Removed by mod

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_East_Media_Research_Institute#Accusations_of_pro-Israel_bias

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Middle_East_Media_Research_Institute#Translation_accuracy_and_controversy

Our current religious texts are continuing to change over time

I disagree.

To say, the text of the Bible doesn’t change, is just untrue

I didn’t say that. As you keep pointing out, there are many different scriptures which are referred to as “the Bible”. Each is a different scripture.

I disagree.

a thousand years ago

Again, we’re talking about different things.

newer versions

So not the same scriptures then.

The texts change in response to our interpretation over time

New texts being created is not the same thing as changing texts. People don’t go around with a pen and update pages.

me and my wife

As her legal wife

we got married

You got married? In a religious ceremony in a Christian church? Or you had a civil ceremony and are now in a civil partnership?

You’re wrong. As shown by the source you yourself gave.

there is no such thing as an “original” Bible text

I never said there was. And the existence of more than one accepted scripture doesn’t contradict what I said. Each of those scriptures will not adapt to its environment.

there’d be no way to perfectly preserve their meaning over the many of thousands of years they developed.

Again, we’re talking about different things. You’re talking about long periods of time where human civilisation develops, where scriptures are translated, reinterpreted, etc. into new scriptures. I’m saying that the King James Bible of the 1950s was the same King James Bible of the 1970s and didn’t adapt in response to the civil rights movement of the 1960s.

When it is illegal for same-sex couples to marry that it was one the things they miss out on.

It seems then that you were comparing married couples with same-sex couples who were not in a legally recognised life partnership, such as a civil partnership in the UK. Which makes no sense. I think it’s safe to assume that the vast majority of people one interacts with on Lemmy will live in a jurisdiction where same-sex life partnerships are legally recognised.

Vatican City

is a backward city-state and is no way representative of contemporary Western democracies.

You said, as part of this discussion, before asking your question:

Except married couples get legal benefits that actually matter in reality that same-sex couples don’t get. So its not a strawman.

Why did you state that married couples get benefits that same-sex couples don’t get if you didn’t know what you were saying was true?

scriptures have been adapted many many times

We’re using the word “adapted” in different ways. There may be no authoritative bible text but texts which are considered to be bibles don’t change in response to their environment. They may be rewritten or translated but the originals are still the originals.

Dafuq are you talking about? It’s not the case in the UK. Quoting directly from the page you linked to:

You can benefit from Marriage Allowance if all the following apply:

you’re married or in a civil partnership

…

adaptation to modern times of the scriptures

The scriptures don’t adapt, only their interpretation.

Arent these religious ceremonies legally binding?

If you don’t know then why are you arguing about it?

Except married couples get legal benefits that actually matter in reality that same-sex couples don’t get.

That’s not the case in the UK.

So its not a strawman.

It’s probably not the case where you live either.

more equivalent legally

This is a straw man. The pope’s decision is about a religious issue, not a legal issue.