Civil partnerships are NOT marriage and you know it, you just want to keep the status quo and uphold second class status for same sex relationships to keep them inferior that`s all this is about really.
Why should religious rights go above anyone elses rights?
Especially in all the 1000s if not 100,000s of years that different religions have been going not one has backed up their religion with fact or evidence to support what they say. They shouldn't even be listened to until they do.
Remember the ones who worshipped the sun and thought it was a God? Opps! Turned out not to actually be a God but a big burning orb about 93,000,000 miles away.
No point asking him now. He's decided I'm the worst person on Earth and gone off in a huff.
I think it was pointless asking him the bleeding obvious anyway, but I thought I'd raise the point.
Years ago when they changed the age of consent for gays to the same as heterosexuals, I remember a conservative MP saying "Do we want grown men buggering our schoolchildren?" - Seems that they think it's OK if it's older man on schoolgirl.
It's a ridiculous non-argument and just scaremongering.
One day you will be old, assuming your not now and there will be new things you can't accept. People that grew up in a different era with different social constraints and values have a right to stick to what they know.
Know? A very misleading word to use as if something is a fact then OK but when it is just something they think then they know nothing.
Of course they still have every right to be terminally ignorant, but not to be listened to and have a say in what others do.
Do lesbians want this or is it mainly a gay man thing, to get actually married ?
Yes of course, gay women (many of us prefer that description by the way) not only want to get married but some of us have spent a lot of time and effort campaigning for it.
UKIP make sense.Civil partnerships is marriage in all respects just with a different name and can save all this conflict, so why not stick with them. Look at the turmoil in the Conservative Party over this issue.
Well first of all the name is very important which is why so many people are up in arms about the thought of gay people being able to use it.
Why not stick with civil partnerships? Because gay people like me want to get married and no one has explained why I shouldn't be able to. UKIP's scaremongering isn't all that impressive given that the Netherlands have had equal marriage for 11 years and precisely no one has yet tried to sue any church to force them to do anything. Farage is simply attempting to use the issue to whip up anti-European sentiment whilst at the same time knowing full well that the ECtHR is about as likely to force the Catholic Church into carrying out a gay wedding as Farage is to marry Cameron. UKIP should also stop pretending to be libertarian given that they have an incredibly unlibertarian approach on this issue.
I can't say I'm all that bothered about turmoil in the Conservative Party but do you think that if civil partnerships were actually the answer then we'd be in this situation at all?
Because marriage is a religious ceremony and most religions believe that homosexuality is wrong.
Seems simple to me.
Well you're wrong about marriage being religious because the majority of marriages in this country have nothing to do with religion whatsoever. In fact every marriage in this country is a civil affair, you can dress it up with as much religion as you like but you're not married until you sign the civil register.
And the fact that some religions see homosexuality as wrong still doesn't explain why I shouldn't be allowed to get married. Please explain the relevance of what a religious view of homosexuality has to do with me being able to marry.
You can write anything down, it doesn't make it anything more than an opinion written down.
It is their opinion if they chose to hold it.
Koan I'm sure it's been explained to you that marriage isn't only religious before, why do I feel we have been here before.
Yes you can write anything down. But unless a couple of 1000 years later a group of people have believed it was the work of God and get together, then it isn't a religious belief any more than the works of Shakespeare would be now.
As far as I know Marriage is a religious affair, Civil partnerships are not. I'm not talking about in terms of rights and tax, but in terms of beliefs.
Yes you can write anything down. But unless a couple of 1000 years later a group of people have believed it was the work of God and get together, then it isn't a religious belief any more than the works of Shakespeare would be now.
As far as I know Marriage is a religious affair, Civil partnerships are not. I'm not talking about in terms of rights and tax, but in terms of beliefs.
Civil partnerships are just for gay people. Straight people have civil Marriages.
A religion has nothing to do with age either, you get new religions all the time.
Once again, the vast majority of 16 year olds who have sex are having sex with people close to their own age.
Do you have issues with reading comprehension?
Instead of insulting people (a common theme in this thread), perhaps you should consider something; that a majority is only that; not ALL. It's perfectly legal for a much older person to have sex with a sixteen-year-old adolescent.
I for one, certainly don't find that remotely acceptable. There are many predatory and manipulative people who keep their activities within the law and I don't want people of such a young age to have to deal with them.
but is equally as capable of consenting to sex with a 50 year old willingly.
Yes, but should a 50 year old be seeking a 16 year old as a sexual partner? Why would they do this? Why would they want someone so immature? Would that 16 year old's parents consider this to be a reasonable situation or would they be more likely to wonder why some aged creep is targeting their teenager?
Comments
Especially in all the 1000s if not 100,000s of years that different religions have been going not one has backed up their religion with fact or evidence to support what they say. They shouldn't even be listened to until they do.
Remember the ones who worshipped the sun and thought it was a God? Opps! Turned out not to actually be a God but a big burning orb about 93,000,000 miles away.
I think it was pointless asking him the bleeding obvious anyway, but I thought I'd raise the point.
Years ago when they changed the age of consent for gays to the same as heterosexuals, I remember a conservative MP saying "Do we want grown men buggering our schoolchildren?" - Seems that they think it's OK if it's older man on schoolgirl.
It's a ridiculous non-argument and just scaremongering.
Know? A very misleading word to use as if something is a fact then OK but when it is just something they think then they know nothing.
Of course they still have every right to be terminally ignorant, but not to be listened to and have a say in what others do.
Yes of course, gay women (many of us prefer that description by the way) not only want to get married but some of us have spent a lot of time and effort campaigning for it.
Yes lesbians want equality as well. And there are some on DS to speak for themselves.
Well, as many men as women currently get married so probably not
The wedding isn't for the man though, no guy dreams of his 'big day' does he. It's to pacify the woman.
My partner and I can't wait for our wedding day. We've picked out our suits already!
Yeah I'm not judging that.
Well first of all the name is very important which is why so many people are up in arms about the thought of gay people being able to use it.
Why not stick with civil partnerships? Because gay people like me want to get married and no one has explained why I shouldn't be able to. UKIP's scaremongering isn't all that impressive given that the Netherlands have had equal marriage for 11 years and precisely no one has yet tried to sue any church to force them to do anything. Farage is simply attempting to use the issue to whip up anti-European sentiment whilst at the same time knowing full well that the ECtHR is about as likely to force the Catholic Church into carrying out a gay wedding as Farage is to marry Cameron. UKIP should also stop pretending to be libertarian given that they have an incredibly unlibertarian approach on this issue.
I can't say I'm all that bothered about turmoil in the Conservative Party but do you think that if civil partnerships were actually the answer then we'd be in this situation at all?
We want it regardless of if we personally don't want to get married.
That is what this is about; equality regardless of personal wants.
It has been clearly explained why gay people shouldn't get married, in the eyes of the religious (not me that is).
According to some religions marriage is between a man and a woman, and being gay is wrong.
Surely you have heard that before?
I'm not saying they are right, but that is what they believe.
How does that explain why he can't get married though?
That only really explains what some persons opinion is.
That you don't like interracial marriage isn't an actual reason that it should be illegal. It's a reason people should ignore you.
That doesn't explain why I shouldn't be able to get married. All that does is tell me that some religions don't like gay people.
It isn't their opinion though.
It is based on the rules of their religion which are based on the writings of their religion.
Because marriage is a religious ceremony and most religions believe that homosexuality is wrong.
Seems simple to me.
Well you're wrong about marriage being religious because the majority of marriages in this country have nothing to do with religion whatsoever. In fact every marriage in this country is a civil affair, you can dress it up with as much religion as you like but you're not married until you sign the civil register.
And the fact that some religions see homosexuality as wrong still doesn't explain why I shouldn't be allowed to get married. Please explain the relevance of what a religious view of homosexuality has to do with me being able to marry.
You can write anything down, it doesn't make it anything more than an opinion written down.
It is their opinion if they chose to hold it.
Koan I'm sure it's been explained to you that marriage isn't only religious before, why do I feel we have been here before.
Yes you can write anything down. But unless a couple of 1000 years later a group of people have believed it was the work of God and get together, then it isn't a religious belief any more than the works of Shakespeare would be now.
As far as I know Marriage is a religious affair, Civil partnerships are not. I'm not talking about in terms of rights and tax, but in terms of beliefs.
Civil partnerships are just for gay people. Straight people have civil Marriages.
A religion has nothing to do with age either, you get new religions all the time.
Instead of insulting people (a common theme in this thread), perhaps you should consider something; that a majority is only that; not ALL. It's perfectly legal for a much older person to have sex with a sixteen-year-old adolescent.
I for one, certainly don't find that remotely acceptable. There are many predatory and manipulative people who keep their activities within the law and I don't want people of such a young age to have to deal with them.
Absolutely.
Yes, but should a 50 year old be seeking a 16 year old as a sexual partner? Why would they do this? Why would they want someone so immature? Would that 16 year old's parents consider this to be a reasonable situation or would they be more likely to wonder why some aged creep is targeting their teenager?