Should I Attend My Gay Friend's Wedding?

This is the place for mature and civil discussions. Not for the faint of heart or weak in faith.
User avatar
amyjo88
Minecraft Server Admin
Posts: 482
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2015 9:24 pm
Location: MidWest USA
Contact:
http://www.breakpoint.org/features-colu ... ry/2/28714

When I saw the title of this article, I first thought "well it depends..." But this article gives compelling points.

This is NOT a thread to discuss whether or not gay marriage should be legal. The topic is, now that gay marriage is in fact legal, do Christians attend gay weddings?

Or to broaden it, are there events that we do not attend because of our beliefs? Can we actually attend an event to support a friend without showing support for the event itself?

Are there other weddings we should not attend?

Why aren't there ever easy answers? lol
User avatar
ccgr
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 34532
Joined: Wed May 25, 2005 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: IL
Contact:
Thankfully, I have yet to be put in that situation. However, I would have to agree with that article and respectfully decline. As far as other weddings not to attend? How about a wedding based off an affair?
User avatar
ArcticFox
CCGR addict
Posts: 3502
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Contact:
I also agree with the article, and it makes some great points I hadn't even considered.
"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
—Brigham Young

"Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus."
—Christopher Hitchens
User avatar
ChickenSoup
CCGR addict
Posts: 3289
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: the doomed ship HMS Sinkytowne
Contact:
I think it just depends on your personal conviction about it.

My opinions differ from most people on this site, but I have attended a gay wedding.
My name is ChickenSoup and I have several flavors in which you may be interested
User avatar
Sstavix
CCGR addict
Posts: 2950
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Eastern Washington. Not the crazy side.
Contact:
I agree with ChickenSoup. (And a lot of people just said "wait, WHAT?" :lol: ) It all depends on one's personal convictions.

I have a couple aunts that have been together for almost as long as I've been alive. When it became legal in Washington state, they went ahead and got united in a civil ceremony. If I had received an invite, I may have attended. I have a couple other friends who run a comic book shop that were the first two in the county to get married in a civil ceremony when it became legal in Idaho, too. And to all of them, I wish them all the happiness in the world.

Whenever this issue comes up, it seems like I go more into Libertarian mode than looking at it from a strictly Christian perspective. :lol: If two people want to get married in a civil ceremony, in front of a judge or other state representative, then go for it. At that point, it's more of a legal binding than a spiritual one - render unto Caesar and all that. I hate to make it sound like I'm belittling anyone's union, but it's like attending the wedding between your daughter's teddy bears. Civil marriages are more akin to legally-binding contracts, and tied to relations in the physical world. Since they're not a spiritual union, then I take no issue with it.

Now if a gay couple were to be married by a priest, I may have some hesitation in attending. The scriptures have made it abundantly clear, in numerous places, that homosexual unions are severely frowned upon. So a religious figure offering to bless such a union makes me wonder if that person actually has any God-given, priestly authority in the first place.

So, to sum up - married by a judge is fine by me. Married by a priest makes me question their faith.
User avatar
ArcticFox
CCGR addict
Posts: 3502
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Contact:
Sstavix wrote:I have a couple aunts that have been together for almost as long as I've been alive. When it became legal in Washington state, they went ahead and got united in a civil ceremony. If I had received an invite, I may have attended. I have a couple other friends who run a comic book shop that were the first two in the county to get married in a civil ceremony when it became legal in Idaho, too. And to all of them, I wish them all the happiness in the world.
I can see where it would be a difficult choice, being family and all.

I still wouldn't though. The reasons I'd give basically echo what was said in the article so I won't repeat them.

To address what you said directly, Sstavix... I agree that it being a secular thing makes it different from someone trying to make it a spiritual union, but I still think this is an issue on which we need to take up a stance. To participate is to endorse, and I can't think of any other secular institution that goes against Christian teachings in which we'd participate without any conflict.

Would you go to a bachelor party if it were held at a strip club, on the grounds that it's only a secular thing? (hetero or gay, doesn't matter)

That's right, everybody, Sstavix and ArcticFox have engaged in battle. Get your tickets here! :lol:

Image
"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
—Brigham Young

"Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus."
—Christopher Hitchens
User avatar
Sstavix
CCGR addict
Posts: 2950
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Eastern Washington. Not the crazy side.
Contact:
I wouldn't go to a strip club... but that would be a personal decision on my part. It would lead to my direct participation, and consequences that I would have to account for. I don't think being a witness to two other people getting married would have any repercussions on me. Those two are the ones who are going to have to explain their actions to God. And, more than likely, they wouldn't listen to me if I said anything to them, anyway.

As I mentioned, for some reason my Libertarian leanings kick in whenever this topic comes up. I suppose I view it as not my place to judge what they do - especially on a spiritual level. I'll focus on my own standing with God, and they can focus on theirs. More than likely, if they thought about inviting me, they already know what faith I belong to and where the church stands on the topic of gay marriage, so they would just hope that I wouldn't make a scene. :wink: (Note: I wouldn't.)
User avatar
ArcticFox
CCGR addict
Posts: 3502
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Contact:
Sstavix wrote:I wouldn't go to a strip club... but that would be a personal decision on my part. It would lead to my direct participation, and consequences that I would have to account for. I don't think being a witness to two other people getting married would have any repercussions on me. Those two are the ones who are going to have to explain their actions to God. And, more than likely, they wouldn't listen to me if I said anything to them, anyway.
I think this is the core on where you and I disagree. The way I see it, being present at a marriage IS direct participation, because being there makes the statement that you support and endorse this union. That's why there's a part of the traditional ceremony where they ask if anyone present has a reason the two shouldn't be joined. That, right there, is the key. If you are present and remain silent, you affirm that there's no reason they shouldn't join.
Sstavix wrote: As I mentioned, for some reason my Libertarian leanings kick in whenever this topic comes up. I suppose I view it as not my place to judge what they do - especially on a spiritual level. I'll focus on my own standing with God, and they can focus on theirs. More than likely, if they thought about inviting me, they already know what faith I belong to and where the church stands on the topic of gay marriage, so they would just hope that I wouldn't make a scene. :wink: (Note: I wouldn't.)
As a Libertarian I get where you're coming from. Legally and secular speaking, there isn't a reason. Morally, there is, if one is in fact true to the Gospel. (Not accusing you of not being true, it's just how I approach it.) As Libertarians we mustn't interfere, and as Christians we mustn't participate. There need not be a conflict between those positions.
"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
—Brigham Young

"Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus."
—Christopher Hitchens
User avatar
ChickenSoup
CCGR addict
Posts: 3289
Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: the doomed ship HMS Sinkytowne
Contact:
As a Libertarian I get where you're coming from. Legally and secular speaking, there isn't a reason. Morally, there is, if one is in fact true to the Gospel. (Not accusing you of not being true, it's just how I approach it.) As Libertarians we mustn't interfere, and as Christians we mustn't participate. There need not be a conflict between those positions.
I mean, that's your opinion, though. I'm down with this theological Libertarianism.

Edit:

On a similar note, would you attend a housewarming party of a boyfriend/girlfriend living together?
My name is ChickenSoup and I have several flavors in which you may be interested
User avatar
Sstavix
CCGR addict
Posts: 2950
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Eastern Washington. Not the crazy side.
Contact:
ArcticFox wrote: I think this is the core on where you and I disagree. The way I see it, being present at a marriage IS direct participation, because being there makes the statement that you support and endorse this union. That's why there's a part of the traditional ceremony where they ask if anyone present has a reason the two shouldn't be joined. That, right there, is the key. If you are present and remain silent, you affirm that there's no reason they shouldn't join.
So along those lines, would you support, or be opposed to, celebrities and companies that support same sex marriages? Or homosexuality in general? Because if you support media with celebrities like Elton John, Ian McKellen or Queen, or companies like Marvel Comics or Nabisco, aren't you using your money to support their causes?
User avatar
ArcticFox
CCGR addict
Posts: 3502
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Contact:
ChickenSoup wrote: On a similar note, would you attend a housewarming party of a boyfriend/girlfriend living together?
Maybe. Are they getting married anyway? Are they in a state where co-habitation constitutes a common law marriage? Does it even matter? A housewarming party celebrates the acquisition of a new home. It is not a celebration of sin nor does it have anything whatsoever to do with what goes on in their bedroom. There's nothing inherently sinful about moving into a house. A wedding celebration is, by definition, a celebration of the union of the couple. In the case of a same sex marriage, the union by its very nature is sinful and so the wedding itself is a celebration of sin.
Sstavix wrote: So along those lines, would you support, or be opposed to, celebrities and companies that support same sex marriages? Or homosexuality in general? Because if you support media with celebrities like Elton John, Ian McKellen or Queen, or companies like Marvel Comics or Nabisco, aren't you using your money to support their causes?
I see what you mean, but it's completely different, in my view. If I buy a comic book that's a simple business transaction that has nothing whatsoever to do with same sex marriage. What they do with their profits, or what causes the owners support, is entirely on them. I'm not interested in reading a political dossier on every company I buy consumer goods from.

Now, let's say Marvel does a run of books for which the proceeds will be donated to some LGBT cause or another. That gets a little stickier because I know then exactly what will be done with the money I give them. In such a case then no, I wouldn't buy one because then they're directly tying the politics to the product.
"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
—Brigham Young

"Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus."
—Christopher Hitchens
User avatar
Sstavix
CCGR addict
Posts: 2950
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Eastern Washington. Not the crazy side.
Contact:
ArcticFox wrote: Now, let's say Marvel does a run of books for which the proceeds will be donated to some LGBT cause or another. That gets a little stickier because I know then exactly what will be done with the money I give them. In such a case then no, I wouldn't buy one because then they're directly tying the politics to the product.
What if the contents of the comic contained messages supporting LGBT causes? There was a story arc in one of the X-Men runs where Northstar (a minor Canadian superhero who is openly gay) got married. It showed the ceremony and them celebrating a kiss and everything, while the rest of the X-Men crew where there at the happy union, all with big smiles on their faces.... There may have been some sort of parallel with civil rights in there as well - the X-Men have always had a message of discrimination, of course, so this fell perfectly into their line of reasoning... and yes, it's about as nauseatingly overt as it sounds.
User avatar
ArcticFox
CCGR addict
Posts: 3502
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Contact:
Sstavix wrote: What if the contents of the comic contained messages supporting LGBT causes? There was a story arc in one of the X-Men runs where Northstar (a minor Canadian superhero who is openly gay) got married. It showed the ceremony and them celebrating a kiss and everything, while the rest of the X-Men crew where there at the happy union, all with big smiles on their faces.... There may have been some sort of parallel with civil rights in there as well - the X-Men have always had a message of discrimination, of course, so this fell perfectly into their line of reasoning... and yes, it's about as nauseatingly overt as it sounds.
Well I can't imagine wanting to read that story in the first place, so maybe it's not such a good example. I wouldn't buy the book. One of my biggest fears right now is that a future Star Trek or Star Wars film will go that route.
"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
—Brigham Young

"Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus."
—Christopher Hitchens
User avatar
Sstavix
CCGR addict
Posts: 2950
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2012 5:47 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Location: Eastern Washington. Not the crazy side.
Contact:
ArcticFox wrote: Well I can't imagine wanting to read that story in the first place, so maybe it's not such a good example. I wouldn't buy the book. One of my biggest fears right now is that a future Star Trek or Star Wars film will go that route.
Future? I remember an episode of Deep Space 9 where Dax (an alien with a symbiote in her) ran into an old friend - another symbiote - who she used to love. Only her old friend had taken another host... a female host. It inevitably led to a scene where Dax and this other lady were making out.

Sure, it's was SUPPOSEDLY the symbiotes, but still... two girls kissing. On prime-time TV. Probably just for the fanservice, but still....

Edit: The episode was "Rejoined," in case you wanted to look it up.
User avatar
ArcticFox
CCGR addict
Posts: 3502
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2007 12:00 am
Are you human?: Yes!
Contact:
I know the episode you're referring to. The main philosophical point had nothing to do with the sex of the hosts involved, but rather the reasons why a newly joined host should avoid being around people from the life of the previous host. (Ignoring the fact that the Dax symbiont was a close friend of Captain Sisko's or that later in the series after Jadzia dies, Dax returns in a new host body and basically joins right in.)

I found that episode slightly easier to bear because, as you said, it was basically about fanservice as opposed to making a political statement, and it didn't promote an political issue per se, other than being considered "courageous" for showing the first same-sex kiss in Star Trek. Most irritating to me was how people compared it to the original series episode where Kirk kissed Uhura... a huge scandal for the late '60s.

It's one I generally avoid along with the incredibly Anvilicious Star Trek: The Next Generation episode (The Outcast) where Riker falls for an alien from a race that are all androgynous... but occasionally one pops up with male or female characteristics. When that happens they get reconditioned to being back to neutral. Of course, the speech they gave is practically straight out of a LGBT rhetoric handbook.

Any future story line in either genre that touches on that stuff will almost certainly be an overt celebration of same sex couples as Hollywood continues to try and strengthen it's "progressive" cred. Kinda like the comic book you mentioned.
"He who takes offense when no offense is intended is a fool, and he who takes offense when offense is intended is a greater fool."
—Brigham Young

"Don't take refuge in the false security of consensus."
—Christopher Hitchens
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests