CreateDebate


Debate Info

5
2
It is wrong It should be like that
Debate Score:7
Arguments:5
Total Votes:7
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 It is wrong (3)
 
 It should be like that (2)

Debate Creator

feelingtruth(2772) pic



I want all of your opinions, but mainly the Gay community.

Do you believe this is justified? Because to me it is a sign of tyranny.

http://humanevents.com/2014/10/21/idaho-ministers-forced-to-perform-same-sex-weddings/ 


Forcing a religion to go against its religious beliefs or face fines and jail time?

I am 99.9% Positive this is not a hoax. 

It is wrong

Side Score: 5
VS.

It should be like that

Side Score: 2
2 points

It is wrong either because:

a. The ministry is government owned, meaning the state is not separate from the church, or;

b. The ministry is privately owned and are not allowed to use their property as they see fit.

Don't get me wrong, I feel that if anyone who's legal, and just wants to get married, should be able to get married, but I personally as an individual don't want to have to marry them, just because I happen to have a wedding license. That would infringe on my private rights as a citizen to refuse service for whatever reason.

Side: It is wrong

I agree whole heartedly .

Side: It is wrong
2 points

Apparently we aren't giving chapels the religious freedom they are supposed to have. A chapel performs a religious ceremony and should be protected. It is different from the florist and cake who aren't providing religious products. This is definitely a problem.

Side: It is wrong

First, I want to say that I abhor anyone who is legally forced to go against his will. With that being said, I am gay, and do not believe that pastors or other clergy should be forced to go against his or her religion. But, consider this:

1. Some states require that marriage/wedding officiants be ordained. Notary public's and clerks are not certified to officiate ceremonies.

2. So, if not the clergy, then who? Think about it. Most of the probate judges in Alabama refuse to marry same-sex couples. So, if probate judges, private individuals, and clergy are not legally bound to wed gay couples, then who can we turn to??

Its pretty simple. As soon as this (http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/03/where justicegoestodiealab.html#incartriver_mobileshort) stops, and laws are amended to include non-ordained citizens as marriage officiants, then perhaps gay couples will not feel that they have no other option but to pursue their "right" to be married by any one they choose.

Side: It should be like that

Ok, so this is tricky. I definitely don't think anyone should be forced into doing things that are harmful to them against their will.

BUT.

Think about the situation if this was not the rule. Any minister who did not approve of gay marriage would simply be able to say it was against their beliefs and the legalization of gay marriage would be nullified. Of course the minister should not do things that are hurtful to him, but allowing him to continue discrimination of gay couples after the law has given them equality would be an open door to continue prejudice, homophobia, and would nullify the progress that has been made.

Side: It should be like that