marriage

Johnny Vodka said:
That's fair enough. I've not read up on exactly what's what. I do think gay people should have precisely the same legal rights with regards to marriage as heterosexual people, but I don't think a religion should have to add their 'blessing' to that if it's against their 'rules'. (At the same time, I wouldn't state fund anything to do with religion.)

I always assumed The Bible forbids homosexuality (or at least certain sexual acts), but what do I know? ;) It's all one big fairy story as far as I'm concerned anyway.
Click to expand...

The bible says lots of things. Most are ignored for common sense reasons. The passage you're referring to is no more explicit than those condoning genocide.

...

As for people of the cloth being given the right to choose - fu(k that. There is no compromise to be drawn.

As long as people have the right to hierarchical discrimination, people will exercise their right to be lairy about it. 'Acceptable discrimination' is not acceptable. Not ever. No. Not even then.
 
If you don't believe in God, you accept religions are just a set of (silly) rules.

Yeah, sure we STOP religious people from doing certain things (and if I had my way, we'd stop them doing more: circumcision, halal meat, etc), but to give a religious blessing is essentially a positive action. If something is literally against a person's religion, then why should they be forced to bless that? So gay people can get married and have the same legal rights as a male/female partnership, just not with the 'blessing' of the church... what's the problem? Maybe church members should be allowed a vote on whether gay marriage can be blessed... Had a look on Wikipedia and there does seem to be various interpretations of what The Bible says.
 
Johnny Vodka said:
If you don't believe in God, you accept religions are just a set of (silly) rules.

Yeah, sure we STOP religious people from doing certain things (and if I had my way, we'd stop them doing more: circumcision, halal meat, etc), but to give a religious blessing is essentially a positive action. If something is literally against a person's religion, then why should they be forced to bless that? So gay people can get married and have the same legal rights as a male/female partnership, just not with the 'blessing' of the church... what's the problem? Maybe church members should be allowed a vote on whether gay marriage can be blessed... Had a look on Wikipedia and there does seem to be various interpretations of what The Bible says.
Click to expand...

Because selective blessing is discrimination. Brain washing cult or otherwise.

Let's stop blessing black people while we're at it shall we? Shouldn't make them after all.
 
Robder said:
Because selective blessing is discrimination. Brain washing cult or otherwise.

Let's stop blessing black people while we're at it shall we? Shouldn't make them after all.
Click to expand...

I'm really not sure why it bothers you. I don't like religious rules, so I'm not going to join a religion. I wouldn't go into a mosque and assert my right to drink a can of beer. Bad analogy, I know, but... You can still get married, but you can't force someone who thinks, according to their silly book of rules, that it's wrong to marry you. In some ways, forcing liberal thinking on religious people is as bad as religious nutters forcing their rules on liberal people. It sounds about right now, a decent compromise. I think gay people will easily be able to find someone to marry them, but they can't force someone to act against their conscience. And that's all I have to say on the matter. A good evening to you, Robder. :)
 
Johnny Vodka said:
I'm really not sure why it bothers you. I don't like religious rules, so I'm not going to join a religion. I wouldn't go into a mosque and assert my right to drink a can of beer. Bad analogy, I know, but... You can still get married, but you can't force someone who thinks, according to their silly book of rules, that it's wrong to marry you. In some ways, forcing liberal thinking on religious people is as bad as religious nutters forcing their rules on liberal people. It sounds about right now, a decent compromise. I think gay people will easily be able to find someone to marry them, but they can't force someone to act against their conscience. And that's all I have to say on the matter. A good evening to you, Robder. :)
Click to expand...

It bothers me because it's homophobia. This is not ok in any way, shape, or form.

This has nothing to do with the fact that I'm supposedly 'gay' (or so the definition tells me I am) - it's a bigger issue and one that may or may not resonate with you too.

If the same paradigm was presented to black/disabled/Scottish people, I would fight tooth and nail for the same cause.

I'm not forcing liberal thinking on anyone. This is not 'liberal' thinking. It's 'my' thinking and if you want to label that liberal or gay or whatever, that's your projection.

There is no compromise. Discrimination is discrimination, regardless of whether it affects me or not.
 
Im sick and tired of the whole "gay" reaction to revert to the default option of the "homophobia" clause when a credible argument is put to you. I agree that when any two people are in love, you have a right to marry, no matter what sex you are. The problem I have, is that when some start the stereotypical, diva, gay attitude that everybody is against you and discriminating, just because you are "gay" is now getting a bit tired. Everybody is entitled to their opinion, so respect it, dont start denouncing it with the easy option of the "homophobic" clause....just recognise that not everybody thinks or feels the same way as you do. Do whatever you feel is right.....dont ask or seek permission to rubber stamp it.
 
Bez said:
Im sick and tired of the whole "gay" reaction to revert to the default option of the "homophobia" clause when a credible argument is put to you. I agree that when any two people are in love, you have a right to marry, no matter what sex you are. The problem I have, is that when some start the stereotypical, diva, gay attitude that everybody is against you and discriminating, just because you are "gay" is now getting a bit tired. Everybody is entitled to their opinion, so respect it, dont start denouncing it with the easy option of the "homophobic" clause....just recognise that not everybody thinks or feels the same way as you do. Do whatever you feel is right.....dont ask or seek permission to rubber stamp it.
Click to expand...

It's not a credible argument though.

Replace the word gay with black and the whole thing would seem different. Should we allow black people to get married in churches? And if a black person was to speak out against this would you say, "I'm sick and tired of you blacks having these opinions, go and hang out in places where you are accepted."

Also - well done for playing the 'stereotypical diva' trump. :rolleyes: "I'm sick and tired of the gays when they..." STFU.

Homophobia is rife and casual attitudes like yours do nothing for the cause.

Giving large organisations like the church the right to discriminate filters through into every aspect of our culture in really insidious ways. I went to a church of England school - I never had a choice about this brainwashing.

Try putting a bunch of five year olds in a line up and telling one of them that they can't get married because the bible says it's wrong to love someone of the same sex. You run the risk of screwing that child up for life.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I got married in 1994. It had nothing to do with religion.

I will be glad when gay people can marry, as it will stop the over use of the word "partner"
 
Black, white, Muslim, Jew, Irish, there has always been discrimination and there always will be. Ok my attitude my be casual on this, because it does not affect me personally. All I know and what I can relate to is my experience with same sex partners. They just go about their business as normal people they dont get hung up on the whole homophobia issue. What im trying to communicate is that discrimination against the gay community is not the same as what the African or Jewish people suffered in their time. Im all for freedom of expression and what people do in private is their own business but dont offend others who may have differing viewpoints. I agree Religion and education should not mix. Like the american model education should be given in a non secular environment. The Bible is an outdated piece of propaganda. I educate my 5year old that its wrong in places and much of it is a fairy story and not real. My experience with education and teaching of doctrine is that in todays society, its not as bad as you paint it out to be, many of the teachers are balanced in the way they teach. Of course if you send a child to a secular school you are going to get a particular style of doctrine administered. I dont see homophobia rife in society. As a discriminatory label, its well down the pecking order.
 
Bez said:
Black, white, Muslim, Jew, Irish, there has always been discrimination and there always will be. Ok my attitude my be casual on this, because it does not affect me personally. All I know and what I can relate to is my experience with same sex partners. They just go about their business as normal people they dont get hung up on the whole homophobia issue. What im trying to communicate is that discrimination against the gay community is not the same as what the African or Jewish people suffered in their time. Im all for freedom of expression and what people do in private is their own business but dont offend others who may have differing viewpoints. I agree Religion and education should not mix. Like the american model education should be given in a non secular environment. The Bible is an outdated piece of propaganda. I educate my 5year old that its wrong in places and much of it is a fairy story and not real. My experience with education and teaching of doctrine is that in todays society, its not as bad as you paint it out to be, many of the teachers are balanced in the way they teach. Of course if you send a child to a secular school you are going to get a particular style of doctrine administered. I dont see homophobia rife in society. As a discriminatory label, its well down the pecking order.
Click to expand...

I really think your point is redundant.

You say homophobia isn't an issue any more because it doesn't affect you and is "low down the pecking order." <--- who are you to decide what's important when you have no experience or understanding of the issue other than anecdotal sound bytes from this abstract group of people you keep referring to as "they"?

I don't spend my days thinking about homophobia. Nor do I even identify as gay...but I do have a close friend who was beaten to a pulp and hospitalised for walking down Old Street holding hands with another man.

What may be 'incidental' and 'low priority' for you is a genuine issue for some - regardless of who they like to fu(k.
 
Robder said:
What may be 'incidental' and 'low priority' for you is a genuine issue for some - regardless of who they like to fu(k.
Click to expand...

Thats my point.

Plus I never said Homophobia was not an "issue" of course it is. In my local society I do not know one person that is outwardly homophobic. Take Ibiza for example.

I know people beaten to a pulp just because they wore the wrong coloured football jersey. You are always going to get morons looking for violence any excuse will do, its not exclusive to the gay community.
 
I think civil rights be that along racial, ethic, religious, sexual orientation, sex or anything other human factors. The whole concept of civil rights means that they are rights and should not have to be voted on; or have laws that prohibit the civil rights. If you have moral objections to something don't do it. The moral codes of states has changed over time to give rights to more members of a society as it should be.
 
Bez said:
Thats my point.

Plus I never said Homophobia was not an "issue" of course it is. In my local society I do not know one person that is outwardly homophobic. Take Ibiza for example.

I know people beaten to a pulp just because they wore the wrong coloured football jersey. You are always going to get morons looking for violence any excuse will do, its not exclusive to the gay community.
Click to expand...

I really have no clue what you're trying to say.

And these generalist comments are pretty feckin' offensive:

Im sick and tired of the whole "gay" reaction to revert to the default option of the "homophobia" clause when a credible argument is put to you.
Click to expand...

The problem I have, is that when some start the stereotypical, diva, gay attitude that everybody is against you and discriminating, just because you are "gay" is now getting a bit tired.
Click to expand...

Everybody is entitled to their opinion, so respect it, dont start denouncing it with the easy option of the "homophobic" clause
Click to expand...
 
What gets on my tits is the reaction of the church, is like they believe they "own" marriage , to me its a load of bollocks. Homophobia is rife, a chap at work has gay twin daughters, he hardly ever mentions them but his 3rd daughter that has produced him a grandson he chats about all the time, its like he is ashamed. He has come to terms with having lesbian daughters because in his eyes it would be worse to have gay sons because he is a man, I dont get his logic but because of his views when I talk about my other half I replace the name of Iain to Cat (sister in law) because I know that I would be seen as filthy and my position untenable

Oh, and if if marriage was an option for same sex couples, I would not do it anyway, its too normal, but would be nice for those who want to conform if they want to
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sorry world we live in when a bloke gets beat up for holding hands with another man! Not sure they would of beat two women up if they were doing the same thing.
Religion is all a load of bollocks anyway :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top