JT, we need a poll on this, chop chop!

Actually if politicians thought they could get the vote from domesticated animals brobably not so far from now! I would understand skate, but red herrings come sir you jest?

I think this line of argument shows deep DISRESPECT for a serious decades long international struggle of real people who have real consequences not having the same civil rights as their neighbors.

Actually it's not an argument, more a comment of possibilities!

Your probably right, but then if someone wants to marry their cat, who are you to trample on his/her civil rights?. Its a joke!

I'm not laughing. Do you realize how stale that kind of "joke" is and how to gay people, it comes across that you think their struggle for civil rights is also a JOKE?

Personally I think whether you pretend it's a joke or - as Transam and many others (elsewhere) have - pretend it's a logical extension, it's truly ugly to make a statement with the implicit premise that homosexuality is akin to bestiality or zoophilia.

It reminds me of when people would openly equate African Americans to monkeys or apes. It's vile and reflects on the person who does it.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

Edited February 8, 201313 yr by SteeleJoe

Actually if politicians thought they could get the vote from domesticated animals brobably not so far from now! I would understand skate, but red herrings come sir you jest?

I think this line of argument shows deep DISRESPECT for a serious decades long international struggle of real people who have real consequences not having the same civil rights as their neighbors.

Actually it's not an argument, more a comment of possibilities!

Your probably right, but then if someone wants to marry their cat, who are you to trample on his/her civil rights?. Its a joke!

I'm not laughing. Do you realize how stale that kind of "joke" is and how to gay people, it comes across that you think their struggle for civil rights is also a JOKE?

Why should I care what they think? Am I supposed to feel sympathetic to them, Why? I think there are causes which are far more deserving. What of all those people who's moral rights have been upset by the right of gay people to marry, Am I right in thinking that the church of England will not be forced to abide by this law, I wonder why?

name='SteeleJoe'

Personally I think whether you pretend it's a joke or - as Transam and many others (elsewhere) have - pretend it's a logical extension, it's truly ugly to make a statement with the implicit premise that homosexuality is akin to bestiality or zoophilia.

It reminds me of when people would openly equate African Americans to monkeys or apes. It's vile and reflects on the person who does it.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa

Your the one making the connection no one else. So much for vile reflections on the person who does it!

This is an emotive subject and I would request that anyone with a view on it, for, against or neutral, be allowed to air that view, without bias.If we can't do that then we need to stop right here and find something different to do with our time, I for one will certainly be happy to do that.

What of all those people who's moral rights have been upset by the right of gay people to marry, Am I right in thinking that the church of England will not be forced to abide by this law, I wonder why?

Moral rights to be judgmental and bigoted against other peoples' personal choices are as worthless as the paper they are written on.

Just because some Jesus wheezer thinks its wrong does not make it wrong.

What of all those people who's moral rights have been upset by the right of gay people to marry, Am I right in thinking that the church of England will not be forced to abide by this law, I wonder why?

Moral rights to be judgmental and bigoted against other peoples' personal choices are as worthless as the paper they are written on.

Just because some Jesus wheezer thinks its wrong does not make it wrong.

It doesn't make it right either!

as a comedian once said

"they deserve to get divorced like the rest of us!"

Other than homophobia, i really don't understand what the big deal is.

PS. i'm dealing with my own homophobia, so I'm no saint.

As an example, i find gay PDA (public displays of affection) extremely difficult to deal with. of course like most male homophobia, i dont seem to have problems with lesbian PDA.

But on the issue of gay marriage, i'm with the comedian referenced above.

let them be miserable like the rest of us!

Dude I'm grossed out when I see Thai people eating fried insects. That isn't an argument for limiting their civil rights.

JT

I think we're violently agreeing........regardless of your culinary phobias

I see no reason to limit gay marriage other than homophobia, which is very wrong.

I was also pointing out that i too still harbor some homophobia (which i need to deal with), but as you delicately put it, "just because you find it gross, it doesn't mean their rights should be limited" (I summarized it for ya, hope you don't mind)

What of all those people who's moral rights have been upset by the right of gay people to marry

That makes no sense. Rights can't be upset and moreover "moral rights" does not mean what you think it does.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

*Deleted quote edited out*

And we've already established that this thread does not relate to parenting, that is an entirely separate discussion.

As for homosexuals, let's not "pretend" they are something else? What, like human beings, you mean?

Edited February 8, 201313 yr by Scott

did i just see a "lets call a spade, a spade" reference?

wait,

did someone just teleport me to Alabama??

i'm depressed lol. I've spent WAY too much time on this thread.

i'm out

What of all those people who's moral rights have been upset by the right of gay people to marry, Am I right in thinking that the church of England will not be forced to abide by this law, I wonder why?

Moral rights to be judgmental and bigoted against other peoples' personal choices are as worthless as the paper they are written on.

Just because some Jesus wheezer thinks its wrong does not make it wrong.

It doesn't make it right either!

Secular governments shouldn't be controlled by theocratic forces. We are talking CIVIL marriage here.

PC has gone mad in the UK IMHO. A couple running a boarding house from home can not decide who stays there. Pub landlords can not decide who can come in to their business. Bring on the thought police.

PC has gone mad in the UK IMHO. A couple running a boarding house from home can not decide who stays there. Pub landlords can not decide who can come in to their business. Bring on the thought police.

So it follows it is OK not to allow gay people equal civil rights under the law? How does that figure?

PC has gone mad in the UK IMHO. A couple running a boarding house from home can not decide who stays there. Pub landlords can not decide who can come in to their business. Bring on the thought police.

If they are inviting guests to their home, they can decide whatever they want.

If they are running a public guest house, then they can't ban gays any more than they can ban asians or black people.

It's called discrimination and if you are going to practice it then you'd better have a bloody good reason.

Oh, and their legal fees were picked up by the Jesus wheezers. There are plenty of Guest houses and hotels that aren't so petty, and they probably don't waste their time on the god squad either.

PC has gone mad in the UK IMHO. A couple running a boarding house from home can not decide who stays there. Pub landlords can not decide who can come in to their business. Bring on the thought police.

If they are inviting guests to their home, they can decide whatever they want.

If they are running a public guest house, then they can't ban gays any more than they can ban asians or black people.

It's called discrimination and if you are going to practice it then you'd better have a bloody good reason.

Oh, and their legal fees were picked up by the Jesus wheezers. There are plenty of Guest houses and hotels that aren't so petty, and they probably don't waste their time on the god squad either.

Trouble is 1 gay couple did decide to make an issue of being refused in a devout christian's boarding house. I suspect they were trying to create an issue. I don't believe in a god. I believe in the right to decide who stays in my residence, business or not.

What does this guesthouse issue have to do with legal same sex marriage?

What does this guesthouse issue have to do with legal same sex marriage?

It's just another example of gays oppressing straights with their rampant gayness.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

What does this guesthouse issue have to do with legal same sex marriage?

It's just another example of gays oppressing straights with their rampant gayness.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

So you do understand? Good.

What does this guesthouse issue have to do with legal same sex marriage?

It's just another example of gays oppressing straights with their rampant gayness.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

So you do understand? Good.

Hmmm...I guess I'll just give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're playing along with joke.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

Hmmm...I guess I'll just give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're playing along with joke.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

You're a generous sort.

Hmmm...I guess I'll just give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're playing along with joke.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

You're a generous sort.

Indeed I am. actually, just lazy and tired; If I assume he actually does feel victimized by homosexuals being homosexual...well, I'd have a number of things I'd almost have to say...and truth be told even the whole 'PC is out of control and people can't even discriminate anymore' thing is worthy of ...err...COMMENT but it's getting late and it's been a long day.

Sent from my iPad using ThaiVisa ap

Lets just say there are more important issues in the UK. OAPs dieing from neglect. The economy etc.

Lets just say there are more important issues in the UK. OAPs dieing from neglect. The economy etc.

I'm sure. But THIS thread is about the UK legalizing same sex marriage. Same sex civil unions are already legal there. Just because there is other business of government doesn't mean making progress on advancing civil rights isn't ALSO worth doing. If we are to accept your argument, civil rights would NEVER advance because there's always something more important going on, yes?

Lets just say there are more important issues in the UK. OAPs dieing from neglect. The economy etc.

I'm sure. But THIS thread is about the UK legalizing same sex marriage. Same sex civil unions are already legal there. Just because there is other business of government doesn't mean making progress on advancing civil rights isn't ALSO worth doing. If we are to accept your argument, civil rights would NEVER advance because there's always something more important going on, yes?

So what's the difference between a civil union and marriage?

Lets just say there are more important issues in the UK. OAPs dieing from neglect. The economy etc.

I'm sure. But THIS thread is about the UK legalizing same sex marriage. Same sex civil unions are already legal there. Just because there is other business of government doesn't mean making progress on advancing civil rights isn't ALSO worth doing. If we are to accept your argument, civil rights would NEVER advance because there's always something more important going on, yes?

So what's the difference between a civil union and marriage?

A word.

Lets just say there are more important issues in the UK. OAPs dieing from neglect. The economy etc.

I'm sure. But THIS thread is about the UK legalizing same sex marriage. Same sex civil unions are already legal there. Just because there is other business of government doesn't mean making progress on advancing civil rights isn't ALSO worth doing. If we are to accept your argument, civil rights would NEVER advance because there's always something more important going on, yes?

So what's the difference between a civil union and marriage?

That depends on the country/state/or province you're talking about.

Since we're talking UK here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/17/gay-marriage-civil-partnerships

UK civil unions (as opposed to USA civil unions which are crap) are very good but they are not the same as marriage. By having two institutions, one reserved for heterosexuals only, you've got a model of separate but equal, or more like separate but mostly equal.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/05/gay-marriage-debate-uncovered-nest-of-bigots?intcmp=239

I admit I started out puzzled by such strong passions on the gay side too. Why on earth do gay people want to be married anyway? Civil partnership is a very fine thing. My dearest old friends, together since the dark days when gay sex was illegal, were civilly partnered a day after the law permitted it. In a moving ceremony, free of all the freighted iconography of "husband" and "wife", here was a pledge of civility between two equal people. Many heterosexuals would prefer that as well. Why be married if you can be civil instead?

But some gay people do want to marry. Why? Those denied the right to a totemic social emblem on grounds of their sexual identity will always feel outraged. Banning gay people from using the word "marriage" suggests they are less worthy. I have no secret hankering to be a bishop, but I feel all women are diminished by being barred. I feel the same about the sight of women in full burqas: social pressure that hides them from sight diminishes us all. Perversely, the anti- campaign has proved exactly why gay people need the right to marriage.

PC has gone mad in the UK IMHO. A couple running a boarding house from home can not decide who stays there. Pub landlords can not decide who can come in to their business. Bring on the thought police.

If they are inviting guests to their home, they can decide whatever they want.

If they are running a public guest house, then they can't ban gays any more than they can ban asians or black people.

It's called discrimination and if you are going to practice it then you'd better have a bloody good reason.

Oh, and their legal fees were picked up by the Jesus wheezers. There are plenty of Guest houses and hotels that aren't so petty, and they probably don't waste their time on the god squad either.

Trouble is 1 gay couple did decide to make an issue of being refused in a devout christian's boarding house. I suspect they were trying to create an issue. I don't believe in a god. I believe in the right to decide who stays in my residence, business or not.

A couple of blokes booked a room in good faith, turned up and basically got told "we don't want your sort in here".

Fine. refund them their petrol money and find them alternative accommodation, and compensate them for the inconvenience.

Oh, they didn't.

Tough sh*t at the consequences, they deserved them.

PC has gone mad in the UK IMHO. A couple running a boarding house from home can not decide who stays there. Pub landlords can not decide who can come in to their business. Bring on the thought police.

If they are inviting guests to their home, they can decide whatever they want.

If they are running a public guest house, then they can't ban gays any more than they can ban asians or black people.

It's called discrimination and if you are going to practice it then you'd better have a bloody good reason.

Oh, and their legal fees were picked up by the Jesus wheezers. There are plenty of Guest houses and hotels that aren't so petty, and they probably don't waste their time on the god squad either.

Trouble is 1 gay couple did decide to make an issue of being refused in a devout christian's boarding house. I suspect they were trying to create an issue. I don't believe in a god. I believe in the right to decide who stays in my residence, business or not.

Once you start offering accommodation to the public it's no longer your residence - it's a business subject to the laws of the land. Those laws require you not to discriminate against people because of their race, religion or sexual orientation. If you're not willing to obey the law then you shouldn't be running the business.

Here's a pictorial explaining why same sex marriage isn't the same as marrying a pencil. It's US biased but nonetheless it clearly explains the differences: