Why marriage equality in the church?
Why should General Convention 2009 seek marriage equality for same sex couples? Integrity USA responds with this video.
While the current President and the Episcopal Church drag their feet on this issue, former Vice President, Dick Cheney, who occasionally attends St. John's Episcopal Church in Jackson, WY, near his home there, says he favors state by state approval of marriage equality.
Former vice president Richard Cheney waded into another simmering public debate today, suggesting he supports legalizing gay marriage as long as the issue is decided by the states rather than the federal government.Interesting that Archbishop Rowan Williams now expects the Episcopal Church to occupy a position to the right of Dick Cheney in order to keep the communion together.Cheney, whose youngest daughter is a lesbian with a longtime partner, said during an appearance at the National Press Club that "people ought to be free to enter into any kind of union they wish, any kind of arrangement they wish."
A gay couple who gets married in an Episcopal Church still has none of the legal rights enumerated in this video, if their state doesn't marry gay couples. Which means that there isn't any such thing as "marriage equality."
And I don't see what Dick Cheney has to do with General Convention.
Posted by BSnyder![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/nav-commenters.gif)
|
June 2, 2009 9:59 PM
But, B, currently it is possible to marry civilly, but not Episcopally, in a number of states. Additionally, in every state where the marriage battle is being waged, Christians are among the high profile foes of progress. It is invaluable, as we are currently learning here in DC, to have people arguing FOR marriage from a Christian perspective.
As for Dick Cheney, I think his conversion on this issue makes it clear that a sea change is underway in public attitude. If we are perceived as unwilling to act on our convictions on this matter, while a guy like Cheney, hardly an exemplary moral figure, is willing to speak on his , we lose a lot of credibility as a church. You can't go from the front of the parade to the back without looking foolish, cowardly, or both.
Posted by Jim Naughton![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/nav-commenters.gif)
|
June 3, 2009 8:18 AM
Sure, it's very valuable to have the church arguing for marriage - for civil marriage, that is. My question concerns the implied relationship between what the General Convention of the Episcopal Church does, and what the state does. I simply think there is no such relationship.
Definitely, the Church should argue for marriage in the civil sphere, where important rights can be conferred - but what General Convention does will have no effect on that at all. And isn't that the question asked at the outset here?
If the worry is that we'll look silly arguing for secular marriage while we don't offer religious marriage - well, I don't think that's really much of a problem, since getting married in church is a declining trend anyway.
Anyway, the church does have some prerequisites for marriage, even for heterosexuals. One of the spouses has to be baptized; if a second or third marriage, there are some hoops to jump through, etc. The church has its own set of criteria for marriage, which have basically nothing to do with secular marriage.
Posted by BSnyder![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/nav-commenters.gif)
|
June 3, 2009 3:50 PM
Apart from the insipid Muzak, the video is effective. Peoples' stories matter and can't be ignored if we are a Church that respects peoples' dignity.
This video is similar in style to one used by the Vermont Freedom to Marry Task Force in the run up to the historic marriage equality bill voted this Spring in the Vermont House.
Whether or not the Integrity video will sway people at General Convention... we'll see. - Jay Vos
Posted by dutchfox![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/nav-commenters.gif)
|
June 4, 2009 1:15 PM