Gay Marriage to Alfred: Your Thoughts

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (3148 of them)
Well, not King exactly, but you could get married to William and be the nu-duke of Edinburgh.

RickyT (RickyT), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:39 (nineteen years ago) link

Anyway, the liberal arguments will win - which is partly why the right are so afraid. We have been moving more and more towards egalitarian societies, ans they know they will lose. Add to that that I have never heard a proper argument against gay marriage and I am certain the egalitarians will win.

Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:40 (nineteen years ago) link

This should never be an issue. Let whomever wants to marry, marry. If they're crazy enough to want to do it, who am I to stand in their way? Hell, I'll even be flowergirl.

luna (luna.c), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:40 (nineteen years ago) link

more like teh nude duke of edinburgh

Freelance Hiveminder (blueski), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:41 (nineteen years ago) link

'08 is going to be a banner fucking year for me.

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

As i thought. Trendy and acceptable to attack Christians. Unnacceptable to attack other religions which are actually tolerant and fluffy.

Ridiculous.

Chantel, Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:47 (nineteen years ago) link

"But Jonathan, why can't a christian gay couple get married in a church which recognises their partnership? "

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

Chantel, Hooked On Phonics might work for you.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:48 (nineteen years ago) link

tolerant and fluffy?

Freelance Hiveminder (blueski), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:48 (nineteen years ago) link

The Passion of the Snuggle Bear.

luna (luna.c), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:49 (nineteen years ago) link

The day that the US and Britain become Islamic societies is the day that your objection to this thread makes sense, Chantel, just to spell it out for you.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:50 (nineteen years ago) link

BBritain is a Christian country? When did this become official? As in the WHOLE of Britain? All of it Christian too?

Chantel, Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:52 (nineteen years ago) link

You are a gigantic moron.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:54 (nineteen years ago) link

I'm not the moron saying the UK is a Christian country.

Chantel, Thursday, 4 November 2004 16:58 (nineteen years ago) link

Basic logic would tell you that saying Britain is not an Islamic society does not imply that Britain is a Christian society.

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

attacking fluffy things is definitely unacceptable!!!! leave the furry bunnies alone!

ken c (ken c), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:01 (nineteen years ago) link

Uh huh, and so why does my point fail to register with you you brainless tosspot? Why the open attack on only one religion? Have you got an answer or not? Are you just going to sit there and dodge my question like the smug little prick you are?

Chantel, Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:02 (nineteen years ago) link

The UK is a Christian country! We have a state religion! The Church of England - the Queen is it's head!

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 not know enough about Islam the religion to comment on how it deals with homosexuality.

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

Haha, Calum must REAAAAALLY be lonely in Essex today. Not even his blow-up doll girlfriend can give him love.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:04 (nineteen years ago) link

Let's not play the Calum game, okay? If this is him and he wants to run a whole bunch of personalities, fine. I don't care.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:06 (nineteen years ago) link

i don't it's true that he moved to Essex fwiw

Freelance Hiveminder (blueski), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:06 (nineteen years ago) link

(think)

Freelance Hiveminder (blueski), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:06 (nineteen years ago) link

the homosexual is the new jew. discuss.

Emilymv (Emilymv), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:08 (nineteen years ago) link

I have never heard a proper argument against gay marriage and I am certain the egalitarians will win.

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

Church of England. That's it then. UK is a Christian country. There's not other part of the UK.

chantel, Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:18 (nineteen years ago) link

are you a moron saying the UK is a Christian country now?

Freelance Hiveminder (blueski), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:19 (nineteen years ago) link

I think it's a veiled version of his usual scotland =/= england schtick, stevem.

Pashmina (Pashmina), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:20 (nineteen years ago) link

the new testament section(the only section with jesus christ in it)
of the bible never mentions jesus christ's sexuality. never once.
he spends time mainly with eleven other men, his friend simon peter is repeatedly referred to in the gospels as 'the one jesus loved' despite him loving everybody anyway, and there are two seperate scenes that i can think of (there might be more) across the four gospels of jesus kissing a man. there is no scene of jesus kissing a woman.

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

I'm Scottish, Chantel - I'm well aware there are other parts to the UK. Nevertheless, the Queen is Queen of Scotland too. She is also head of the Church of England.

Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:53 (nineteen years ago) link

Okay Chantel, we are all scared of those weird terrorist Muslims and afraid they will send Cat Stevens out to get us. Happy now?

Steve.n. (sjkirk), Thursday, 4 November 2004 17:57 (nineteen years ago) link

The word "marriage" is charged with religious meaning, which is why I think it'd be best to jettison it from a legal opint of view and just talk about civil unions. This is what they've essentially done in France, where gay couples (or straight couples or brothers and sisters or whatever) can sign a PACS (pacte civile de solidarité) which affords most of the rights of marriage.

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

Oh my God! She wants FRANCE to decide what's best for us!

dave225 (Dave225), Thursday, 4 November 2004 20:56 (nineteen years ago) link

How did this thread get so derailed?

J (Jay), Thursday, 4 November 2004 21:00 (nineteen years ago) link

Three guesses, dude.

One of the guilty (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 21:01 (nineteen years ago) link

take the law out of what is essentially a cultural, judeo-christian practice. And just stick to the idea of a civil contract of union between two or more people of whatever sex.

-- 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

We should enact a bunch of laws based on the more ludicrous sections of Deuteronomy.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Thursday, 4 November 2004 21:29 (nineteen years ago) link

Ban those shrimp now!

caitlin (caitlin), Thursday, 4 November 2004 21:34 (nineteen years ago) link

Going back to near-relevance: my wedding had absolutely no connection with any religion. We were married by a notary.

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

Search for "sexual immorality" in the bible too. Consider if homosexuality is classified under that in a lot of places too.

A Nairn (moretap), Thursday, 4 November 2004 21:52 (nineteen years ago) link

"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."

I'm not saying I'm in the anti-camp, but if you want to understand the intelligent side of the anti-camp your best bet is to research where they are coming from. A lot of them get their position from the bible. Ignore it if you want to just blindly oppose them without understanding them, and that will get your agenda no where.

and your stuff about Jesus is cute. Don't forget about him crying too.

A Nairn (moretap), Thursday, 4 November 2004 22:04 (nineteen years ago) link

Uh, I don't think they really get that position from the Bible, man. They get from sweaty guys in suits who told them it was in the Bible.

http://www.religioustolerance.org/hom_marj_l.htm#menu

J (Jay), Thursday, 4 November 2004 22:07 (nineteen years ago) link

there IS stuff in the bible that frowns upon homosexuality, although it's not really any more vociferous than injunctions against gambling and lying and stuff. which gives rise to my opinion that this isn't really about the bible at all, or even religion--although religion provides a *necessary* pretext.

amateur!!st, Thursday, 4 November 2004 22:10 (nineteen years ago) link

or maybe it is about religion, and not about the bible. the bible's relationship to christianity is not very straightforward. different aspects and interpretations seize the christian imagination at different times. see also: all monotheistic religions.

amateur!!st, Thursday, 4 November 2004 22:11 (nineteen years ago) link

Well, there is stuff in the Old Testament, the law of which was fulfilled at Christ's resurrection. This is why Christians eat pork, for example - such laws are irrelevant, and Christ redifined a new moral law, which was the ten commandments plus love thy neighbour. Homosexuality is only mentioned once in the NT, in Romans I, in kind of a vague rambling way. Western society has had taboos against sexuality, but it hasn't used the bible for their justification - they were taken as self-evident. Now that is being questioned the religious right has decided the message of Christianity is contained in one nonsense and demonstratably false rambling of St. Paul.

Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Thursday, 4 November 2004 22:15 (nineteen years ago) link

This whole issue of gay marriage really depresses me. I really thought homophobia was a thing of the past.

daavid (daavid), Thursday, 4 November 2004 22:16 (nineteen years ago) link

That shoulld be homosexuality, not sexuality - though the latter is also true, but to a lesser extent. (x-posts)

Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Thursday, 4 November 2004 22:17 (nineteen years ago) link

This is a wild idea, but maybe some are afraid that allowing same-sex unions would be one step closer to legalizing pedophilia or beastiality.

A Nairn (moretap), Thursday, 4 November 2004 22:19 (nineteen years ago) link

"maybe"? some people have explicitly said this.

see nabisco's point on my "why do people hate 'the homosexuals' so much" thread.

amateur!!st, Thursday, 4 November 2004 22:21 (nineteen years ago) link

Homophobics have always mashed homosexuality and paedophilia together.

Kevin Gilchrist (Mr Fusion), Thursday, 4 November 2004 22:22 (nineteen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.