U K Parliament Backs Gay Marriage Bill

[endure]

Possibly so but I've not seen any. Once again I have no really feelings on this, my concerns are Camerons priorities, it's almost as though he's Billy no mates and is trying to win some from somewhere, tell you what Dave, fix the economy, that'll do the trick.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/dec/26/voters-back-gay-marriage-poll

I don't understand the 'priorities' argument. Is a government not capable of doing more than one thing at once?

[phuketjock]

Why shouldn't homosexuals be allowed to bring up children?

The reason is quite clear to me.

Children should be brought up in as normal an environment as possible so that they grow up to be well balanced individuals. A childhood spent watching homosexuals show affection to each other is not normal and is likely to encourage the child to also live an abnormal adulthood.

I'm homosexual and I was bought up by a heterosexual couple. I spent my childhood watching them displaying affection to each other. Please explain why I'm not heterosexual?

I note your remark about lesbians which demonstrates just how little you've actually thought about all this. Lesbians , by definition, aren't attracted to men. It's not that they haven't yet met the man of their dreams (even though that man might be you). They just aren't interested. The fact that you are interested in them is your problem not theirs.

I sort of admire your persistence in debating with bigots, dear Endure. Personally, I normally refrain from arguing with people who are full of hatred and discrimination because it is mainly useless and I just get a headache..

Well done to the UK Parliament.

And, once again, shame on Russia and those Middle Eastern and African countries which have anti-gay laws.

Well there's yet another open mind then, I am right and anyone who disagrees is a bigot and not worth the time of day

Brilliant arguement for gay marriage!! well done

[endure]

The title of the thread is "U K Parliament Backs Gay Marriage Bill" - not the mechanics of sexual intercourse.

[chiang mai]

Possibly so but I've not seen any. Once again I have no really feelings on this, my concerns are Camerons priorities, it's almost as though he's Billy no mates and is trying to win some from somewhere, tell you what Dave, fix the economy, that'll do the trick.

http://www.guardian....y-marriage-poll

I don't understand the 'priorities' argument. Is a government not capable of doing more than one thing at once?

An ICM survey of 1,000 people is not exactly the acid test of UK public opinion, but let;s not debate this, I've explained what I thought to be the popular opinion and I really don't care whether it's right or wrong or what it really is.

As for the second part of your question:, no is the short answer, the longer answer is all about effort and priorities, this is a politically motivated agenda to win votes and in that context it's a distraction from the truly more important and burning issues of the day.

[endure]

Possibly so but I've not seen any. Once again I have no really feelings on this, my concerns are Camerons priorities, it's almost as though he's Billy no mates and is trying to win some from somewhere, tell you what Dave, fix the economy, that'll do the trick.

http://www.guardian....y-marriage-poll

I don't understand the 'priorities' argument. Is a government not capable of doing more than one thing at once?

An ICM survey of 1,000 people is not exactly the acid test of UK public opinion, but let;s not debate this, I've explained what I thought to be the popular opinion and I really don't care whether it's right or wrong or what it really is.

An ICM survey is rather more credible that reader's comments on an online newspaper site.

[chiang mai]

Possibly so but I've not seen any. Once again I have no really feelings on this, my concerns are Camerons priorities, it's almost as though he's Billy no mates and is trying to win some from somewhere, tell you what Dave, fix the economy, that'll do the trick.

http://www.guardian....y-marriage-poll

I don't understand the 'priorities' argument. Is a government not capable of doing more than one thing at once?

An ICM survey of 1,000 people is not exactly the acid test of UK public opinion, but let;s not debate this, I've explained what I thought to be the popular opinion and I really don't care whether it's right or wrong or what it really is.

An ICM survey is rather more credible that reader's comments on an online newspaper site.

[phuketjock]

Sorry all I am finished here, It is quite apparent that anyone who has a view contrary to

gay marraige will not be allowed to express their opinion without censure on this thread

Bye all!!!

[Krataiboy]

Why shouldn't homosexuals be allowed to bring up children?

The reason is quite clear to me.

Children should be brought up in as normal an environment as possible so that they grow up to be well balanced individuals. A childhood spent watching homosexuals show affection to each other is not normal and is likely to encourage the child to also live an abnormal adulthood.

I'm all for letting homosexuals do what they want to each other so long as they keep it away from me (lesbians being a possible exception!) but, in front of children, their relationship would amount to abuse.

Your bigotry you presumably cannot help, but you can do something about your ignorance in relation to whether or not children raised by same sex couples grow up as "normal" as the children of men and women partners.

Ever heard of Google? Or are you afraid that a few salient facts - they are out there - might force you to consider your preconceptions?

And have you any idea of how self-demeaning is your silly remark about lesbians "doing what they want" in front of you?

Time to drop the stone club, Jock - and with it your Neanderthal prejudice.

[Jingthing]

An American humorous take on the British gay marriage debate.

The topic starts at 8:20.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/full-episodes/wed-february-6-2013-ed-whitacre

In the video a Tory MP who is in opposition to marriage equality references the fact that the POLLS show a clear majority support for it. So I think that point is settled.

[chiang mai]

An American humorous take on the British gay marriage debate.

The topic starts at 8:20.

http://www.thedailys...013-ed-whitacre

In the video a Tory MP who is in opposition to marriage equality references the fact that the POLLS show a clear majority support for it. So I think that point is settled.

If people will insist on pushing this aspect: the matter will be settled, if and when there is a referendum on the issue which frankly I believe there ought to have been, until that non-existent time, the true and accurate desire of the population will remain unproven and the subject of conjecture. But hey, spilt milk mand water under bridges and all that.

Edited February 7, 2013 by chiang mai

[transam]

Why shouldn't homosexuals be allowed to bring up children?

The reason is quite clear to me.

Children should be brought up in as normal an environment as possible so that they grow up to be well balanced individuals. A childhood spent watching homosexuals show affection to each other is not normal and is likely to encourage the child to also live an abnormal adulthood.

I'm all for letting homosexuals do what they want to each other so long as they keep it away from me (lesbians being a possible exception!) but, in front of children, their relationship would amount to abuse.

Your bigotry you presumably cannot help, but you can do something about your ignorance in relation to whether or not children raised by same sex couples grow up as "normal" as the children of men and women partners.

Ever heard of Google? Or are you afraid that a few salient facts - they are out there - might force you to consider your preconceptions?

And have you any idea of how self-demeaning is your silly remark about lesbians "doing what they want" in front of you?

Time to drop the stone club, Jock - and with it your Neanderthal prejudice.

Well l think your wrong. YOU want what YOU think is OK when YOU have no idea the affects on a kid in the long term. I read about sex criminals doing stuff and the Barrister brings up the fact that the accused had a non normal childhood. Understand.

[Jingthing]

An American humorous take on the British gay marriage debate.

The topic starts at 8:20.

http://www.thedailys...013-ed-whitacre

In the video a Tory MP who is in opposition to marriage equality references the fact that the POLLS show a clear majority support for it. So I think that point is settled.

If people will insist on pushing this aspect: the matter will be settled, if and when there is a referendum on the issue which frankly I believe there ought to have been. But hey, spilt milk mand water under bridges and all that.

I am not sure what you mean. In any case, my opinion is that civil rights for unpopular minorities are not always best decided by majority public opinion anyway. In the U.S. when states were forced to legalize interracial marriages, that was very unpopular in those especially racist states, but it was still the RIGHT thing to do under the law.

[Jingthing]

Why shouldn't homosexuals be allowed to bring up children?

The reason is quite clear to me.

Children should be brought up in as normal an environment as possible so that they grow up to be well balanced individuals. A childhood spent watching homosexuals show affection to each other is not normal and is likely to encourage the child to also live an abnormal adulthood.

I'm all for letting homosexuals do what they want to each other so long as they keep it away from me (lesbians being a possible exception!) but, in front of children, their relationship would amount to abuse.

Your bigotry you presumably cannot help, but you can do something about your ignorance in relation to whether or not children raised by same sex couples grow up as "normal" as the children of men and women partners.

Ever heard of Google? Or are you afraid that a few salient facts - they are out there - might force you to consider your preconceptions?

And have you any idea of how self-demeaning is your silly remark about lesbians "doing what they want" in front of you?

Time to drop the stone club, Jock - and with it your Neanderthal prejudice.

Well l think your wrong. YOU want what YOU think is OK when YOU have no idea the affects on a kid in the long term. I read about sex criminals doing stuff and the Barrister brings up the fact that the accused had a non normal childhood. Understand.

I don't know what you mean. Why don't you spell it out? I hope you aren't suggesting there is a higher rate of abuse of children in gay parented families, because that is not the case.

[transam]

Wrong suggestion.

Don't care what you folk get up too but l care about kids developing into normal adults WITHOUT wondering <deleted> is dad and dad doing. Plain and simple. Straight couples who can't have kids have to jump many hurdles to adopt a babe, now folk are saying two guys can. Sheeeesh. BUT, l am sorry if l sound off, BUT, any country in the world puts the kids first, nothing else, ooooop's perhaps until now.

[Jingthing]

Wrong suggestion.

Don't care what you folk get up too but l care about kids developing into normal adults WITHOUT wondering <deleted> is dad and dad doing. Plain and simple. Straight couples who can't have kids have to jump many hurdles to adopt a babe, now folk are saying two guys can. Sheeeesh. BUT, l am sorry if l sound off, BUT, any country in the world puts the kids first, nothing else, ooooop's perhaps until now.

Sounds like you're scare mongering now. In countries that do allow gay couple adoptions, the couples are screened at least as well as straight couples, and also as mentioned already, gay parents often get to choose only the kids nobody else wants! So this is a good thing, these adoptions. As far as natural births, it is very common for lesbians to bear their own children through various methods, and don't forget gay people who have children from previous relationships. It is more common than you think.

In western countries anyway, it is very obvious that not so far in the future, the people of today who were arguing against gay marriage equality will be seen in the same harsh way that most everyone sees the people who argued against legalizing interracial marriage. So I suggest, do yourselves a favor and go with fairness and legal equality sooner than later.

Edited February 7, 2013 by Jingthing

[endure]

Wrong suggestion.

Don't care what you folk get up too but l care about kids developing into normal adults WITHOUT wondering <deleted> is dad and dad doing. Plain and simple. Straight couples who can't have kids have to jump many hurdles to adopt a babe, now folk are saying two guys can.

Bit late for that. It's been legal for same sex couples in the UK to adopt kids since 2002 so it really has no relevance to the gay marriage debate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Same-sex_adoption_in_the_United_Kingdom

[transam]

Wrong suggestion.

Don't care what you folk get up too but l care about kids developing into normal adults WITHOUT wondering <deleted> is dad and dad doing. Plain and simple. Straight couples who can't have kids have to jump many hurdles to adopt a babe, now folk are saying two guys can. Sheeeesh. BUT, l am sorry if l sound off, BUT, any country in the world puts the kids first, nothing else, ooooop's perhaps until now.

Sounds like you're scare mongering now. In countries that do allow gay couple adoptions, the couples are screened at least as well as straight couples, and also as mentioned already, gay parents often get to choose only the kids nobody else wants! So this is a good thing, these adoptions. As far as natural births, it is very common for lesbians to bear their own children through various methods, and don't forget gay people who have children from previous relationships. It is more common than you think.

In western countries anyway, it is very obvious that not so far in the future, the people of today who were arguing against gay marriage equality will be seen in the same harsh way that most everyone sees the people who argued against legalizing interracial marriage. So I suggest, do yourselves a favor and go with fairness and legal equality sooner than later.

Sorry, l understand what you are saying but the kids won't.

[Jingthing]

Wrong suggestion.

Don't care what you folk get up too but l care about kids developing into normal adults WITHOUT wondering <deleted> is dad and dad doing. Plain and simple. Straight couples who can't have kids have to jump many hurdles to adopt a babe, now folk are saying two guys can. Sheeeesh. BUT, l am sorry if l sound off, BUT, any country in the world puts the kids first, nothing else, ooooop's perhaps until now.

Sounds like you're scare mongering now. In countries that do allow gay couple adoptions, the couples are screened at least as well as straight couples, and also as mentioned already, gay parents often get to choose only the kids nobody else wants! So this is a good thing, these adoptions. As far as natural births, it is very common for lesbians to bear their own children through various methods, and don't forget gay people who have children from previous relationships. It is more common than you think.

In western countries anyway, it is very obvious that not so far in the future, the people of today who were arguing against gay marriage equality will be seen in the same harsh way that most everyone sees the people who argued against legalizing interracial marriage. So I suggest, do yourselves a favor and go with fairness and legal equality sooner than later.

Sorry, l understand what you are saying but the kids won't.

Things are changing with the kids. Your views are from a previous era.

[Morden]

Why shouldn't homosexuals be allowed to bring up children?

The reason is quite clear to me.

Children should be brought up in as normal an environment as possible so that they grow up to be well balanced individuals. A childhood spent watching homosexuals show affection to each other is not normal and is likely to encourage the child to also live an abnormal adulthood.

I'm all for letting homosexuals do what they want to each other so long as they keep it away from me (lesbians being a possible exception!) but, in front of children, their relationship would amount to abuse.

Your bigotry you presumably cannot help, but you can do something about your ignorance in relation to whether or not children raised by same sex couples grow up as "normal" as the children of men and women partners.

Ever heard of Google? Or are you afraid that a few salient facts - they are out there - might force you to consider your preconceptions?

And have you any idea of how self-demeaning is your silly remark about lesbians "doing what they want" in front of you?

Time to drop the stone club, Jock - and with it your Neanderthal prejudice.

Yes, I have heard of Google.

You are calling me a bigot from you own perspective and because I don't agree with homosexuals caring for children. My opinion is worth as much as yours. The more that you and a few others attack people with different views the more you show that you are on the defensive and discredit your own cause.

[Jingthing]

The OP actually is about UK marriage legalization in general (a step beyond already legal same sex civil unions), not gay parenting. In any case if you don't agree with gays being parents, don't be a gay parent. Aside from that, what gives the majority the right to deny basic civil rights to their fellow citizens who happen to be a less popular small minority? I can understand not wanting to be thought of as a bigot. But if I was to say I don't think races should mix in marriage, really, how would you describe me?

Edited February 7, 2013 by Jingthing

[Morden]

The OP actually is about UK marriage legalization in general (a step beyond already legal same sex civil unions), not gay parenting. In any case if you don't agree with gays being parents, don't be a gay parent. Aside from that, what gives the majority the right to deny basic civil rights to their fellow citizens who happen to be a less popular small minority?

Homosexuals caring for children follows from the legalisation of full marriages for those people.

I will never be a gay parent!

My concern is for the children exposed to homosexuality. It's plain wrong. I don't care what they do with each other.

You accept, then, that the majority have one or another objection to the new law. Thanks for that admission. I'm sure that you are all for majorities when it suits you.

[Steely Dan]

The OP actually is about UK marriage legalization in general (a step beyond already legal same sex civil unions), not gay parenting. In any case if you don't agree with gays being parents, don't be a gay parent. Aside from that, what gives people the right to deny basic civil rights to their fellow citizens?

And of course at parents evening or sports day the child of a gay couple would not be able to conceal their domestic set-up, which may cause them some awkwardness, but societal 'norms' can and do change so I have faith that children in such situations would not be unduly traumatized, any more than I was for being the sole representative of my religion in a school of 2000 pupils.

But any potential discomfort a child might feel is no reason to deny parents of the same gender the right to be parents, or to be legally recognized as married for that matter. I feel very strongly that the character and values of parents are far more important than whether one, both or neither of them have a 'Y' chromosome.

[Jingthing]

The OP actually is about UK marriage legalization in general (a step beyond already legal same sex civil unions), not gay parenting. In any case if you don't agree with gays being parents, don't be a gay parent. Aside from that, what gives the majority the right to deny basic civil rights to their fellow citizens who happen to be a less popular small minority?

Homosexuals caring for children follows from the legalisation of full marriages for those people.

I will never be a gay parent!

My concern is for the children exposed to homosexuality. It's plain wrong. I don't care what they do with each other.

You accept, then, that the majority have one or another objection to the new law. Thanks for that admission. I'm sure that you are all for majorities when it suits you.

As already stated, gay parents ALREADY legally have children in the UK and have for a long time! You sound like someone who also thinks gay teachers should be fired. If so, that's an extremely discriminatory position. BTW, I "admitted" no such thing. As said before, the POLLS in the UK are in favor of this change.

BTW, I will ALSO never be a gay parent and probably never a gay married either. So we have lots in common, mate!

Legal gay marriage. Not to panic. Keep in mind -- it is NOT required.

Bottom line if you're from a more advanced country, chances are sooner, later, or already you're on the LOSING side of this controversy. Might as well grin and bear it.

Edited February 7, 2013 by Jingthing

[Scott]

The thread is massively off-topic. The OP is about gay marriage in the UK. Further discussion of adoption will have to wait for a different thread.

[Potosi]

I wonder what the rate of divorces is going to be. 90%? At least male gays are mostly about polyamorous relationships, or NSA altogether. Anyway, congrats you can marry. Now move kindly aside, and make way for the next non-relevant issue that'll go on forever.

[Jingthing]

I wonder what the rate of divorces is going to be. 90%? At least male gays are mostly about polyamorous relationships, or NSA altogether. Anyway, congrats you can marry. Now move kindly aside, and make way for the next non-relevant issue that'll go on forever.

OK, the divorce rate variance of gay marriages vs. hetero marriages is inconclusive so far and of course lesbians are different than gay men. Seems like you parroted a long time negative stereotype that gays aren't capable of long term commitments. Some are, some aren't, like any group of people.

Interestingly, in the famous Washington Post's 2013 "In and Out" list gay marriage was listed as OUT, with gay divorce listed as IN. Whatever the rate of divorces, it's not really relevant. People gay and straight get married with hope and optimism and it doesn't always work out. If that's an argument for not marrying, then don't marry. The issue is free choice and equality.

BTW, I am close to two straight people who married for these reasons:

1. To get free airline travel benefits

2. To get a sick friend health insurance

People enter marriage for all kinds of reasons. Are those reasons wrong? Perhaps to you, but for the people who entered them that's what they wanted. (Yes, divorce was the result in both.)

In most countries straight people can marry their latest drunken one night stand the next day the same night while a committed gay couple together 50 years can't. Is that fair?

http://en.wikipedia....ame-sex_couples

Edited February 7, 2013 by Jingthing

[FritsSikkink]

Why shouldn't homosexuals be allowed to bring up children?

They will be brought up in a life of torment

Why do you think so, i think they will be wise enough not to listen to that narrowminded BS.

[FritsSikkink]

Why shouldn't homosexuals be allowed to bring up children?

The reason is quite clear to me.

Children should be brought up in as normal an environment as possible so that they grow up to be well balanced individuals. A childhood spent watching homosexuals show affection to each other is not normal and is likely to encourage the child to also live an abnormal adulthood.

I'm all for letting homosexuals do what they want to each other so long as they keep it away from me (lesbians being a possible exception!) but, in front of children, their relationship would amount to abuse.

Your bigotry you presumably cannot help, but you can do something about your ignorance in relation to whether or not children raised by same sex couples grow up as "normal" as the children of men and women partners.

Ever heard of Google? Or are you afraid that a few salient facts - they are out there - might force you to consider your preconceptions?

And have you any idea of how self-demeaning is your silly remark about lesbians "doing what they want" in front of you?

Time to drop the stone club, Jock - and with it your Neanderthal prejudice.

The more that you and a few others attack people with different views the more you show that you are on the defensive and discredit your own cause.

Same could be said about you.

[Jingthing]

BTW, some more info on the gay divorce question.

In the USA there is no nationally recognized gay marriage but there a number of different legal commitment options at the state level including marriage in SOME states.

SO FAR, it appears gay people are divorcing at lower rates than straight people in the USA:

2. About 1% of the total number of currently-married or registered same-sex couples get divorced each year, in comparison to about 2% of the total number of married straight couples. Note that the percentage of couples that get divorced eventually is close to 50%, but only 1% or 2% of them get divorced in any particular year.

http://www.huffingto..._b_1085024.html Edited February 7, 2013 by Jingthing

[onthemoon]

Why shouldn't homosexuals be allowed to bring up children?

The reason is quite clear to me.

Children should be brought up in as normal an environment as possible so that they grow up to be well balanced individuals. A childhood spent watching homosexuals show affection to each other is not normal and is likely to encourage the child to also live an abnormal adulthood.

I'm all for letting homosexuals do what they want to each other so long as they keep it away from me (lesbians being a possible exception!) but, in front of children, their relationship would amount to abuse.

You mean that heterosexual couples should do "it" in front of their children, but homosexuals shouldn't?

I think a well-balanced kid has no problems with homosexuals or heterosexuals showing affection to each other. Kids that are not well-balance might show an abnormal negative behaviour towards homosexuals.