Local church votes for marriage equality, ends practice of signing marriage licenses - Polidicks

[release][img]http://imgkk.com/i/im5b.jpg[/img] Louisville, Kentucky - On Sunday, April 17, the congregation of Douglass Boulevard Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) unanimously voted to end the practice of signing marriage licenses because they give legal benefits to heterosexual couples that are not available to homosexual couples. Until the church's ministers may confer identical legal benefits on homosexual and heterosexual couples, they will perform only religious wedding ceremonies. "As an Open and Affirming Community of Faith (a designation signifying DBCC's commitment to full acceptance of all people, regardless of race, gender, age, or sexual orientation), our membership is committed to treating homosexuals and heterosexuals equally. Our congregation believes it is unfair to provide different services and benefits to heterosexual couples than we can provide to gay and lesbian couples," said associate minister Rev. Ryan Kemp-Pappan. Senior minister Rev. Derek Penwell added, "Heterosexual couples enjoy a number of benefits that result from having state-sanctioned union. They may inherit property, adopt children together, visit one another in the hospital, and save thousands each year in taxes by filing as a couple. Ministers, as agents of the state, have the power to confer these benefits-and the imprimatur of normalcy-on heterosexual couples, but we do not have the honor to bestow these benefits on gay and lesbian couples." "In our attempt to live out God's call to pursue justice for all, the Elders of the congregation joined the Pastors in witnessing to the right for gay and lesbian persons to God's blessing on their union and witnessing to the Commonwealth toward ending the refusal to recognize these unions," said Rev. Chuck Lewis, Chair of Elders with the church. Douglass Boulevard Christian Church, founded in 1846, has historically been committed to the pursuit of justice for all people, offering leadership in trying to live out the message of love and hospitality embodied by Jesus. In 2008, Douglass Boulevard Christian Church voted to become an Open and Affirming Community of Faith. Douglass Boulevard Christian Church is located at 2005 Douglass Boulevard in the Highlands near Douglass Loop. For more information on the church, visit [url]www.douglassblvdcc.com[/url].[/release] [url=http://www.whas11.com/community/Local-church-120224919.html?clmob=y]Source[/url]

progress progress progress

Hopefully this becomes a trend.

The churches either stay with the times or they fall behind and wither away. It's good they've at least embraced the idea of survival.

[QUOTE=Jimpy;29315906]The churches either stay with the times or they fall behind and wither away. It's good they've at least embraced the idea of survival.[/QUOTE] Protestants are typically with the time.

[QUOTE=Rubs10;29316351]Protestants are typically with the time.[/QUOTE] This is hardly with the times.

Good I love it when Christians are decent enough to literally go against what their bible says

how about they give benefits to homosexual and heterosexual couples instead of neither

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;29316378]This is hardly with the times.[/QUOTE] Marriage is itself an outdated institution, it was pretty useful when the most common cause of death for newborns was "eaten by predator".

there is literally no point to marriage anymore besides the legal benefits and whatnot

[QUOTE=not_Morph53;29320315]Marriage is itself an outdated institution, it was pretty useful when the most common cause of death for newborns was "eaten by predator".[/QUOTE] Hell, when you think about it, in a society with birth control, polyamory becomes rational. But our ethics are outdated :colbert:

[QUOTE=Sanius;29320047]how about they give benefits to homosexual and heterosexual couples instead of neither[/QUOTE] They can't. The state is in charge of that, not the church. I like this. "Well, if you can't share with the other kids, then none of you can have it. You'll get it back once you learn tolerance and cooperation." Awesome church.

Woah, that's like 10 feet from my house. Good for them!

[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;29316378]This is hardly with the times.[/QUOTE] More than the catholics :v: [editline]20th April 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=MrBob1337;29320657]Woah, that's like 10 feet from my house. Good for them![/QUOTE] Go give the priest a high five :3:

[QUOTE=Sanius;29320360]there is literally no point to marriage anymore besides the legal benefits and whatnot[/QUOTE] Or, you know, unless you like the other person and want to be married to them.

[QUOTE=Mikesword221;29320727]Or, you know, unless you like the other person and want to be married to them.[/QUOTE] that's not a valid reason for marriage to carry any sort of legal benefits marriage for romantic reasons is stupid beyond belief

[QUOTE=Mikesword221;29320727]Or, you know, unless you like the other person and want to be married to them.[/QUOTE] But why do you need a ceremony and paperwork to validate a relationship? [editline]20th April 2011[/editline] also, marriages are fucking expensive

[QUOTE=Lizard Of Guilt;29315861]progress progress progress[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_L7qoP17-w[/url]

I didn't expect this from Kentucky, but it's good to see some people in religion are recognizing that marriage isn't just between a man and woman.

I'm glad that more people are now supporting the more sane side of a biblical contradiction. [QUOTE=MrBob1337;29320657]Woah, that's like 10 feet from my house. Good for them![/QUOTE] Have you congratulated the priest yet?

[QUOTE=Sanius;29320047]how about they give benefits to homosexual and heterosexual couples instead of neither[/QUOTE] Up to the legislature...not the church. [editline]20th April 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Sanius;29320751]that's not a valid reason for marriage to carry any sort of legal benefits marriage for romantic reasons is stupid beyond belief[/QUOTE] ......Isn't that one of the main reasons behind letting gays marry!?

[QUOTE=VengfulSoldier;29323335] ......Isn't that one of the main reasons behind letting gays marry!?[/QUOTE] the main reason for homosexuals to be able to marry is that heterosexuals can marry and get legal benefits from it

[QUOTE=Sanius;29323377]the main reason for homosexuals to be able to marry is that heterosexuals can marry and get legal benefits from it[/QUOTE] Please re-read what I said, because you missed the part where I said "one of the main reasons".

[QUOTE=Sanius;29320751]that's not a valid reason for marriage to carry any sort of legal benefits marriage for romantic reasons is stupid beyond belief[/QUOTE] Fuck books and fuck romance. Truly a man of our time.

[QUOTE=VengfulSoldier;29323389]Please re-read what I said, because you missed the part where I said "one of the main reasons".[/QUOTE] what [editline]20th April 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=ThatHippyMan;29323410]Fuck books and fuck romance. Truly a man of our time.[/QUOTE] romance doesn't require marriage

[QUOTE=Sanius;29323413]what[/QUOTE] So there can't be more than one main reason behind a movement?

[QUOTE=VengfulSoldier;29323435]So there can't be more than one main reason behind a movement?[/QUOTE] what movement? your posts never make sense

[QUOTE=Sanius;29323450]what movement? your posts never make sense[/QUOTE] Oh for fuck's sake. The gay rights movement? One of the things they fight for is the right to marriage, one main reason is because they want to be legally recognized and be able to show their love for one another. :v: You never make any fucking sense, you're all for progress but then you have massive regressive tendencies. Such AS calling me a tree hugger :v:

any homosexual who fights for the right to arbitrarily display their love through marriage is a moron. that's not what the gay rights movement is about

[QUOTE=Sanius;29323546]any homosexual who fights for the right to arbitrarily display their love through marriage is a moron. that's not what the gay rights movement is about[/QUOTE] Sanius, they can't fight for more than one reason or is it if that is one of their reasons they're automatically a retard that shouldn't be allowed to fight for his/her rights? I'm asking because you're being a massive dickhead. I'm just trying to figure out if you're truly saying what you are saying.