no, but then contradicted yourself. Was that a typo?
@peter,
Scripture is not open to interpretation; we do not tell God what he meant when he said same gender relations is an abomination and one of the few ways where man can sin against himself.
Does adherence to scripture apply to the roles of women in a church as well? Or is it acceptable for the Epicopal Church to bow to the "whims and fancies of current pop culture" in those matters?
@Teri
"NOM seems to want religious freedom as long as that freedom is the way they think it should be and not freedom to make the choice for themselves."
Is it wrong to be concerned that the teachings of the Bible are being ignored? Churches can do as they please, that's why we have the 1st amendment. Don't think for a minute that NOM wants to punish congregations who deviate from Scripture because they don't. This seems to me and others that it is merely a stunt to gather more congregants because these people at least recognize there is a spiritual decline in our country. However, they are going about it the wrong way.
So most of you are saying that the Bible can only be interpreted in one way. Got it. So all the different denominations of Christianity are doing it wrong with their shading of interpretations. If there were truly only one interpretation, wouldn't there only be one church? zach, you said they're ignoring the teachings of the Bible. But again, if there is only one interpretation, then there shouldn't be such differences in the teachings. You guys are seriously messed up.
Re. #3.
“Let religions define marriage within their own traditions”
Polygamy is still banned by law even though it is part of the tradition of a major world faith with 1.6 billion members.
“but allow civil marriage to be applied to any all adults, regardless of sexual orientation.”
There is no sexual orientation test when you apply for a marriage license. Traditional law is applied equally to all adults.
@Teri,
The different denominations of Christianity each interpret the Bible as written. It is in the application that they differ; which is based on how they may put the finger on the scale - so to speak.
By legislating the acceptance of sexual depravity the government is picking sides; which violated the spirit of the separation of Church and State.
Once again we see that marriage corruption supporters are the perpetrators; not the victims, but, then again, blaming others for the crimes they themselves commit is the SOP of the A-typical sociopath.
@Teri
"If there were truly only one interpretation, wouldn't there only be one church?"
No. Each denomination offers their own path to God, they may have different practices but their interpretation of the Bible has been largely the same.
"zach, you said they're ignoring the teachings of the Bible. But again, if there is only one interpretation, then there shouldn't be such differences in the teachings."
There aren't. As I have said, each denomination offers their own path to God. Different practices don't mean different teachings. For instance, Baptists and Catholics are pretty much the same, one of the few differences between them is the process of Baptism. Baptists believe it should be up to the individual where as Catholics believe it should be done when the person is in infancy.