If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Telegraph)   Vicar at church which worships baby with no father refuses to baptize baby with no father   (telegraph.co.uk) divider line 104
    More: Interesting, Church of England, lesbian couples, Aimi Leggett, civil partnerships  
•       •       •

4999 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Sep 2013 at 12:04 PM (50 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



104 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-05 12:06:39 PM
Well, it makes sense you know.  After all, the father could be the kind of bum who doesn't even show up when the kid is on trial and gets capital punishm.....ohhhhh.
 
2013-09-05 12:06:40 PM
I was going to say God is the father, but then Jesus is god. Or something. I don't know.
 
2013-09-05 12:06:47 PM
Nice try subby, but Mary was married and was a divine surrogate, this girl is just a slut.
 
2013-09-05 12:07:04 PM
This is my shocked face

edschultzmsnbc.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-09-05 12:07:13 PM
What's it all about, Alfie?
 
2013-09-05 12:08:39 PM
So is TFA fictional, also?
 
2013-09-05 12:09:13 PM

lockers: Nice try subby, but Mary was married and was a divine surrogate, this girl is just a slut.


She wasn't married when she got pregnant, now was she?
 
2013-09-05 12:10:09 PM
Vicar at church that worships baby with TWO fathers refuses to baptize baby with two mothers.
 
2013-09-05 12:11:16 PM
I, for one, am SHOCKED to hear that many Christians may be hypocrites. Just... Flabbergasted.
 
2013-09-05 12:11:37 PM

ciberido: lockers: Nice try subby, but Mary was married and was a divine surrogate, this girl is just a slut.

She wasn't married when she got pregnant, now was she?


This is true. In fact, Joseph planned to break off the engagement when he discovered she was pregnant.
 
2013-09-05 12:11:41 PM
www.goddiscussion.com
 
2013-09-05 12:12:18 PM
There are no illegitimate children, only illegitimate parents.
And all priests are assholes by definition, association, and occupation.
 
2013-09-05 12:12:19 PM
Why would you want an organization that is oppose to your way of life to baptize your child?
 
2013-09-05 12:12:22 PM

lockers: Nice try subby, but Mary was married and was a divine surrogate, this girl is just a slut.


yay, slut-shaming!
 
2013-09-05 12:13:16 PM
The vicar will sanctify your heterosexual marriage just as soon as he can pry that choirboy's ringpiece off his junk.
 
2013-09-05 12:14:48 PM
Since when is a baptismal record enough to prove you didn't steal a baby, the dark ages? He had no problem listing one mother, just not two. Old guy was just ticked they didn't fit in the form all nice and neat. He'll get over it.
 
2013-09-05 12:15:30 PM
I think the Vicar watched the Simpsons a little too much

Where my soul will be chopped into a million little pieces and used as confetti upon a parade of murderers and single mothers.
 
2013-09-05 12:15:39 PM

lockers: Nice try subby, but Mary was married and was a divine surrogate, this girl is just a slut.


daylightwebsites.com
"I don't need to read no stinkin' article..."
 
2013-09-05 12:17:14 PM
To be fair..... it is a church and they are pretty firmly against the gay marriage thing. Maybe they should take their baby baptizing business to a religion that doesn't hate them.
 
2013-09-05 12:18:19 PM
So anyway, the Actual problem is that the women are lesbians.  But wait!  Sexuality is not the issue, it's that Both women want to be listed as the registered mother.

There's only so much accommodation everybody else should be expected to do on your account.  It's a frickin' Catholic church, and they're taking a relatively progressive approach in allowing the whole thing in the first place.  If you want the kid baptised, make some accommodations of your own.
 
2013-09-05 12:19:01 PM
So the guy in a dress has a problem casting a magic spell for a baby with two moms?
 
2013-09-05 12:19:22 PM

PsyLord: Why would you want an organization that is oppose to your way of life to baptize your child?


The Rev specifically said it had nothing to do with the couple's sexuality. He was for some reason claiming that 2 mothers could not be listed in the registry, and saying one of them had to be listed as a godmother. Then the archdeacon weighed in and basically said, "Um, no, it's fine to register both parents as mothers." End of story.
 
2013-09-05 12:20:34 PM
Sigh. Nobody's reading the article, are they.
 
2013-09-05 12:21:41 PM
So many didn't bother to read TFA.

SpectroBoy: To be fair..... it is a church and they are pretty firmly against the gay marriage thing. Maybe they should take their baby baptizing business to a religion that doesn't hate them.


The couple had chosen the church as it is where Aimi - Alfie's biological mother - was baptised and where her parents got married.
 
2013-09-05 12:21:45 PM

jonas opines: So anyway, the Actual problem is that the women are lesbians.  But wait!  Sexuality is not the issue, it's that Both women want to be listed as the registered mother.

There's only so much accommodation everybody else should be expected to do on your account.  It's a frickin' Catholic church, and they're taking a relatively progressive approach in allowing the whole thing in the first place.  If you want the kid baptised, make some accommodations of your own.


Or, as they did in the end, just go someplace else.
 
2013-09-05 12:22:10 PM

jonas opines: So anyway, the Actual problem is that the women are lesbians.  But wait!  Sexuality is not the issue, it's that Both women want to be listed as the registered mother.

There's only so much accommodation everybody else should be expected to do on your account.  It's a frickin' Catholic church, and they're taking a relatively progressive approach in allowing the whole thing in the first place.  If you want the kid baptised, make some accommodations of your own.


Actually, it's an Anglican church....
 
2013-09-05 12:22:12 PM

someonelse: Sigh. Nobody's reading the article, are they.


Welcome to fark.jpg
 
2013-09-05 12:22:51 PM
The vicar won't be home for hours.
 
2013-09-05 12:23:40 PM

PsyLord: Why would you want an organization that is oppose to your way of life to baptize your child?


Read TFA.

Doesn't even sound like he refused to perform the baptism as such, but that he's anal about the form and doesn't want to list both women as "mother."
 
2013-09-05 12:23:54 PM
"I'm baptised Church of England, and Victoria is a Catholic. We want him to be brought up the same as we were."

As both a Catholic and a member of the C of E? I guess he can start hating himself from the get-go.
 
2013-09-05 12:25:22 PM

joseelsegundo: "I'm baptised Church of England, and Victoria is a Catholic. We want him to be brought up the same as we were."

As both a Catholic and a member of the C of E? I guess he can start hating himself from the get-go.


To be fair, isn't that one of the basic tenants of Catholicism?
 
2013-09-05 12:25:23 PM

jonas opines: So anyway, the Actual problem is that the women are lesbians.  But wait!  Sexuality is not the issue, it's that Both women want to be listed as the registered mother.

There's only so much accommodation everybody else should be expected to do on your account.  It's a frickin' Catholic church, and they're taking a relatively progressive approach in allowing the whole thing in the first place.  If you want the kid baptised, make some accommodations of your own.


Yeah, see...  The Vicar even said that it has nothing to do with their sexuality and is nothing more than a matter of record keeping.  If you both want to be "mothers" that's up to you.  But as far as the records go, only ONE of them can be the biological mother.  And one of them IS the biological mother.
They are making a big stink over nothing.

Fortunately for them, they did manage to find a church without such stringent rules on record keeping.  So, other than bashing the Vicar for no good reason, this is a non-story.
 
2013-09-05 12:26:00 PM

gravy chugging cretin.: [www.goddiscussion.com image 620x330]


No, he was a criminal who was put to death.
 
2013-09-05 12:26:30 PM

someonelse: Then the archdeacon weighed in and basically said, "Um, no, it's fine to register both parents as mothers." End of story.


Since when does any kind of a Deacon hold any authority over any sort of Preacher/Minister/Priest?
 
2013-09-05 12:26:41 PM

jonas opines: So anyway, the Actual problem is that the women are lesbians.  But wait!  Sexuality is not the issue, it's that Both women want to be listed as the registered mother.

There's only so much accommodation everybody else should be expected to do on your account.  It's a frickin' Catholic church, and they're taking a relatively progressive approach in allowing the whole thing in the first place.  If you want the kid baptised, make some accommodations of your own.


I really don't understand why baptism is so important to some people. Especially to people that the Church has already determined long ago will be burning in hell, Baptism or no. Go be a Buddhist or something. They're not going to judge you for that petty crap. And it's just as valid in the real world as any of the other crappy religions. I guess my point is: if you MUST have religion, why not choose one that actually wants you the way you are?
 
2013-09-05 12:27:13 PM
That'll really mess up the Mormons with all that ancestry empire they have built. Who hasn't tried to look up genealogy stuff and not stumbled on the Mormon archives of church baptismal records, death records, wedding records especially in the UK and US.

How does two mothers fit into the standard genealogical chart? And which mother's family tree do you trace?

Damn you little bastard, opening up a can or worms like that.
 
2013-09-05 12:27:33 PM

jst3p: To be fair, isn't that one of the basic tenants of Catholicism?


I wasn't aware one needed a lease to be Catholic.
 
2013-09-05 12:28:13 PM

Deucednuisance: jst3p: To be fair, isn't that one of the basic tenants of Catholicism?

I wasn't aware one needed a lease to be Catholic.


goddamnitsomuch.
 
2013-09-05 12:28:37 PM

someonelse: The Rev specifically said it had nothing to do with the couple's sexuality. He was for some reason claiming that 2 mothers could not be listed in the registry, and saying one of them had to be listed as a godmother. Then the archdeacon weighed in and basically said, "Um, no, it's fine to register both parents as mothers." End of story.


Everybody loves to be outraged on this subject, and the volume only increases especially when this particular villain acts reasonably.  Must drown out all voices that might undercut that point of view....
 
2013-09-05 12:29:01 PM

lockers: Nice try subby, but Mary was married and was a divine surrogateprobably got knocked up by some Roman soldier,*; this girl is just a slut.


* maybe a slut, maybe rape; in those times, amounts to the same thing I suppose
 
2013-09-05 12:29:21 PM
I am shocked, SHOCKED!
 
2013-09-05 12:29:35 PM

PsyLord: someonelse: Sigh. Nobody's reading the article, are they.

Welcome to fark.jpg


Seriously.

And didn't the Anglicans just recently come out (so to speak) in support of gay marriage? Or at least the Church of England adherents? I mean they've been fairly liberal on that front for a while now. These women seem to have cause to raise a fuss in this case.
 
2013-09-05 12:30:05 PM
Which one of you did that come out of? Ok, we'll put you down as the mother. Now you, you get to be mom 2. Ok?
 
2013-09-05 12:31:03 PM

ginandbacon: And didn't the Anglicans just recently come out (so to speak) in support of gay marriage? Or at least the Church of England adherents? I mean they've been fairly liberal on that front for a while now. These women seem to have cause to raise a fuss in this case.


The Episcopal Church is on board with it in states where it's legal. They are derived from the Anglican Church which is wrestling with legal issues on the subject. Neither are unfriendly to gay couples, at least at the organizational level. Local results may vary.
 
2013-09-05 12:32:16 PM

jst3p: joseelsegundo: "I'm baptised Church of England, and Victoria is a Catholic. We want him to be brought up the same as we were."

As both a Catholic and a member of the C of E? I guess he can start hating himself from the get-go.

To be fair, isn't that one of the basic tenants of Catholicism?


Well you only have to hate yourself until your next confession. After that, it's all good. Lather. Rinse. Repeat.
 
2013-09-05 12:39:03 PM

someonelse: PsyLord: Why would you want an organization that is oppose to your way of life to baptize your child?

The Rev specifically said it had nothing to do with the couple's sexuality. He was for some reason claiming that 2 mothers could not be listed in the registry, and saying one of them had to be listed as a godmother. Then the archdeacon weighed in and basically said, "Um, no, it's fine to register both parents as mothers." End of story.


I was thinking maybe it was like the contacts app in my old cell phone where a person could only have one number tagged as "mobile".The any other number had to be listed as under home, work, or "custom"... but go ahead and list as many "custom" numbers as you want.... you just couldn't customize the tag.

Someone think of the forms!
 
2013-09-05 12:41:20 PM

ArcadianRefugee: lockers: Nice try subby, but Mary was married and was a divine surrogateprobably got knocked up by some Roman soldier,*; this girl is just a slut.

* maybe a slut, maybe rape; in those times, amounts to the same thing I suppose


Or so I am lead to believe from conservatives.
 
2013-09-05 12:41:26 PM
I am surprised they were even willing to do the baptism, and wouldn't have expected them to accomodate in the records as well... however, what is this garbage about listing one mother proving they didn't snitch the baby?  How is just making them pick one to be 'more' the mother proof of anything, even if it were a legitimate fear?  It's just a really bizarre reason to give, and it appears he doubled down on his reason a few times.  Just saying it was a religious reason would have been way easier and probably would actually be less offensive.
 
2013-09-05 12:43:10 PM

ArcadianRefugee: lockers: Nice try subby, but Mary was married and was a divine surrogateprobably got knocked up by some Roman soldier,*; this girl is just a slut.

* maybe a slut, maybe rape; in those times, amounts to the same thing I suppose


Back in the day rape was a crime against the slut's husband or father. You know, the guy that owned the property you just devalued by soiling it.
 
2013-09-05 12:43:52 PM
"Rev Gebauer - who has been a vicar for 40 years - said the couple's sexuality was not an issue and he was willing to carry out the baptism if the women agreed to record just one of them as mother." "
"The couple are not even from our parish, so we could have informed their local church and directed them there instead."

So, it seems like a couple of lesbian women walked into a random church asking them to baptize their kid. The church says the will if they fill out the required paperwork correctly with simple suggestions that fit their circumstances. They then refuse, get up in arms, and run to the media and make a big stink. So now it is the church's fault.
 
Displayed 50 of 104 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report