The Gay Marriage Question

[BoneDog]

I might regret asking this , but what the flippin heck were they doing that would put you off cowboy films ?

Slight exaggeration from me, I've always liked a good cowboy film!

He probably means the film Broke back mountain perhaps he was adopted by Elton and David ?

I was an adult when that came out I'll have you know. One of the few modern cowboy films I've not seen.

Not nowadays they will probably be considered cool. Also can you imagine how stylish you would be. If brought up by two gay men, pulling women would be a doodle.

I can't think of anything worse! You'd look like a right tart.

Ah yes I hadn't thought of that .

All I could think of is that he must have walked in on his parents as they were re-enacting some sort of bucking bronco type rodeo show with daddy Empty shouting yeeeeee haaaaa !!!

Defo no walking in on them! Just the noises. Oh the noises.

To be honest it was the blaspheming that really upset me.

[sphericalfox]

Yes that's right ignore what a a great many people think , you just whinge whine and moan stamp your little feet accuse all and sundry of being bigots and racists and homophobes until you get your own way and move the fvck on. yep it's as simple as that.

which one are you? All? Or Sundry?

[Captain...]

Its definatelya possibility the child maybe bullied at school, but they might not, they might be bullied simply because they are adopted whether to a gay couple or not, they could be bullied simply because they come from a childrens home, its a difficult one no doubt,but to be so firmly against it simply for the reason they 'might be bullied' seems weak, especially given the alternative.

If adopted kids get bullied at school for being adopted, maybe we should ban adoptions altogether, or ginger hair, or people that reach puberty early, actually the most common bullying is for being a teachers pet/swot, we should probably execute any kids that show any sign of being slightly different just in case the are bullied.

[leicsmac]

Yes that's right ignore what a a great many people think , you just whinge whine and moan stamp your little feet accuse all and sundry of being bigots and racists and homophobes until you get your own way and move the fvck on. yep it's as simple as that.

Yep...because that's the way our democratic political system works. Personally I would have preferred a mass referendum on the matter (I would like this for all law changes, true democracy and I don't really trust politicians) but in the end the vote of our elected 'politicians' (once again I use that term loosely) will have to do.

The problem with democracy is that it can appear far too much like 'majority rule' or 'mob rule' at times, and it can often appear to ignore the views of a significant minority, but we haven't come up with a better system yet.

But honestly - I feel this issue is ridiculously trivial, hence my flippant post. Like I said - it's a semantic argument over the meaning and use of a word - I really don't get all the brouhaha either way, and I'm leaning in favour purely of the option that allows further free will (eg. gay people get the freedom to call their ceremonies marriage, and churches get the freedom to prohibit those ceremonies in their churches if they so choose).

[Guest MattP]

If adopted kids get bullied at school for being adopted, maybe we should ban adoptions altogether, or ginger hair, or people that reach puberty early, actually the most common bullying is for being a teachers pet/swot, we should probably execute any kids that show any sign of being slightly different just in case the are bullied.

Surely you are ignoring a pretty obvious point here?

How would kids know a child has been adopted when his 'mother and father' turn up for parents evening?, you should be able to keep that a secret surely if you want to.

Good luck keeping it that way when the poor thing turns up with Bruce and Jules to spend a few hours round the place.

[BoneDog]

Its definately a possibility the child maybe bullied at school, but they might not, they might be bullied simply because they are adopted whether to a gay couple or not, they could be bullied simply because they come from a childrens home, its a difficult one no doubt,but to be so firmly against it simply for the reason they 'might be bullied' seems weak, especially given the alternative.

I get what you're saying, but having two same sex parents is like putting a massive target sign on the child. I'd say 50% of a schools children are cultured enough not to bully other kids harshly, but many of the others can be brutal. Whichever kids get targeted by that kind are in for a rough ride.

[Monk]

Yes that's right ignore what a a great many people think , you just whinge whine and moan stamp your little feet accuse all and sundry of being bigots and racists and homophobes until you get your own way and move the fvck on. yep it's as simple as that.

But look - whinge and moan is all you've done in this thread. You haven't made a single convincing case that gay marriage shouldn't be legal, other than the fact that you don't think it's natural and you think its some kind of radical leftist agenda to make everyone think the same.

[BoneDog]

Bruce and Jules.

[21st Century Fox]

By the bullying logic, should children be placed in the care of say a disabled parent or a parent with dwarfism? Once they pitch up for parents evening the wheelchair and snow white jokes might start.

[Captain...]

Surely you are ignoring a pretty obvious point here?

How would kids know a child has been adopted when his 'mother and father' turn up for parents evening?, you should be able to keep that a secret surely if you want to.

Good luck keeping it that way when the poor thing turns up with Bruce and Jules to spend a few hours round the place.

No I'm just posting ridiculous nonsense, everyone else is, thought I'd join in.

[I am Rod Hull]

Its not going to last anyway...

2.5% of our nation were Muslim in 2002, in 2012 its up to 5% (check the censors records).

We will be an Islamist state in 50 years time and they dont like gayism

They`re all doomed

[21st Century Fox]

Its not going to last anyway...

2.5% of our nation were Muslim in 2002, in 2012 its up to 5% (check the censors records).

We will be an Islamist state in 50 years time and they dont like gayism

They`re all doomed

Coolings spidey sense just went off.

[flowwolf]

which one are you? All? Or Sundry?

I'm the one who is a confirmed Pancakeaphobe.

[Guest MattP]

Coolings spidey sense just went off.

He'll be singing always look the bright side of life when he sees that.

Actually not a bad point actually, might be a chance we'll be a majority Islamic society in 200 years time anyway so anything we do now for the gays will only be short term anyhow.

[leicsmac]

He'll be singing always look the bright side of life when he sees that.

Actually not a bad point actually, might be a chance we'll be a majority Islamic society in 200 years time anyway so anything we do now for the gays will only be short term anyhow.

More likely we'll have discovered other habitable planets and religion will have become still more marginalised. Either that or civilisation will have collapsed due to some event or through mankinds inherent stupidity. It's probably even money.

Next century is going to be a crucial one for civilisation on this planet, I reckon.

[flowwolf]

Yep...because that's the way our democratic political system works. Personally I would have preferred a mass referendum on the matter (I would like this for all law changes, true democracy and I don't really trust politicians) but in the end the vote of our elected 'politicians' (once again I use that term loosely) will have to do.

The problem with democracy is that it can appear far too much like 'majority rule' or 'mob rule' at times, and it can often appear to ignore the views of a significant minority, but we haven't come up with a better system yet.

But honestly - I feel this issue is ridiculously trivial, hence my flippant post. Like I said - it's a semantic argument over the meaning and use of a word - I really don't get all the brouhaha either way, and I'm leaning in favour purely of the option that allows further free will (eg. gay people get the freedom to call their ceremonies marriage, and churches get the freedom to prohibit those ceremonies in their churches if they so choose).

I think although it appears quite trivial on the surface people realise that it is yet another caving in to minority pressure groups and quite rightly seeing it as just one more step on the road to a society with ever decreasing morals.

This is not about equality at all it's about the noisy homosexual lobby trying to pass the big chip on their shoulders on to the rest of society, frankly I've had enough of their pathetic Narcism let them get married in a church then I can have a good laugh at the bloke in the brides dress.

[Guest MattP]

Far more likely we'll have discovered other habitable planets and religion will have become still more marginalised. Either that or civilisation will have collapsed due to some event or through mankinds inherent stupidity. It's probably even money.

Next century is going to be a crucial one for civilisation on this planet, I reckon.

Yeah I'd agree with that.

Let's all hope for religion becoming more marginalised. It's a tough one though, the growth of Islam over the last 200 years has been staggering and it's showing no signs of slowing up. The most fantical showed in Mali last week they have no problem destroying proven history in order to enforce their beliefs .

[flowwolf]

But look - whinge and moan is all you've done in this thread. You haven't made a single convincing case that gay marriage shouldn't be legal, other than the fact that you don't think it's natural and you think its some kind of radical leftist agenda to make everyone think the same.

I am really truely sorry you feel that way.

[Kitchandro]

I think although it appears quite trivial on the surface people realise that it is yet another caving in to minority pressure groups and quite rightly seeing it as just one more step on the road to a society with ever decreasing morals.

This is not about equality at all it's about the noisy homosexual lobby trying to pass the big chip on their shoulders on to the rest of society, frankly I've had enough of their pathetic Narcism let them get married in a church then I can have a good laugh at the bloke in the brides dress.

[leicsmac]

I think although it appears quite trivial on the surface people realise that it is yet another caving in to minority pressure groups and quite rightly seeing it as just one more step on the road to a society with ever decreasing morals.

This is not about equality at all it's about the noisy homosexual lobby trying to pass the big chip on their shoulders on to the rest of society, frankly I've had enough of their pathetic Narcism let them get married in a church then I can have a good laugh at the bloke in the brides dress.

I've always found the area of 'morality' to be very tenuous anyway. Everyone's view of what is morally right/wrong is different, and there is never a truly black and white issue (bar Peter Taylor being an incompetent manager).

I'm a fierce believer in free will, and as long as people act in a way that doesn't directly and quantitatively inconvenience the lives of others,they should be allowed to. Of course you have to have rules and laws for effective government and for when there is a direct and quantitative provable inconvenience.

Yeah I'd agree with that.

Let's all hope for religion becoming more marginalised. It's a tough one though, the growth of Islam over the last 200 years has been staggering and it's showing no signs of slowing up. The most fantical showed in Mali last week they have no problem destroying proven history in order to enforce their beliefs .

I think the general population growth has resulted in a rise of people who would deem themselves Islamic, rather than an increase as a proportion of general population. Either way, the majority of countries have either separated church and state, or are trying to do so. The few remaining theocracies are becoming more marginalised.

Of course, it's not really nation-states that are the threat any more - it's radical fundamentalist groups, but without the backing and legitimacy represented by a major state they will never get enough power to truly change the world in their favour.

[BoneDog]

More likely we'll have discovered other habitable planets and religion will have become still more marginalised. Either that or civilisation will have collapsed due to some event or through mankinds inherent stupidity. It's probably even money.

Next century is going to be a crucial one for civilisation on this planet, I reckon.

Not trying to start a side debate here, but do you think that we would ever be able to get to a distant habitable planet even if we did discover one? It would be nigh on impossible to even get a small crew any real distance away from earth, let alone successfully starting to populate a distant planet from what I can tell.

[leicsmac]

Not trying to start a side debate here, but do you think that we would ever be able to get to a distant habitable planet even if we did discover one? It would be nigh on impossible to even get a small crew any real distance away from earth, let alone successfully starting to populate a distant planet from what I can tell.

Not with current tech - to get to other systems we would really need to solve the problem of faster-than-light travel. There are several theoretical solutions to this, but all of them require far more energy or exotic matter than we have as present. However establishing a colony on the Moon or Mars of many thousands of individuals is reasonably possible within a good timeframe given money and political will.

If you want I could either bump the World of Tomorrow thread or start a new one if you want to discuss this further...

[BoneDog]

Talking of the 'homosexual lobby', I googled LGBT earlier and found that the 'B' stands for bisexual.

Why the heck should I give a toss about some bisexuals views? It's not even an important issue and should be a totally personal thing. Doesn't make any sense to me.

[Bettsj2]

Can we hear from some gay people on the subject?

They're too busy shoving their cocks up each others arses.

😳

[BoneDog]

Not with current tech - to get to other systems we would really need to solve the problem of faster-than-light travel. There are several theoretical solutions to this, but all of them require far more energy or exotic matter than we have as present. However establishing a colony on the Moon or Mars of many thousands of individuals is reasonably possible within a good timeframe given money and political will.

If you want I could either bump the World of Tomorrow thread or start a new one if you want to discuss this further...

I'll have a look at that thread, don't think I've read it properly.