Options

"will destroy the institution of marriage for future generations"

1262729313270

Comments

  • Options
    Stiffy78Stiffy78 Posts: 26,260
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Lizzy11268 wrote: »
    Ah but the majority of practicing christians do not spend their time trying to recruit others or trying to make them believe. They just believe themselves and a lot of good can come out of that. If that was all it was, then it would be all good wouldnt it?

    They would not harm anyone and through their beliefs may help others - I don't mind that at all. Even if I thought their actual belief system was nonsense.

    No harm, no foul.

    They don't exist in a vacuum. The organisations who count them among their numbers do spend their time not only trying to recruit others but also trying to influence laws that affect all of us. While such organisations exist religion can never be 'all good' imo. And if they didn't exist would 'religion' still mean the same thing anyway?
  • Options
    Mr.HumphriesMr.Humphries Posts: 1,043
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It seems gays want to destroy Christianity rather than have equality. Just my $0.02.
  • Options
    GlowbotGlowbot Posts: 14,847
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It seems gays want to destroy Christianity rather than have equality. Just my $0.02.

    No that would just be an added bonus.

    That's a joke. I am sure they will allow gay Christians. :p

    Makes you wonder how having equality will somehow cause Christianity to implode.
    Christians need to have a good long look at itself themselves if so. I don't believe it's the case for the most part.
  • Options
    Chester666666Chester666666 Posts: 9,020
    Forum Member
    It seems gays want to destroy Christianity rather than have equality. Just my $0.02.
    There are LBG christians
    Homophobia is what is opposed
    Do you think Christianity is purely homophobia?
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 7,807
    Forum Member
    It seems gays want to destroy Christianity rather than have equality. Just my $0.02.

    Once it's done, it will be marriage, not gay, not straight, just marriage.The gays won't be destroying anything.

    Christians are doing a bloody good job of destroying themselves over an issue that will have no bearing whatsoever on their marriages.
  • Options
    Mr.HumphriesMr.Humphries Posts: 1,043
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    tribade wrote: »
    Once it's done, it will be marriage, not gay, not straight, just marriage.The gays won't be destroying anything.

    Christians are doing a bloody good job of destroying themselves over an issue that will have no bearing whatsoever on their marriages.

    Perhaps they regard man-woman marriage as sacrosanct. I don't think than Christians are destroying themselves, there's two billion of them.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 26,853
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Perhaps they regard man-woman marriage as sacrosanct. I don't think than Christians are destroying themselves, there's two billion of them.

    Perhaps they do. Thats up to them. Unfortunately for them we live in a society that claims to be one of acceptance and equality. Therefore they will just have to put up with some things changing to reflect that. Tough titty basically.
  • Options
    Neda_TurkNeda_Turk Posts: 8,447
    Forum Member
    Perhaps they regard man-woman marriage as sacrosanct. I don't think than Christians are destroying themselves, there's two billion of them.

    Really what does it matter what they think? They don't own marriage and the proposal is for marriage OUTSIDE of any church.

    Nothing they think, say or do is any excuse to discriminate against people's equality.

    Shall I repeat THEY DON'T OWN MARRIAGE again just to get the point across?
  • Options
    Chester666666Chester666666 Posts: 9,020
    Forum Member
    Perhaps they regard man-woman marriage as sacrosanct. I don't think than Christians are destroying themselves, there's two billion of them.

    They seem to consider homophobia as sacrosanct,
  • Options
    Chester666666Chester666666 Posts: 9,020
    Forum Member
    Neda_Turk wrote: »
    Really what does it matter what they think? They don't own marriage and the proposal is for marriage OUTSIDE of any church.

    Nothing they think, say or do is any excuse to discriminate against people's equality.

    Shall I repeat THEY DON'T OWN MARRIAGE again just to get the point across?

    May as well
    It seems like the bigots think they own marriage and ignore facts and reality
  • Options
    1Mickey1Mickey Posts: 10,427
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    It seems gays want to destroy Christianity rather than have equality. Just my $0.02.

    I wouldn't worry too much if i was you.Christianity's doing just fine.
  • Options
    Mr.HumphriesMr.Humphries Posts: 1,043
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Lizzy11268 wrote: »
    Perhaps they do. Thats up to them. Unfortunately for them we live in a society that claims to be one of acceptance and equality. Therefore they will just have to put up with some things changing to reflect that. Tough titty basically.

    They will put up a fight. Are you tough enough? I don't know what Christians will do if challenged. What about Jews, Muslims and Buddhists? Will equality campaigners go after them?
  • Options
    GlowbotGlowbot Posts: 14,847
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    1Mickey wrote: »
    I wouldn't worry too much if i was you. Christianity's doing just fine.

    Exactly. They do a lot worse things than campaign against gay marriage and come out smelling of roses.
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 26,853
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    They will put up a fight. Are you tough enough? I don't know what Christians will do if challenged. What about Jews, Muslims and Buddhists? Will equality campaigners go after them?

    None of them are currently shouting nonsense - no church is going to have to perform same sex marriages anyway so its sod all to do with them. Butt out of secular business. Pee off. Go away. Take a hike. Long walk of short pier....etc etc.

    Now I MIGHT have some sympathy for them if the law was going to try and force them to perform the marriage ceremony for gay couples against their will. Maybe. Just a tad mind.
  • Options
    1Mickey1Mickey Posts: 10,427
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Glowbot wrote: »
    Exactly. They do a lot worse things than campaign against gay marriage and come out smelling of roses.

    I don't know if smelling like roses is mandatory(infact i prefer not to) but i'm always up for good old campaign.:D Especially with it being progenitors day in just over an hour :rolleyes:
  • Options
    jackthomjackthom Posts: 6,644
    Forum Member
    kimindex wrote: »
    I'd love to hear what they'd say if challenged. Was the Bishop of Leicester challenged on it?

    Yes, not all views, beliefs or attitudes should be automatically respected. It depends on the view, belief or attitude

    Yes Ben Summerskill did call him on it a number of times but IMO the Today presenter was too keen to move the discussion on. I wish it could had been Paxman.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9727000/9727607.stm

    ETA: Sorry alaninmcr, I missed your earlier post.
  • Options
    jsmith99jsmith99 Posts: 20,382
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    You cannot claim I have a closed mind and believe that, the naysayers have no rational, logical or fair reasons to deny equality, there's only baseless ignorance, lies and stupidity. Then they clim there's God on their side yet God is also on side of the religious that support equalityAll that and neither term that I supposedly always use

    I agree entirely with the BIB, though I maybe wouldn't express it in quite those terms.
    @jsmith99 - Also - terms like bigot and homophobe get used for a reason, check the damned dictionary

    I know what the dictionary says; what I'd like to know is your definition, which you've never revealed despite requests from myself and others.
    There are LBG christians
    Homophobia is what is opposed
    Do you think Christianity is purely homophobia?

    See what I mean?
  • Options
    kimindexkimindex Posts: 68,260
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    jackthom wrote: »
    Yes Ben Summerskill did call him on it a number of times but IMO the Today presenter was too keen to move the discussion on. I wish it could had been Paxman.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9727000/9727607.stm

    ETA: Sorry alaninmcr, I missed your earlier post.
    Thanks!
    Yes, some of the presenters are too deferential (or seem to be).
  • Options
    SULLASULLA Posts: 149,789
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭✭
    Lizzy11268 wrote: »
    Ah but the majority of practicing christians do not spend their time trying to recruit others
    Perhaps they should:)
    or trying to make them believe.
    However, I do have a problem with the concept of trying to make someone believe. But there's nothing wrong with a bit of gentle evangelism:)
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 7,103
    Forum Member
    It "could force the church to split from the state"? Well good! I thought it was like that already!

    If a marriage carries legal weight it shouldn't be controlled by a religious institution. If religions want to set rules about which marriages they approve/host, then that's cool though.
  • Options
    Chester666666Chester666666 Posts: 9,020
    Forum Member
    jsmith99 wrote: »


    I know what the dictionary says; what I'd like to know is your definition, which you've never revealed despite requests from myself and others.


    Because why reveal what you already know?
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 26,853
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    SULLA wrote: »
    Perhaps they should:)
    However, I do have a problem with the concept of trying to make someone believe. But there's nothing wrong with a bit of gentle evangelism:)

    I have people come to the door being "gentle evangalists" :D

    To be fair to me I always accept their leaflets, thank them politely, then put the leaflet into the recycling bin.

    Except on one occasion - when the leaflet was filled with threats of hellfire. On that occasion I set it alight then gave it back to them. ;)
    Because why reveal what you already know?

    Not exactly revealing then is it? :D
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 1,796
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Affairs destroy the institution of marriage. Regardless of sex.
  • Options
    peonpeon Posts: 1,671
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Lizzy11268 wrote: »
    Except on one occasion - when the leaflet was filled with threats of hellfire. On that occasion I set it alight then gave it back to them. ;)

    course you did
  • Options
    KarlSomethingKarlSomething Posts: 3,529
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    peon wrote: »
    how long is a piece of string? everybody will take something different from it.

    I was hoping someone would say it's about seeking out the truth or something to that affect. If you're not interested in knowledge, then I suppose you can go nuts with it, do whatever you like.

    Personally I'm not out to abolish religion, but I am going to challenge it as long as it makes claims about reality and desires to affect the progress of society.
    peon wrote: »
    religious belief of some description will exist for as long as the mystery of what happens to us after death remains unanswered in my opinion. something that isn't likely to be answered anytime soon.

    What about the mystery of what happens to us before birth? Or before conception?
Sign In or Register to comment.