Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there! Sign in to have your say on this topicNew here? Join for free to post

Gay marriage...opinions

Announcements Posted on
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Charlie Chaplin)
    The problem I have is with same-sex marriages being performed in churches, as homosexual relationships are against what it says in the bible.

    Am I right to have an opinion on this an express it when everyone else is expressing their opinion on it?? x
    On that first bit ive quoted, the bible seems to have a problem with a lot of things (such as crustaceans, which it refers to as abominations) so id take it with a grain of salt what the bible says, although it is your Holy Text. Am i understanding you when you say your objection is to where the marriage takes place (i.e. your okay with same-sex marriage, just not with it taking place in a church)?

    On that second part, Of course your allowed to express your opinion, and I dislike the way some people are silenced with cries of 'your wrong' and things like that. The only way this stuff moves forward is to have civil discussion. HOWEVER, just because you do not agree with it as a christian, does not mean your christian values should dictate public policy, the idea of seperation of church and state (which is written in with America but is basically practicised here in Britain)
    • 23 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jmj)
    x
    Let's try something really really simple

    (1) Separate is inherently unequal
    Therefore,
    (2) Civil unions are not equal to marriages

    To disagree with this argument, you have to disprove (1).

    To give you some examples of how separation propagates inequality - look at marriage. It has with it associated 'long-term', 'loving', 'family', 'commitment' and so on and so forth. Look at civil unions - they do not carry the same social implications that marriages do.

    Wonderful, they're quite obviously unequal.

    Let's look at something else:

    Not everyone is religious and we aren't talking about religious marriage, we're talking about civil marriage. What on earth is your religion doing in civil marriage? You allow Muslim people, Hindu people, Atheists, etc. all to get married even though they don't believe in God and they all have their own versions of marriage which they believe in. So why is it that homosexual people must follow your religious definition of marriage?

    I think you'll find that, given the incredibly simple argument at the beginning of this post, you're clearly discriminating against people; you do not believe in equal rights; and you're perfectly fine treating homosexual people as second-class citizens. And, in fact, I like heyhey922's comment, which your argument would logically force you to agree with - as you're advocating for 'separate is equal'. So, therefore, we can separate where white people and black people sit on the bus because they all get to the same place (i.e. they have the same 'rights'). Yeah, see how utterly ridiculous your argument is?
    • 11 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jmj)
    I agree with you, but I don't think civil partnerships is an 'analogy' of marriage, to use your terms.
    Are they the same thing? No. Are they by design analogous? Yes.

    (Original post by jmj)
    What do you mean?
    Civil Partnerships are not Civil Marriages - they are different institutions, endow couples with (slightly) different rights and have very different connotations. Same-sex couples can have civil partnerships, and can only have civil partnerships. Mixed-sex couples can have marriages, and can only have marriages. Therefore the rights which same-sex couples are granted differ from those which mixed-sex couples receive - in the sense that they are granted different rights, this is discrimination.

    Since you claim that homosexuals and heterosexuals should have the same rights, please explain how you justify enshrining discriminatory provisions in law.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    It actually hurts no one if two men or two women get married. There are only positives to it, zero negatives.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    My sig says it all. The concept of marriage has been consantly changing throughout history.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: April 12, 2012
New on TSR

The future of apprenticeships

Join the discussion in the apprenticeships hub!

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.