This post may contain Mildly Adult content.
Mildly AdultRandom
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

They want to have their cake and eat it.

In England, the official state church, The Church of England, has just declared it will not conduct same sex marriages. As I see it, as His Majesty's Government had approved same sex marriages, His Majesty's Church should be obligated to conduct them. If they don't like it, they should withdraw their unelected representives from Parliament and ask His Majesty to step done as head of their little club. Then they can continue on an equal footing with other religious groups.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
To be honest it sounds more like you want to eat the cake and prevent anyone else from making any more.

Also I love that's it's now "The England"
Lynda70 · F
@Tinkles What leads you to that erroneous conclusion?

Typo corrected.
@Lynda70 you're wanting an organisation to change it's ways to suit your personal opinion. I suspect that you have no involvement with said organisation other than this issue. So once you've got what you want another organisation will be targeted and so on.

People should not be forced to compromise their religious beliefs, and if they don't agree with the opinion that marriage can be between same sex people then that should be respected.

Only the CoE is being targeted here, surely their are LGBTQI+ people who would want to get married in a Mosque or Synagogue for examples. You can't force one religious group to change and not the others.
Lynda70 · F
@Tinkles I have no problem with any other regligous group declining to conduct same (or even opposite) sex marriages but the CoE, specifically, holds a preferential position in England. That position allows it to appoint its own, unelected, representatives to Parliament. No other religious group has that right.

If the CoE want to retain its preferential position, it should be required to accept additional responsibilities, including conducting same sex marriages. Alternatively, it should forsake its preferential position so it only has the same rights and responsibilities of any other religious group.
@Lynda70 Elected MPs make up the house of commons, usually referred to as parliament, the are elected by geographical areas containing similar numbers of the electorate. Absolutely nothing to do with the CoE.

The house of lords are all unelected but can be overruled by the commons so are there to act as a buffer and advise the commons on the affects of voted legislation, and they all hold peerages, nothing to do with appointments by the CoE, I believe membership is granted by the royal family at the advice of the PM. Even CoE Bishops are appointed by the PM, so the CoE doesn't even really choose its own leaders!
Lynda70 · F
@Tinkles The House of Common is the Lower House of Parliament. The House of Lords is the Upper House of Parliament, where, [i]inter alia[/i] the unelected representative of the CoE sit. The monarch (head of the CoE) appoints bishops on the advice of the PM who, rubber stamps the CoE's list of nominees. The exception in living memory was when Margaret Thatcher opposed Jim Thompson’s nomination as Bishop of Birmingham,

Whatever the precise mechanism, the fact remains the the CoE holds a privileged position compared to all other religious groups. That privilege should come with obligations.