May the Force Now Wed You? Jedi Knights may perform marriages


This Week’s Sign the Apocalypse is Upon Us

by Rebekah Maxwell

A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, a great war waged in the minds of men. Seeking to cast off ancient restraints, they now faced an essential void…what is marriage? Who can now say? How can we reconcile what is true with what we want to be true?

A compromise is proposed. Keep the state out of marriage, they said. Let the church define marriage, they said. So they will.

But who defines what a “church” is?

The government, of course…because they’re theological experts. For proof, check out a new law proposed in Scotland that, while completely overhauling their marriage statutes in order to legalize same-sex marriage, also declares any group “promoting a belief” a viable authority to marry couples. Including the Jedi Knights.

BBC News reports:

The Free Church of Scotland has raised concerns about religious and civil partnership ceremonies being joined by a third category.

Church spokesman, the Reverend Iver Martin says, “The third category is quite astonishing because it is the so-called belief category without really defining what “belief” means.

“There are loads of people in a diverse society like this for whom belief can mean virtually anything – the Flat Earth Society and Jedi Knights Society – who knows?

That’s no joke: it’s actually quite plausible. In England, “jedi knight” or The Temple of the Jedi Order is the second-most popular “alternative religion,” with more than 175,000 people listing themselves as Jedi in the 2012 nationwide census. What’s truly silly is the notion that self-proclaimed students of Yoda will be performing marriages, when any true Star Wars fan knows Jedi can’t get married. But digressing, I am.

Reverend Martin continued, “I am not saying that we don’t give place to that kind of personal belief, but when you start making allowances for marriages to be performed within those categories then you are all over the place.”

The Scottish government is holding public consultation on bill.

A spokeswoman said: “Our current consultation covers not only the introduction of same sex marriage but also the detail of important protections in relation to religious bodies and celebrants, freedom of speech and education.”

But she did say they’re considering “the introduction of tests which a religious or belief body would have to meet before they could be authorized to solemnize marriage.”


Because I completely trust this policy that will require officials to perform same-sex ceremonies against their consciences, from a government that allows preachers to be arrested for reciting Bible verses about sexual sin (check the cases of Harry Hammond, Stephen Green, and Dale McAlpine).
But the government says it will “ensure that no religious group or individual member of the clergy would be forced to conduct such ceremonies.” Unless you count the threat of prosecution by a continental Human Rights court as being “forced.” No biggie.

Ah, the self-destruction of the mythical secular society. First, we buy the notion that mutually-exclusive truth claims can all be true at once…resulting in a cancelled state of no established truth. Then comes the “validation” that you can believe anything you want, including belief in nothing, as long as you don’t impose your non/beliefs on others. That seems reasonable.

Then, when sensitivities heighten (as they must, in the absence of objective reality, when the only standard is not based on evidence but on personal emotion), those opposing your beliefs/behaviors must be silenced. It’s not about “belief” any more. They disagree with what you claim, therefore they hate you. They can’t say words that criticize what you like…that’s “violence.” Inevitably, this results in a drastic imposition of values, and the loudest victim group wins the argument.

And when those honored institutions that provided us stability and structure for centuries must be silenced by the fluctuation of public whim, or must contradict their very essence to be allowed to continue, in what other anchor will society trust? Nature abhors a vacuum, therefore, any “values-neutral” utopia we deceive ourselves into trusting is merely a mirage…just waiting a dominant, unyielding force of ideology to topple the delusion and leave us empty-handed and servile.

It really shouldn’t be too hard to conquer western civilization. We’ve surrendered our defenses and weakened our own foundation already. And, to paraphrase Master Yoda, that is why we fail.

  • Aaron W. Jaco

    Judges can marry people, too.

  • groovyone

    Uh….a “gay” life is not “morally positive”… “God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error. And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done” Romans 1

  • Cecil_S

    Got a really easy question for you. What business is it of anyone else’s if two people who love each other want to get married?

  • Cecil_S

    Great! Me too! Therefore it should be nobody’s buisness if a man and two women want to get married! Or say two men and a woman. Or shoot a man and 10 women! If they love each other why not? For that matter a man and his daughter? Why are we fooling around with all this stupid married stuff anyway and just let people be with whoever they want!! Or whatever they want whether man or beast, if they love each other who’s buisness is it anyways???

  • Cecil_S

    I notice, as usual, you people completely ignore and then try to go off on something else, when it is brought up that homosexual’s should have the right to “marry”. You don’t want to discuss the fact that once you do that you have no reason to stop 3 people from getting “married”. Oh well I can keep trying.

  • Cecil_S

    Nobody was asking to have 2 perverts get “married” 10 years ago. My assertion is that you have no reason what so ever to stop a man from marrying two women. You are the ones who said homosexual “marriage” won’t affect me. However now we teach our kids and grand kids in school that two daddy’s are “normal”. Now we say if you SAY something against homo “marriage” it is a hate crime. Yeah, won’t affect me. Of course you say no one is saying they want to marry two women, however you are wrong. Oh maybe you left a loop hole because no one famous is saying it? You are either knowingly being ignorant that the next step is polygamy or you know you have to keep your head in the sand in order to not have to admit what is inevitable. Either way it isn’t good.