Undoubtedly there are gays who are deeply religious and I think they should seek out clerics who do perform gay marriages.

I also think radical gays who demand church weddings should be more sensitive and diplomatic. Nothing worthwhile will be achieved by trying to force others to comply with their wishes. Many would see such demands as capricious, and in most cases would be correct. When acceptance comes, it will be a natural development.

Incidentally, not all male gays practice anal sex.

Danielle, "To insist on marriage in a church would imply that they are committed religious and that they seek a marriage valid in the sight of god"

Yet at the same time gay activists denounce churches and the institution of marriage, saying that both are better gone. How does that work?

Danielle, "By logical extension - as in the case of religious heterosexuals - if there was an impediment to marrying in a church - they would not seek marriage outside the church, nor would they live together"

That extension is dispelled by the very obvious fact, confirmed by gay activists, that they are presently shacking up with their squeeze. Also, most activists for gay marriage are serial activists for other agendas, with gay marriage being one suspects just another lever to push. The few gay marriage activists who are gay themselves may not represent the majority of homosexuals anyhow.

It does seem to be a media-led protest, which is not surprising given some of the main supporters, the political 'Progressives' and Greens being the very obvious example. As an avowed protest party that seeks to embarrass and knobble foe and partners alike for headlines (the Gillard government is a case example), the feckless, treacherous Greens take no responsibility for the unintended consequences of their policies.

There is not only strong evidence that Jesus was gay, there is also evidence of Jesus attending a gay marriage, where he supplied the booze.
John 2:1-11 Marriage at Canna. Jesus attended with his 12 disciples and his mum, who may have felt a little uncomfortable being the only woman at a wedding where everyone else was male, even the bride. The event had considerable importance in the acceptance of early Christians of gay marriage. The gospel account of Jesus being invited to a gay wedding, attending, and using his divine power to save the celebrations from disaster are taken as evidence of his approval of gay marriage and homosexuality in general.
The Mormons believe the Marriage at Canna was actually Jesus's own polygamist wedding, where he married the sisters Mary Magdalene and Martha as well as another Mary, 3 wives. Many theologians are accepting of the gay marriage version, but others, other than Mormon that is, have some difficulty with the polygamy version. But all theologians agree it was clearly not a heterosexual wedding.

Dear Danielle,

Thank You for your well-reasoned and intelligent comments.
It is an issue that is a very emotive one and the model
that you offered in your earlier post modelled on the
French sounds to me like a reasonable suggestion.
If civil marriage became the acceptable and legal form
in this country perhaps this would overcome some problems.
Afterall not everyone marries in churches nowadays - many
couples prefer marriage celebrants. Australia has secular
government and no official or state religion. Religious
laws have no legal status in Australia - so making civil
marriage the legal form in this country makes sense.

I looked up "Fact-Check" on same sex marriage - and found it
to be quite interesting. Pe4rhaps you will as well:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-10-21/ask-fact-check-same-sex-marriage/5029100

onthebeach,

My comments were meant to be the logical sequel for gays, indeed any, wanting a church marriage. It was not meant to be descriptive.

Foxy,

Thank you. I am very interested in looking at the "Fact-Check" which I will do asap.

Paul1405,

What sources, or other evidence, can you provide that the marriage at Canna was a gay marriage - or that Jesus was gay? Given the environment and mores of the period, these issues would have resulted in very unpleasant consequences. There would have been no Jesus of the gospels.

"Posted by Paul1405, Thursday, 7 November 2013 10:40:35 AM"

Paul,
How about a couple of scholarly references?