Christmas and barmitzvahs are religious in nature, but marriages certainly are not. First off it is a ceremony that is recognized by almost every culture in history, including athiest societies such as the former USSR. If you're saying that Marriage is purely secular, you're not being intellectually honest. So many people in social industries essentially are forced to live by religious rules without actually being a member of those religions just to be able to get a job.

And as long as the Conservatives are in office this will not change, since the churches offer them, well, let us call it PR support in exchange for keeping their special status intact. And since they are so good at it there are areas where the churches have a quasi-monopoly in welfare services, leaving workers dependent on them. so they can undercut the private-sector competition. This all works so well because as religious organisations the churches get preferred treatment with regard to taxation, exemption from labour regulations and union rates etc. The churches make a shitload of money through this system, and because they can publicly claim that they run soandso many percent of welfare services they get to influence public policy and politics. people have lost their jobs for getting a divorce, remarrying, outing themselves as homosexuals etc. Here in Germany the Catholic and Protestant Churches run many hospitals, kindergartens and other welfare services which are funded not by the churches but entirely by the public, yet they impose rules on their employees based on their respective faith, ie. If we get a young Pope, he may come up with an appropriate compromise solution at the time, then by the time he dies or resigns, the policy is completely outside the change in our values. However over time and culture has changed further, the Don't Ask Don't Tell was considered to be anti-Gay and needed to be repealed. Where it prevent the military from trying to find gay people to kick out. This at the time was actually considered to be pro-Gay bill. However sometimes a popular idea at the time turns out to be be a bad idea.ДЇor example in the United States Bill Clinton Signed the Don't Ask Don't Tell Policy. In some ways is like having continual obsoleteness in your policy. Having an older pope who will last 5-15 years means every new pope will gradually put in new changes. By that point culture would have changes where that method would seem unheard of. However The way he addresses these issue will stay the same for the next 40-50 years. (Woman's Rights, Abortion, Gay Marriage, Contraceptives) Are fairly new (40 or so years old) A younger pope may address these issues. The big issues is that us Western Cultures have in terms of Sex Rights. Having older popes with a gradual changes could be more productive. However he will stay in power for so long, that his reforms will become old, and backwards. Now the younger pope may be more of a reformist. John Paul II was elected pope at and earlier age and some would say electing a younger pope, means having a pope for a long time.

Quaker 3 for mac os 10.4