Foxy:

I agree.

Mmmm,

Wonder where the free speech advocates will side on this one?

A couple have their ceremony cancelled at a church because they express support for same sex marriage on their facebook page.

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/church-cancels-wedding-because-bride-and-groom-supported-gay-marriage-on-facebook-20170913-gygcyp.html

They weren't denied the right to speak - Facebook guaranteed that. They just have to deal with the consequences of their speech. They don't have a right to be married in that church.

So far there is an anonymous complainant saying she is representing her partner to be as well, while the party complained against is known and in the full glare of media and social site publicity.

What is the full story? Who would ever know?

Dear phanto,

Of course this was an attack on their right to free speech, or perhaps we have a differing definition of such.

Mine pretty well aligns to that given by Wikipedia;

“Freedom of speech is the right to articulate one's opinions and ideas without fear of government retaliation or censorship, or societal sanction.”

This couple's words were not inciting harm toward others, they were not hateful, and in fact they probably espouse a true christian perspective. I certainly deem the actions of the minister as societal sanction. Why don't you?

And you claim they don't have a right to be married in that church. Why not? They appear to have been part of the congregation for 10 years presumably giving of themselves and their money to support it. There most certainly is an implied right and if that smug, petulant, so and so didn't want to officiate then so be it. They should have been allowed to have someone else do it in the church, their spiritual home.

Dear Steele,

The Church is supposed to be a Christian Institution
and as such it is supposed to accept people of
all persuasions. Apparently due to the ever reducing
numbers of believers in attending Churches the Ministery
is not following the teachings of religious belief
and the prejudicial leadership that's being exhibited by
some ministers is driving away many believers whose
only fault seems to be a different interpretation of their
faith to those preached by their Ministers.

On the other hand I recently read the following letter in
our local newspaper which gives a different religious
viewpoint:

"I am concerned over how any debate on civil marriage
is now developing. Later this year, I shall have been
in the priesthood 58 years, and as a priest, I am
obliged to care for all, no matter what gender or
cultural background. All that matters is their belief
in Catholic values.

I shall be voting yes for civil marriage, something
very different to the marriage sacrament.

However, in doing so I can see no avenues open for those
who desire to inflict vindictive hatred on those who
do not agree with their position."

Reverend Mother Nerissa Marshail.
Sept. 11th 2017.