Should a priest be able to refuse to marry a couple because of their ethnicity?

I mean it's not like the church is a governement organisation. Why shouldn't the preist be as arbitrary as he likes? I'm not saying he would sensible in doing that, but shouldn't he have the right?

  • Yes, he should be able to refuse.
    40% (4)24% (4)30% (8)Vote
  • No, he should have no choice.
    40% (4)59% (10)52% (14)Vote
  • See answers
    20% (2)17% (3)18% (5)Vote
And you are? I'm a GirlI'm a Guy
Updates:
To our resident closet nazi,

As temporary tactic during war. He didn't want to go down in history as evil.
Only a complete coward blocks someone immediately after making a claim during an argument.

0|0
3|12

Most Helpful Guy

  • This is a complicated issue. The job of a priest is to make sure there is enough harmony - particularly in regard to the doctrinal teachings of his specific organization - between the organization and the specific values of both parties seeking marriage.

    Any violation of that should be grounds for refusal. If it's a Baptist and a Buddhist, that's asking for some straight-up Nephillim-style trouble with the bitter, confused kids down the road. It helps nobody.

    Take a look at the Book of Ruth, for example. Ruth was from Moab. Once it was clear she had forsaken the gods of Moab, she was free to marry Boaz. Had she retained her cultural traditions and original non-Jewish faith, she'd have been forbidden to marry.

    The only reason Jews in the Old Testament were warned not to marry foreigners was because of the ancient notion of regionalized religion. This land has these gods, that other land had its gods. But if God had to share Israel with every other god, then that was the spiritual equivalent of genocide. Especially if worship of him was all but forbidden in non-Jewish lands.

    In the modern day, inter-racial marriage means little to a priest. Skin color is meaningless, other than which diseases children are most at risk for. Cultural traditions are a yellow light. Religious inconsistency is a red light.

    A priest that cannot comprehend the green-yellow-red at play is not very good at his job. In which case, why would you insist on that particular priest's services? That anyone would, means their motives should be questioned. Those calling for the jailing of priests who refuse to perform XYZ particular wedding are flat-out insane.

    I may not agree with a given priest's specific position, but I would defend his right not to be forced into association with something he clearly feels is wrong.

    Society today should tremble that it does not feel the same way. Somehow, we have morphed as a society from thinking like Evelyn Beatrice Hall to thinking more like Marquis deSade. And there is no excuse allowing our modern thoughts to be dictated by the philosophies of the worst French and Germans that ever lived.

    0|0
    0|0

What Girls Said 3

  • The church can refuse to marry same sex couples or couples where one or both are not part of that religious denomination and I get that, but refuse to marry a couple because of their race? Even if they are members of that religion? That's crazy. I'm sure it happens though, I wouldn't be surprised.

    0|0
    0|0
    • I'm not aware of a religion which allows different races to be members but discourages interracial relations, but if such religion were to exist I don't see why their priest (or equivalent) shouldn't be able to refuse to marry them.

      It is crazy, but as it's not government organisation I don't see why the priest shouldn't be able to be completely arbitrary. You know like "You're 5'8 you can't marry a man with green eyes" - it wouldn't make sense, but this religion after all, I don't see why we should restrict their ability to be arbitrary and silly. If minorities/people don't like it they can just avoid that church/religion.

    • Show All
    • Since religious marriages here are performed concurrently with a civil legal marriage ceremony that is recognized by the government, that could be considered a violation of Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms:

      Equality before and under law and equal protection and benefit of law.

      15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

      But religious institutions and religious figures are exempt from so many things simply because of the right to freedom of religion outlined in Section 1.

      laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/const/page-15.html

    • I don't mean whether you think it fits within the law, but rather do you think he should be able to refuse.

  • I think it's a bit much to refuse someone a marriage based off of race because racism is not even in the bible. Refusing based on same sex marriage is another thing though because gay marriage is against the bible. The priests run the church based off of the bible.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Yeah they can refuse but the priest is an asswhole

    0|0
    0|1
    • Sure, but do you think he should be able to refuse?

    • Yeah because its America, your rights blah blah. can't make someone do something they dont want to do.

What Guys Said 11

  • Priest should be happy to have a job and income since churches are closing down and disappearing all over.

    1|0
    0|0
  • I don't think the priest has a right to decline anybody, not on moral grounds but by virtue of the fact that he i a representative of the church, there employee essentially. That would then mean they get to determine what he says and does. He has the right to not like it and refuse to do it and risk geting forced out of the church but this would be no diffrent then any other employer employee relationship.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Of course he has the right. I doubt that would be a reason against, but, yes, he has the religious liberty to marry or not marry anyone he wants. And I know the Catholic church has many strict requirements for marriage as it is.

    0|0
    0|0
    • Do you think he should have that right? (Perhaps my question wasn't as clear I thought...)

    • Yes, of course. To say he shouldn't have that right, is negate the First Amendment and religious liberty. And, of course I support that.

  • Who would want to be married by a racist priest? If I found out my priest didn't want to marry people who were of a certain race I would find a new priest or get the marriage done by a judge.

    1|0
    0|0
    • Some people really fancy a particular church, and then the local racist priest is their only option.

    • Show All
    • You really are sensitive. If you don't want me "pestering you" then stop messaging me and stop throwing around insults like a baby.

    • If you walk like a dick and talk like a dick, expect to get spat on like dick.

  • It's a matter between him and his church.

    0|0
    0|0
  • Not at all.

    0|0
    1|1
    • Fancy you saying that...

    • Show All
    • "most faiths see it as a good thing.
      he wanted to change that"

      I don't think that's accurate. I highly doubt Hitler's intention was to be seen as bad.

    • It was to crush spirits of those who oppose him.
      seriously... education is key.

  • I don't think anybody should be forced to do anything they don't want to

    0|0
    0|0
  • If its just the priest, then another priest will just do the wedding

    0|0
    0|0
    • So is that a yes? He should be entitled to refuse?

    • The priest should be allow to, its not like their is only one priest but the priest action will be frown upon

  • He can but who need a priest anymore?

    0|0
    0|0
  • He does have the right. If a priest doesn't want to marry u he won't. Messed up I know

    0|0
    0|0
  • If liberials disagree with something then people should have to do it, if liberials disagree with something then they say people should be forced to do it or ban, ban, ban it.

    Liberials are sooooo intolerant. The irony is stunning.

    0|0
    0|0
    • The first one is agrre* not disagree. Meg, liberials, friggin new age nazis.

Loading...