U K Parliament Backs Gay Marriage Bill

thaicbr · February 13, 2013

Why do you all keep clouding the one resounding issue of 2 consenting, loving adults being allowed to be joined in legal union?
There is only one issue here.

Were we discussing heterosexual marriage, none of the other 'issues' these opponents of freedom keep throwing into the mix would crop up...

" issue of 2 consenting, loving adults being allowed to be joined in legal union?"

Homosexuals in the UK have had that since 2004. It's called civil partnership. It is the civil vehicle for homosexuals to be joined in legal union.

HeavyDrinker · February 13, 2013

But it's not marriage....

All they are asking for is an equal footing and I say let them have it.

Potosi · February 13, 2013

Marriage is a HUMAN institution. Not a heterosexual institution. Homosexuals are humans. A surprising number of them MARRY the opposite sex! All belong in the human FAMILY. Some of these humans happen to have children. Some of them happen to be gay. More common with lesbians. A lesbian with children meets a lesbian to love and live with. It is much better for the children if these lesbians can MARRY and have fully legally bound (and equal) parents with her neighbors. The weird thing is the anti-gay marriage are actually the REAL anti-family people.

A few sweeping statements there, chap, some of them off topic. Your first sentence is an opinion presented as fact.

Like a little boy who cries 'I want to use the ladies bathroom! Bathroom is a Human right! I am as human as the ladies! No gender separation! It's sexist!

There is not much precedent for gay marriage. I looked up that it existed in ancient China, but the religious ceremony was reserved for weddings of men and women only. Emperor Nero married a couple of men. He had a repution as a nutcase. A later emperor also married a male. However, Roman law recognized only the bond between a man and a woman as marriage, so those two emperors were above the law.

Group marriage, polygamy has been around forever, though. Do we legalize this one as well? It's a human right.

phuketjock · February 13, 2013

That's just your view. Other's have differing views. Civil partnership is a legal partnership.

Yes it is. But denying homosexuals from the same thing as heterosexuals is discriminatory. I doubt you would like to be stuck in a small minority class of people that was deemed not quite proper enough to be allowed to use the same vehicle as the majority. To insist on the status quo, SEPARATE things, is also to be pro-discrimination.

What utter rubbish gays and lesbians are deviants by definition and choosing such a path they exclude themselves from

normal human activities, one of which happens to be marriage, and there are many more which are not allowed to be

mentioned on this thread.

de·vi·ant

/ˈdiviənt/ Show Spelled [dee-vee-uhnt] Show IPA

adjective

1.

deviating or departing from the norm; characterized by deviation: deviant social behavior.

noun

2.

a person or thing that deviates or departs markedly from the accepted norm.

Origin:

1350–1400; Middle English < Late Latin dēviant- (stem of dēviāns, present participle of dēviāre to

thaicbr · February 13, 2013

But it's not marriage....
All they are asking for is an equal footing and I say let them have it.

And then?

The continued response from the gay activist's here is absolute equal footing so that would include children. Church weddings etc.

Jingthing · February 13, 2013

Now the underlying and very ugly bigotry of much of the anti-gay forces emerges here yet again. Predictable, but sad.

thaicbr · February 13, 2013

Now the underlying and very ugly bigotry of much of the anti-gay forces emerges here yet again. Predictable, but sad.

Where? What's ugly? Maybe reference a quote?

phuketjock · February 13, 2013

Now the underlying and very ugly bigotry of much of the anti-gay forces emerges here yet again. Predictable, but sad.

Translation " the truth will out " and we don't like it so it has to be bigotry or homophobia or anything but the truth.

Chicog · February 13, 2013

referenced from the wiki. http://en.wikipedia....ncial_situation

"Although an established church, the Church of England does not receive any direct government support. Donations comprise its largest source of income, and it also relies heavily on the income from its various historic endowments. As of 2005, the Church of England had estimated total outgoings of around £900 million.^[47]

The Church of England manages an investment portfolio which is worth more than £8 billion.^[48]^"

also note 26 out of over 700 Lords...

Unfortunately that's rubbish. On 17th May the government agreed to add 30 million to the 12 million the government gives the church each year to subsidise their building maintenance.

And that does not include other tax breaks etc. which the Church can deceitfully mask as not being "direct government support".

I suspect Wikipedia is edited by the CofE. We'll see if it is based on how long they leave the edit I added yesterday to contradict that very lie.

So the question still begs: Why does a religion have any say in a political decision such as the gay marriage bill? They simply do not deserve it and should have no say whatsoever.

Edited February 13, 2013 by Chicog

Chicog · February 13, 2013

It seems the French don't have any problem with it (apart from the minority of religious groups that cling precariously to their antiquated works of fiction):

France's lower house of parliament has approved a bill to legalise gay marriage and allow same-sex couples to adopt children.
President François Hollande's Socialists pushed the measure through the national assembly, carrying a vote by 329 to 229.

The assembly has been debating the bill and voting on individual articles in recent weeks. The bill now goes to the senate, which is also controlled by the Socialists and their allies.

Polls show most French support legalising gay marriage, though that backing softens when children come into play. There have been demonstrations in recent weeks by opponents of the bill.

chiang mai · February 13, 2013

Now the underlying and very ugly bigotry of much of the anti-gay forces emerges here yet again. Predictable, but sad.

We want something but we can't have it so it must be, "the underlying snd very ugly bigotry .....etc", pure unwarranted drama that weakens the effectivness of other arguments.

thaicbr · February 13, 2013

referenced from the wiki. http://en.wikipedia....ncial_situation

"Although an established church, the Church of England does not receive any direct government support. Donations comprise its largest source of income, and it also relies heavily on the income from its various historic endowments. As of 2005, the Church of England had estimated total outgoings of around 900 million.^[47]

The Church of England manages an investment portfolio which is worth more than 8 billion.^[48]^"

also note 26 out of over 700 Lords...

Unfortunately that's rubbish. On 17th May the government agreed to add 30 million to the 12 million the government gives the church each year to subsidise their building maintenance.

And that does not include other tax breaks etc. which the Church can deceitfully mask as not being "direct government support".

I suspect Wikipedia is edited by the CofE. We'll see if it is based on how long they leave the edit I added yesterday to contradict that very lie.

So the question still begs: Why does a religion have any say in a political decision such as the gay marriage bill? They simply do not deserve it and should have no say whatsoever.

Oh my goodness another that cannot read!

All large organizations can get tax breaks. The Church own and have cared for many national heritage buildings over the years and now they get a grant. Would you like to see these wonderful buildings falling in to disrepair. I would not as they are part of the heritage of England and in fact many are tourist attractions in their own right. Sad that your hate of the C of E blinds you to this.

Edited February 13, 2013 by thaicbr

Chicog · February 13, 2013

What utter rubbish gays and lesbians are deviants by definition and choosing such a path they exclude themselves from
normal human activities

Can you actually hear yourself?

FritsSikkink · February 13, 2013

Personally, I believe that if it is forced on the populace it will harm both society and the institution of marriage in the long run, but once instituted widely, it will be too late.

If it is forced on the populance????

Nobody is forced to marry a gay person. It will only hurt homophobic people.

SteeleJoe · February 13, 2013

Nobody is forced to marry a gay person.

Don't be so naive! (The obvious long term goal of the gays is exactly that - we will all be forced to marry a gay person.)

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

thaicbr · February 13, 2013

Nobody is forced to marry a gay person.

Don't be so naive! (The obvious long term goal of the gays is exactly that - we will all be forced to marry a gay person.)

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

There REALLY needs to be a sarcasm Smiley....... I think!!!!!!

FritsSikkink · February 13, 2013

Now the underlying and very ugly bigotry of much of the anti-gay forces emerges here yet again. Predictable, but sad.

Where? What's ugly? Maybe reference a quote?

What about post # 424:

What utter rubbish gays and lesbians are deviants by definition and choosing such a path they exclude themselves from

normal human activities, one of which happens to be marriage, and there are many more which are not allowed to be

mentioned on this thread.

SteeleJoe · February 13, 2013

Nobody is forced to marry a gay person.

Don't be so naive! (The obvious long term goal of the gays is exactly that - we will all be forced to marry a gay person.)

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

There REALLY needs to be a sarcasm Smiley....... I think!!!!!!

Just in case: No, I don't believe that is anyone's goal and no, I don't think anyone on this thread believes that either.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

thaicbr · February 13, 2013

Now the underlying and very ugly bigotry of much of the anti-gay forces emerges here yet again. Predictable, but sad.

Where? What's ugly? Maybe reference a quote?

What about post # 424:

What utter rubbish gays and lesbians are deviants by definition and choosing such a path they exclude themselves from

normal human activities, one of which happens to be marriage, and there are many more which are not allowed to be

mentioned on this thread.

It is a definition. I personally do not hold with it. But some do. And it fits the definition as stated.

phuketjock · February 13, 2013

Now the underlying and very ugly bigotry of much of the anti-gay forces emerges here yet again. Predictable, but sad.

Where? What's ugly? Maybe reference a quote?

What about post # 424:

What utter rubbish gays and lesbians are deviants by definition and choosing such a path they exclude themselves from

normal human activities, one of which happens to be marriage, and there are many more which are not allowed to be

mentioned on this thread.

OK I give in for gay activists it probably is the " ugly truth " , nevertheless it is still the truth whether they like it or not,

or, of course, there is an alternative, the rest of the world are deviants and gays and lesbians are the norm in society.

I am sure that makes sense if you are from the planet gay.

Jingthing · February 13, 2013

Calling gay people deviants is verbal gay bashing. As far as the "choosing" to be gay or not question, perhaps that is relevant to legalizing gay marriage because it is even more unfair to discriminate against people who haven't chosen what they are. Science is showing more and more that actually is mostly the case with sexual orientation, not a choice. However, we're still in the early days of scientific understanding of human sexuality. Personally I didn't "choose" anything. Just one day realized same sex did it for me and opposite sex didn't. Hardly any kind of choice. But in my view, it doesn't really matter whether its a choice or not.

BTW, for people who insist it is a "choice" what do you propose? Perhaps all gay people should marry your sisters and make both ourselves and your sisters miserable. Wouldn't that be grand?

Redheads are a minority. Do you call them deviants (or worse, to their face)?

Left handed people are a minority. Do you call them deviants (or worse, to their face)?

If you want to describe how gay people are a minority without being overtly offensive, simply say SEXUAL MINORITY.

The gist of these loaded and unpleasant "deviant" type arguments against gay legal equality is garden variety homophobia. Clear as day. Old as the hills.

Edited February 13, 2013 by Jingthing

Goldieinkathu · February 13, 2013

I am in a civil partnership and am sick and tired of people asking "what's that?"

I look forward to being able to change our status and when i say to people "i'm married" they'll get it.

I did not choose to be gay, it's been a long and hard struggle. Reading some of the comments on this forum makes me want to cry.

Some of your words are so shallow, no thought to real peoples lives. Are you not able to put yourselves in others shoes?

What possible difference would it make to any of you if my partner and i are married or not?

As for you Phuketjock, for someone who has a hard time with "skin tax" i doubt you'd have made it past the age of 7 had you been born gay!

Please all of you - try to be kind.

Chicog · February 13, 2013

All large organizations can get tax breaks. The Church own and have cared for many national heritage buildings over the years and now they get a grant. Would you like to see these wonderful buildings falling in to disrepair. I would not as they are part of the heritage of England and in fact many are tourist attractions in their own right. Sad that your hate of the C of E blinds you to this.

I think you're missing the point. They receive 42 million of year of taxpayers money to maintain buildings that generate them hundreds of millions of pounds of revenue.

They attempt to hide that fact with lies like this:

the Church of England does not receive any direct government support

That's why you can't trust Wikipedia.

My objection is that a minority group has 26 unelected seats in the legislature, and this is a prime example of them foisting their archaic agenda onto others.

Edited February 13, 2013 by Chicog

Jingthing · February 13, 2013

Actually there is massive scientific evidence that sexual orientation is NOT a choice. It is true the full story and complexity about how it is not a choice, at least for most people, is yet to be told. You could say that about any field of scientific inquiry though.

Again, I can see some relevance to the gay marriage debate because enemies of gay equality use the choice argument to justify their depressing cause of continued DISCRIMINATION.

Edited February 13, 2013 by Jingthing

thaicbr · February 13, 2013

All large organizations can get tax breaks. The Church own and have cared for many national heritage buildings over the years and now they get a grant. Would you like to see these wonderful buildings falling in to disrepair. I would not as they are part of the heritage of England and in fact many are tourist attractions in their own right. Sad that your hate of the C of E blinds you to this.

I think you're missing the point. They receive 42 million of year of taxpayers money to maintain buildings that generate them hundreds of millions of pounds of revenue.

They attempt to hide that fact with lies like this:

the Church of England does not receive any direct government support

That's why you can't trust Wikipedia.

My objection is that a minority group has 26 unelected seats in the legislature, and this is a prime example of them foisting their archaic agenda onto others.

Nope. Not missing the point. C of E is now a minority...

Just admit your anti church and be finished with it... also what about the other 700 or so unelected people in the Lords... all of which have NEVER been elected.. but I actually agree that the ex bishops should not be there for the exact same reason Endure stated ... a fair time ago.

Edited February 13, 2013 by thaicbr

phuketjock · February 13, 2013

I am in a civil partnership and am sick and tired of people asking "what's that?"

I look forward to being able to change our status and when i say to people "i'm married" they'll get it.

I did not choose to be gay, it's been a long and hard struggle. Reading some of the comments on this forum makes me want to cry.

Some of your words are so shallow, no thought to real peoples lives. Are you not able to put yourselves in others shoes?

What possible difference would it make to any of you if my partner and i are married or not?

As for you Phuketjock, for someone who has a hard time with "skin tax" i doubt you'd have made it past the age of 7 had you been born gay!

Please all of you - try to be kind.

I acknowledge your cry for sympathy and I have a " hard time " with anything that I think is wrong and/or unfair, and that happens to

include gay marriage and double pricing. I don't let it rule my life though and I have yet to come to tears over it.There are many more

but that's not the point. As I have already stated I do not believe anyone is born gay, thats probably why I made it past the age of 7.

If you are determined to behave different from other people why does it bother or surprise you when you are treated differently by

people??

thaicbr · February 13, 2013

I am in a civil partnership and am sick and tired of people asking "what's that?"
I look forward to being able to change our status and when i say to people "i'm married" they'll get it.

I did not choose to be gay, it's been a long and hard struggle. Reading some of the comments on this forum makes me want to cry.

Some of your words are so shallow, no thought to real peoples lives. Are you not able to put yourselves in others shoes?

What possible difference would it make to any of you if my partner and i are married or not?

As for you Phuketjock, for someone who has a hard time with "skin tax" i doubt you'd have made it past the age of 7 had you been born gay!

Please all of you - try to be kind.

I would have thought it's very simple explaining civil partnership " it's a word for gay civil marriage"

Jingthing · February 13, 2013

If the House of Lords blocks this bill, then it's just a matter of the people of the UK waiting for more older people to die. Like in the US the younger people are pro equal civil rights in larger majorities, and the older people have more retro attitudes of closed mindedness and intolerance, examples of which we can see on this thread. So full equality in the UK soon, or not so soon, but it is coming for sure.

Goldieinkathu · February 13, 2013

I am in a civil partnership and am sick and tired of people asking "what's that?"

I look forward to being able to change our status and when i say to people "i'm married" they'll get it.

I did not choose to be gay, it's been a long and hard struggle. Reading some of the comments on this forum makes me want to cry.

Some of your words are so shallow, no thought to real peoples lives. Are you not able to put yourselves in others shoes?

What possible difference would it make to any of you if my partner and i are married or not?

As for you Phuketjock, for someone who has a hard time with "skin tax" i doubt you'd have made it past the age of 7 had you been born gay!

Please all of you - try to be kind.

I acknowledge your cry for sympathy and I have a " hard time " with anything that I think is wrong and/or unfair, and that happens to

include gay marriage and double pricing. I don't let it rule my life though and I have yet to come to tears over it.There are many more

but that's not the point. As I have already stated I do not believe anyone is born gay, thats probably why I made it past the age of 7.

If you are determined to behave different from other people why does it bother or surprise you when you are treated differently by

people??

I'm not asking for sympathy thanks.

Can you tell me why you think anyone would choose to be gay?

Goldieinkathu · February 13, 2013

I am in a civil partnership and am sick and tired of people asking "what's that?"
I look forward to being able to change our status and when i say to people "i'm married" they'll get it.

I did not choose to be gay, it's been a long and hard struggle. Reading some of the comments on this forum makes me want to cry.

Some of your words are so shallow, no thought to real peoples lives. Are you not able to put yourselves in others shoes?

What possible difference would it make to any of you if my partner and i are married or not?

As for you Phuketjock, for someone who has a hard time with "skin tax" i doubt you'd have made it past the age of 7 had you been born gay!

Please all of you - try to be kind.

I would have thought it's very simple explaining civil partnership " it's a word for gay civil marriage"

Should i have to explain to every person who is not English speaking or aware of UK laws? When i say "we're married they immediately understand.

Sign In

U K Parliament Backs Gay Marriage Bill

Recommended Posts

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in

Recently Browsing 0 members

Announcements

Topics

Latest posts...

Popular in The Pub

ASEANNOW

MORE INFO

POPULAR AREAS

CONTACT US