Okay, am I the only one who sees a deep irony here? The vast majority of the posters on this thread have been British!
― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:32 (nineteen years ago) link
― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:34 (nineteen years ago) link
But still, you are the spawn of our nation (i.e. you speak English).
― Steve.n. (sjkirk), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:34 (nineteen years ago) link
― RickyT (RickyT), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:35 (nineteen years ago) link
― Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:35 (nineteen years ago) link
― adam... (nordicskilla), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:35 (nineteen years ago) link
― Steve.n. (sjkirk), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:36 (nineteen years ago) link
― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:37 (nineteen years ago) link
― Pashmina (Pashmina), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:38 (nineteen years ago) link
― RickyT (RickyT), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:39 (nineteen years ago) link
― Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:40 (nineteen years ago) link
― luna (luna.c), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:40 (nineteen years ago) link
― Freelance Hiveminder (blueski), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:41 (nineteen years ago) link
It is probably best that I have four years to acclimate myself to the political realm before I turn 35 as right now I want to state all of my issues as satirical initiatives; my current solution to the gay marriage issue would be to pen a bill that banned divorce and heterosexual civil unions.
― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:43 (nineteen years ago) link
Ridiculous.
― Chantel, Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:47 (nineteen years ago) link
I have no problem with that. But you can't legislate to force a church to do that. On the other hand, it's the law's business to protect the rights of individuals. Therefore we should separate out what churches do from what the law does, and call the two things by different names.
― Jonathan Z. (Joanthan Z.), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:48 (nineteen years ago) link
― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:48 (nineteen years ago) link
― Freelance Hiveminder (blueski), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:48 (nineteen years ago) link
― luna (luna.c), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:49 (nineteen years ago) link
― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:50 (nineteen years ago) link
― Chantel, Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:52 (nineteen years ago) link
― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:54 (nineteen years ago) link
― Chantel, Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:58 (nineteen years ago) link
You don't know this because you are a moron.
― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:58 (nineteen years ago) link
― ken c (ken c), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:01 (nineteen years ago) link
― Chantel, Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:02 (nineteen years ago) link
X-posts I don't want to force churches to hold gay services - none the less many would and want to, and saying that what happens in a Church is between a man and a woman and what happens outside is a civil union doesn;t help gay Christians.
― Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:02 (nineteen years ago) link
I do know enough about the way that homosexuals are treated in Islamic societies to know that what happens to gays in Islamic societies is wrong.
You are still a gigantic, oxygen-stealing idiot.
― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:04 (nineteen years ago) link
― Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:04 (nineteen years ago) link
― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:06 (nineteen years ago) link
― Freelance Hiveminder (blueski), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:06 (nineteen years ago) link
― Emilymv (Emilymv), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:08 (nineteen years ago) link
Overcoming emotionalism and irrational fear with argument is admittedly classic, but it's not an automatic win.
― Aimless (Aimless), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:08 (nineteen years ago) link
― chantel, Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:18 (nineteen years ago) link
― Freelance Hiveminder (blueski), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:19 (nineteen years ago) link
― Pashmina (Pashmina), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:20 (nineteen years ago) link
these are the facts.
in case anyone's thinking that i may not know what i'm talking about, i went to 2 roman catholic schools for a combination of 13 years, i was an altar boy from the age of 9 until i was 16, and i read from the bible on the altar until i was 20.
can those in the 'anti' camp please stop quoting 'the bible' in relation to this subject, because it doesn't sound like you've actually read it, and it isn't doing you any favours.
cheers.
― piscesboy, Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:45 (nineteen years ago) link
― Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:53 (nineteen years ago) link
― Steve.n. (sjkirk), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:57 (nineteen years ago) link
There's no real reason why the french *have* to give it a different name, though, other than to pander to homophobia. After all, in France, religious marriages are not considered legally valid, and haven't been since the 19th century. So why - considering that all couples who want a religious wedding in France aren't legally married unless they have a civil wedding as well - is there a need to differ between a marriage and a civil pact?
― caitlin (caitlin), Thursday, 4 November 2004 20:50 (nineteen years ago) link
― dave225 (Dave225), Thursday, 4 November 2004 20:56 (nineteen years ago) link
― J (Jay), Thursday, 4 November 2004 21:00 (nineteen years ago) link
― One of the guilty (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 21:01 (nineteen years ago) link
-- James R. (jgw...), November 4th, 2004 10:51 AM. (later) link)
And what a great idea this would be, except there are so many fundies who would call you a secular humanist and try to mandate teacher-led in-school prayer for your sins and then they'd bash you over the head with that big stone copy of the ten commandments they've been hanging in the courtrooms.
― J (Jay), Thursday, 4 November 2004 21:18 (nineteen years ago) link
― The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 21:29 (nineteen years ago) link
― caitlin (caitlin), Thursday, 4 November 2004 21:34 (nineteen years ago) link
What I'm wondering - when did it become legal (in the US and/or the UK) to marry without religious supervision? That is, when did civil marriage - by a judge, notary, or what have you - become recognized? Was it controversial?
Are people who were not married by clergy considered "not really married" by some?
― Layna Andersen (Layna Andersen), Thursday, 4 November 2004 21:39 (nineteen years ago) link
― A Nairn (moretap), Thursday, 4 November 2004 21:52 (nineteen years ago) link