Churches Refuse to Marry Straight People
A group of local churches in the Minneapolis/St.Paul area have begun to refuse to marry heterosexual couples in protest of the ban on same-sex marriage. The churches will still hold ceremonies and blessings for both straight and gay couples, but not sign the marriage certificates of the straight couples. Instead, the straight couples will have to seek out a judge to make the nuptials legal.
Thank God (literally) that some churches are standing up for our community and what’s right. ”Seventy-five dollars for a judge and 30 minutes plus parking is such a small inconvenience compared to what same-sex couples experience,” explains one minister.
The idea that churches should have no real involvement in civil marriages is long overdue. Our country’s idea of marriage is completely too intertwined with religion, which is why we have fallen behind other countries in the world when it comes to marriage equality. Spain, one of the most Catholic countries in the world, allows same sex marriage because they are able to separate the religious aspect from the civil contract, something our society is unwilling or unable to do.
The separation of religious blessing and civil marriage can only help all involved. It allows the government to grant the rights that go along with civil marriage to all and allows churches the freedom to choose whom they bless without interference.
As Anita Hill, a pastor at Saint Paul-Reformation Church, says, “We’re not in the wedding business; we’re in the blessing business.“
Amen.
Waymon Hudson, The Homo Politico, is founder and President of Fight OUT Loud, a national non-profit organization dedicated to helping LGBT individuals and their allies fight discrimination and hate. www.fightoutloud.org
Also posted The Bilerico Project (www.bilerico.com)
November 23rd, 2007 at 7:12 am
I agree that it’s a positive step, I say well done and thankyou, as long as some people don’t take it like this, “Okay, you’re not even allowed to have partners anymore, nobody can have partners anymore!” Ha.
Great post Waymon.
Peace.
Freedom and equality!
November 23rd, 2007 at 10:02 am
Thanks, S! I think any step to separating civil marriage (and the rights that come with it) from religious blessings is a positive one. I say bravo to these churches!
December 9th, 2007 at 10:38 am
[…] Anyone who regularly reads my posts and comments knows that I have a bit of an issue with organized religion. You might even say that I am one of those “militant homosexual activists” that automatically dislikes and discounts a person when they are religious. […]
January 5th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
um…i think thats the dumbest thing i have ever heard a church not marrying straight people….thats what a marriage is is a man and a woman
January 5th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
What’s truly dumb, Bob, is the fact that straight people have been the ones destroying the “sanctity” of marriage with high divorce rates and quickie drive-thru weddings. If conservative “values voters” are so keen to preserve marriage, why not look at themselves first? It seems your idea that “marriage = man + woman” isn’t working out so well.
I have no issue with churches not blessing same-sex unions. That’s their right. The problem I have is not being afforded the rights and civil benefits that go along with marriage. Churches have no business denying me and my loved ones civil benefits.
January 10th, 2008 at 7:58 am
That is Right thing to do, ban on heterosexual couples, because that is opposite to nature.
January 10th, 2008 at 10:47 am
I’m not sure what your comment means.
I don’t think that there should be a “ban” on anyone, gay or straight. There should be separate civil and religious parts of marriage that the parties involved can choose to be a part of or not.
Thanks for reading, though.