The Doctor Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 You begin your tirade with abuse and then expect me to take anything you said there after seriously. If as you said churches can opt out of marrying homosexuals what is the point of passing a law in the first place ? No government has the right to challenge peoples thoughts on faith or how they feel about homosexuality that is not what they are in power for that is up to peoples personal consience and not a matter of law. Err, because church marriage isn't the only type of marriage? And because some churches support gay marriage?
indierich06 Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 You consider two people of the same sex having children 'normal', do you? What definition of normal are you using? It certainly isn't common, and neither is it even biologically possible. It is not normal and has never been normal. You're being typically left wing in that you think you're striving towards some higher goal than the rest of us when in fact you're missing the simple point that the child is the priority. All this fanciful crap about how we should all be tolerant is wonderful, really generates that warm fuzzy feeling, but the fact is that some people are not, and therefore the child will be placed at a disadvantage. Obviously it's biologically impossible for two people of the same sex to have children, but I don't consider homosexuality to be abnormal in any way shape or form, it's been going on as long as there have been men and women. Thankfully, we now live in a society where racism, homophobia and most other kinds of prejudice are not accepted and it's the mouthy minority which seem to be the only people who have a problem with that. So why would a child be placed at a disadvantage by being part of a family who can provide him or her with care, shelter and a happy childhood just because they are the same sex? Children up for adoption are there because they have been abandoned by their parents, their parents were not fit to look after them or their parents died. I think as long as any couple passes the stringent tests required to adopt a child, then there is no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to adopt children because being part of a happy home - even if it is with parents of the same sex - is far better for a child than being in an abusive environment, or being bounced around the care system for years. I'm not saying all gay people should be allowed to adopt children, just as all straight people shouldn't be allowed to adopt children either - there are certain couples who will not be suitable for whatever reason, but as long as ANY couple meets the criteria, I see no reason at all why gay couples shouldn't be allowed to adopt children. Being gay is socially acceptable. Over the next few years, gay marriage will become socially acceptable and hopefully in the future, people won't bat an eyelid at families with gay parents. I certainly don't at the minute, and I'm sure a lot of other people don't either. The child IS the priority and placing them with a family who will love them, care for the them and treat them like one of their own is the priority. If a couple meets this criteria, then their gender or sexual preferences are absolutely irrelevent.
flowwolf Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 Err, because church marriage isn't the only type of marriage? And because some churches support gay marriage? Civil partnerships have exactly the same legal rights as a church marriage so why the need to marry in a church ? Do they expect the public to say ah doesn't he look loverly in a wedding dress ! To get married in a church there has to be a religious service and as the vast majority of religions reject homosexualty what can of religious service do you invisage ? As I said civil partnership service is a marriage without the religious content why can't they be happy with that instead of trying to bully their way into a religious order that does not want them in the first place and indeed says they are evil.
indierich06 Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 But this is not about wether you can get married in one building and not another. This is about peoples faith and their right to practice their beliefs without the law interfering in those beliefs. As it stands at the moment the belief of most religions is that homosexuality is wrong and against gods will. Now I don't subscribe to that view but I do believe those people have the absolute right to define the rules for that particular faith. If this law is passed can you imagine two gay Muslim people being allowed to marry in a Mosque ? or a synagogue allowing gay jews to marry ? You know that is not going to happen and why should it just because a government has decreed that it is now the law and we don't give a damn about what your religion preaches you WILL allow marrages in your churches. And like others have said, some churches will perform gay marriages and some won't - no-one's forcing them to. All the law is doing is saying 'yes; it's legal for gay people to marry and yes; it's legal for them to marry in a church' - they're not saying churches HAVE to perform gay weddings, just that it would be legal to do so. There are certainly some forward thinking Christian churches and clergymen who would support gay marriage and there are certainly a lot of gay religious folks. Like you say, I'm not sure why they would want to be religious when their own religious teachings forbid what they're doing... you'd have to ask them I suppose.
flowwolf Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 Obviously it's biologically impossible for two people of the same sex to have children, but I don't consider homosexuality to be abnormal in any way shape or form, it's been going on as long as there have been men and women. Thankfully, we now live in a society where racism, homophobia and most other kinds of prejudice are not accepted and it's the mouthy minority which seem to be the only people who have a problem with that. So why would a child be placed at a disadvantage by being part of a family who can provide him or her with care, shelter and a happy childhood just because they are the same sex? Children up for adoption are there because they have been abandoned by their parents, their parents were not fit to look after them or their parents died. I think as long as any couple passes the stringent tests required to adopt a child, then there is no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to adopt children because being part of a happy home - even if it is with parents of the same sex - is far better for a child than being in an abusive environment, or being bounced around the care system for years. I'm not saying all gay people should be allowed to adopt children, just as all straight people shouldn't be allowed to adopt children either - there are certain couples who will not be suitable for whatever reason, but as long as ANY couple meets the criteria, I see no reason at all why gay couples shouldn't be allowed to adopt children. Being gay is socially acceptable. Over the next few years, gay marriage will become socially acceptable and hopefully in the future, people rwon't bat an eyelid at families with gay parents. I certainly don't at the minute, and I'm sure a lot of other people don't either. The child IS the priority and placing them with a family who will love them, care for the them and treat them like one of their own is the priority. If a couple meets this criteria, then their gender or sexual preferences are absolutely irrelevent. Is that the same priority that will not allow white couples to adopt Black children . In your cosy little unreal world maybe but it's not reality and the adoption services know that.
The Year Of The Fox Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 I don't like watching close-ups of any people snogging, I think it's gross. It pisses me off no end when couples sit around in public sticking their tongues down eachothers throats, regardless of what gender they are. There's a time and a place. Having said that, I have no problem with gay people whatsoever, they should have the exact same rights as any other couple. If they want to get married, that's their business - and good luck to them. What goes on between two consenting adults is no-one's business apart from theirs and they certainly shouldn't have their human rights denied to them on some the basis of archaic notion on what is 'normal' and 'abnormal'. About thirty or forty years ago we'd have been having the same debate about mixed race marriages, now no-one would bat an eyelid. Hopefully in about twenty or thirty years we'll be able to say the same about gay marriage. I agree. As i say I've no problem with gays, more to do with how being gay is launched upon us by tv programs etc. It does seem unnatural to me. Any bloke who isn't gay yet doesn't think that shoving his nob up a blokes arse, or putting his chops around another blokes nob is unnatural is fooling himself
flowwolf Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 I agree. As i say I've no problem with gays, more to do with how being gay is launched upon us by tv programs etc. It does seem unnatural to me. Any bloke who isn't gay yet doesn't think that shoving his nob up a blokes arse, or putting his chops around another blokes nob is unnatural is fooling himself Or gay themselves ?
indierich06 Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 Is that the same priority that will not allow white couples to adopt Black children . In your cosy little unreal world maybe but it's not reality and the adoption services know that. Well, not currently, but not for much longer hopefully; although I do think the government needs to do more to attract more adopters from different ethnic groups. But in the mean time, placing children in happy families is much better for them than leaving them in the system for years to wait for a family of the same ethnicity to adopt them. http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/mar/09/adoption-made-fairer-faster-cameron
The Year Of The Fox Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 As for adoption, its far more natural to allow mixed raced couples to adopt but that isn't allowed
The Doctor Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 Civil partnerships have exactly the same legal rights as a church marriage so why the need to marry in a church ? Do they expect the public to say ah doesn't he look loverly in a wedding dress ! To get married in a church there has to be a religious service and as the vast majority of religions reject homosexualty what can of religious service do you invisage ? As I said civil partnership service is a marriage without the religious content why can't they be happy with that instead of trying to bully their way into a religious order that does not want them in the first place and indeed says they are evil. There's not the need to marry in a church, there's just the need to acknowledge their partnership as marriage, as with every other couple. Marriage can be non-religious you jebend, civil registry office marriages are non-religious. So, separate but equal? Sounds familiar... People shouldn't be happy with being separated because of some aspect and denied access to certain things, given something similar instead - that's an affront to true equality.
indierich06 Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 I agree. As i say I've no problem with gays, more to do with how being gay is launched upon us by tv programs etc. It does seem unnatural to me. Any bloke who isn't gay yet doesn't think that shoving his nob up a blokes arse, or putting his chops around another blokes nob is unnatural is fooling himself I must have missed the programmes with the close ups of gay people getting off with eachother, shoving their nobs up eachothers arses and noshing eachother off. Are you sure you weren't watching a naughty channel? I don't think it's particularly unnatural for a bloke who likes blokes arses to want to stick his nob in one, and I don't think it's particularly unnatural for a bloke who likes blokes nobs to want to stick one in his mouth. It's not for me, but if they like it, let them get on with it. I'm sure a gay bloke probably wouldn't want to see you snogging your missus, I'm sure he probably thinks its weird that you want to stick your nob up her fanny, but the difference is he isn't preaching on a message board, telling you that it's sickening and wrong.
breadandcheese Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 Ha ha Sarah Teather. She's always come across as a sanctimonious idiot when being interviewed or questioned. http://www.telegraph...-in-policy.html
21st Century Fox Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 Gays have got away with it for far too long . They should get married and fookin suffer like the rest of us . That reminds me of this... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MBteT3Jq3OY The surfboard!
Zingari Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 Anyone hear their parents making sweet love when they were a kid? I flipping did, and it's an awkward experience I can tell you. Put me off cowboy films for years. I can't imagine the horror if it was Trevor and Mike I'd had to listen to. Soundproofing could be the solution, I'm not sure. I might regret asking this , but what the flippin heck were they doing that would put you off cowboy films ?
The Year Of The Fox Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 But thats exactly what men and women were created for! Have you not watched any soaps with the camerman zooming right in on the kiss! Dunno why im arguing, as i say im not bothered, it doesn't affect me, but i find it laughable that straight blokes are supposed to think it as normal. I guess thats just the pc world we're supposed to live in
21st Century Fox Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 But thats exactly what men and women were created for! Have you not watched any soaps with the camerman zooming right in on the kiss! Dunno why im arguing, as i say im not bothered, it doesn't affect me, but i find it laughable that straight blokes are supposed to think it as normal. I guess thats just the pc world we're supposed to live in I assume you retch a little whenever you see a plane fly overhead... IT'S UNNATURAL!! WE WEREN'T SUPPOSED TO FLY!!!
flowwolf Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 There's not the need to marry in a church, there's just the need to acknowledge their partnership as marriage, as with every other couple. Marriage can be non-religious you jebend, civil registry office marriages are non-religious. So, separate but equal? Sounds familiar... People shouldn't be happy with being separated because of some aspect and denied access to certain things, given something similar instead - that's an affront to true equality. Oh christ almighty I wondered just how long it would be before the race card was produced. :rolleyes: shame on you I had you down for more intelligence than that.
flowwolf Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 I must have missed the programmes with the close ups of gay people getting off with eachother, shoving their nobs up eachothers arses and noshing eachother off. Are you sure you weren't watching a naughty channel? I don't think it's particularly unnatural for a bloke who likes blokes arses to want to stick his nob in one, and I don't think it's particularly unnatural for a bloke who likes blokes nobs to want to stick one in his mouth. It's not for me, but if they like it, let them get on with it. I'm sure a gay bloke probably wouldn't want to see you snogging your missus, I'm sure he probably thinks its weird that you want to stick your nob up her fanny, but the difference is he isn't preaching on a message board, telling you that it's sickening and wrong. If a homosexual thinks it's weird for a man to want to stick his knob up a womans fanny he should go and ask his parents how he was made it's simply biology for humans to have the urge to recreate . They are the weird ones not the hetrosexuals.
flowwolf Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 I assume you retch a little whenever you see a plane fly overhead... IT'S UNNATURAL!! WE WEREN'T SUPPOSED TO FLY!!! Ah yes the sight of two planes having natural sex in the sky , such a beautiful thing to behold. Great analogy :rolleyes:
flowwolf Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 I might regret asking this , but what the flippin heck were they doing that would put you off cowboy films ? He probably means the film Broke back mountain perhaps he was adopted by Elton and David ?
21st Century Fox Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 Ah yes the sight of two planes having natural sex in the sky , such a beautiful thing to behold. Great analogy :rolleyes: When are you watching two men engaging in sex?
indierich06 Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 If a homosexual thinks it's weird for a man to want to stick his knob up a womans fanny he should go and ask his parents how he was made it's simply biology for humans to have the urge to recreate . They are the weird ones not the hetrosexuals. Why is it weird? People of the same gender have been having sex for thousands of years. Sure, they do it for fun - but I'd say 99% of sex between heterosexuals is for pleasure rather than procreation.
Webbo Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 Those dirty greek bastards.... I'm pretty sure that's a boy he's banging.
21st Century Fox Posted 6 February 2013 Posted 6 February 2013 I'm pretty sure that's a boy he's banging. It is, it's the Warren Cup. I was hoping for a reaction from a canis lupus like individual.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.