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

Arguments against Gay marriage?

Announcements Posted on
    • 12 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wirral)
    You can bet your bottom dollar that if homosexual marriage is legalised, it will be forced onto the churches. The people who are pushing this agenda are primarily militant atheists and secularists rather than homosexuals. That is why Christians are concerned.
    The churches will not get forced due to the same reason that you could not force the Catholic church to remarry a divorced person, or conduct a Muslim marriage for a Muslim couple.

    And anyway, one of the important arguments is that some sectors of religion do want to marry homosexual couples (or have no issues with it), but are prevented from doing so.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bkeevin)
    Idol worship and rejection of christ as your lord and saviour? It was technically illegal not to be a christian or worship other deities in the christianised Roman empire.
    (Original post by bkeevin)
    As far as I am aware Britain was occupied by the Romans for almost 4 centuries and we had to follow Roman Laws since the Romans (Emperor Claudius) already made our local druidic religion illegal and imposed their own beliefs and legal system upon our ancestors. Christian beliefs and laws just happen to be the last one the Romans left us with and that remained the basis for our legal system today.

    I get that, but where exactly is in written into law today that we can't worship idols or reject Christ?

    In this country everyone is entitled to worship who/what they want and it is their choice whether to accept Christ or not.

    Neither of these are British law at the present?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Presenttime)
    Well what is marriage ? An affirmation of love, and lifetime commitment, and a basis for child rearing. These things are more meaningful than gender labels. Therefore it seems appropriate that marriage should be extended to many gay couples. If you find dictionary definitions more appealing than love and human connection - then veto away.
    I know rejecting and talking about gender labels is in vogue and all, but they are a nothing description and statement.

    Those things above between a man and a women is what marriage is lol.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ufo2012)
    I get that, but where exactly is in written into law today that we can't worship idols or reject Christ?

    In this country everyone is entitled to worship who/what they want and it is their choice whether to accept Christ or not.

    Neither of these are British law at the present?
    Well you asked for a law we have used almost as long as the ban of same sex marriage and I gave you that one. I hope you understand that witchcraft has been illegal and the Witchcraft Act was only abolished in 1951. We used to arrest people for witchcraft during WW2.

    Anyway don't worry our democratically elected parliament will soon vote a the law to allow same sex marriage again. So very soon this debate will just become as academic as the debate on witchcraft or apostasy in our laws. And in this country everyone will be entitled to marry a person of their choice whether they are staight or gay finally.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bkeevin)
    Well you asked for a law we have used almost as long as the ban of same sex marriage and I gave you that one. I hope you understand that witchcraft has been illegal and the Witchcraft Act was only abolished in 1951. We used to arrest people for witchcraft during WW2.
    Doesn't mean we have become a better society though by abolishing that act.

    (Original post by bkeevin)
    Anyway don't worry our democratically elected parliament will soon vote a the law to allow same sex marriage again.
    They may just do that, as long as they separate the issue of gays and church - the two just do not mix.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wirral)
    Your 'neg limit for the day'? Quite a charmer aren't you krishan? Do you dress up in a Voldemort cloak in your bedroom and fire pretend jinxes from a plastic wand?
    what does that even mean?
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by minimarshmallow)
    The religious bit includes the non-religious bit... You sign the legal marriage contract. It's a marriage contract. Civil marriage just doesn't include the religious bit. From a legal standpoint they're exactly the same.

    The institution of marriage pre-dates recorded history. And, as I mentioned, it was redefined by the Church of England. There have also been several other redefinitions in history - wives are no longer property of their husbands, the purpose isn't for shared property any more, marital rape is no longer legal etc.
    This! i find it so hyporitical when church of england christians are against a redefinition of marriage when it was a redefinition of marriage that is one of their sect's main defining characteristics.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by krishan369)
    This! i find it so hyporitical when church of england christians are against a redefinition of marriage when it was a redefinition of marriage that is one of their sect's main defining characteristics.
    perfectly put.

    The greatest threat against gay marriage in Britain is in fact antidisestablishmentarianism in the Church of England.
    • 27 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by krishan369)
    This! i find it so hyporitical when church of england christians are against a redefinition of marriage when it was a redefinition of marriage that is one of their sect's main defining characteristics.
    Yup, really annoys me.

    That guy I was arguing with wasn't Church of England though, but it is relevant to any other Church of England Christians (including the one that lives on my street that I wanted to slap the other day).
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Being a (closeted) gay myself, I fail to see the standing against gay marriage. Only 50 years ago, blacks were being discriminated against, and the wedding of Dawn French and Lenny Henry was criticized heavily, as he was black. Now look - blacks get equal rights. So why not us homos, eh? No reason us a good enough reason to ban gay marriage.

    Homosexuality is found in nature, and appears to not be a problem amongst the animals...so why is it a problem with the "cleverest" species on the planet?

    Also, to the person who posted a few pages back, civil partnerships do not give gay couples the same rights as heterosexual couples. Which is why the issue of gay marriage is still that - an issue.

    This was posted from The Student Room's Android App on my MZ604
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dem503)
    perfectly put.

    The greatest threat against gay marriage in Britain is in fact antidisestablishmentarianism in the Church of England.
    thats such a long word...i had to slowly sound it out to read it
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ufo2012)
    Doesn't mean we have become a better society though by abolishing that act.



    They may just do that, as long as they separate the issue of gays and church - the two just do not mix.
    Of course that is a judgement call. You are free to believe that a society that abolishes discriminatory laws against the different faiths, poor, women, different races, gay and disabled people is not better than one that condones those discriminations and thankfully you will always be in the minority in this country.

    As you already know the proposed law about gay marriage is for civil marriages and aims to only give those religious institutions asking for permission the option to carry it out. What you guys are trying to do is just to stop society and certain faiths the freedom to practice their beliefs. You know no one is going to force any church perform such ceremony just like any church can does not have to marry muslims, hindus, divorcees etc.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bkeevin)
    Of course that is a judgement call. You are free to believe that a society that abolishes discriminatory laws against the different faiths, poor, women, different races, gay and disabled people is not better than one that condones those discriminations and thankfully you will always be in the minority in this country.
    You are getting into different issues here with your 'discriminatory laws' comment - I was referring specifically to the Witchcraft Act which you mentioned.

    So back to that issue, do you think we are a better/different/changed society because of the abolition of that act?

    We certainly have more psychics conning people which has not been a positive outcome from it.

    (Original post by bkeevin)
    As you already know the proposed law about gay marriage is for civil marriages and aims to only give those religious institutions asking for permission the option to carry it out. What you guys are trying to do is just to stop society and certain faiths the freedom to practice their beliefs. You know no one is going to force any church perform such ceremony just like any church can does not have to marry muslims, hindus, divorcees etc.
    We don't know that for sure and neither can you as these are bridges that have not yet been crossed.

    In theory though, all it would take is for the EU Human Rights pushers to get their claws into the issue and the next thing you know, they would be trying to push the same issue onto the churches.

    Although it's 'theory', it's all very good you saying "you know no-one is going to force any church etc." but when it comes to law it's all about the finer details such as these.

    And it is of relevance here in particular since this is posted in the Religion forum.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ufo2012)
    They may just do that, as long as they separate the issue of gays and church - the two just do not mix.
    Apart from churches that want to marry gay people :rolleyes:
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gremlins)
    Apart from churches that want to marry gay people :rolleyes:
    Yes and right now we don't know how many of those exist.

    But, those churches if associating themselves with Christianity should be ashamed to do so. They will not be, but they should be. Just shows you how churches have changed however, but doesn't mean it is a good thing.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ufo2012)
    You are getting into different issues here with your 'discriminatory laws' comment - I was referring specifically to the Witchcraft Act which you mentioned.

    So back to that issue, do you think we are a better/different/changed society because of the abolition of that act?

    We certainly have more psychics conning people which has not been a positive outcome from it.



    We don't know that for sure and neither can you as these are bridges that have not yet been crossed.

    In theory though, all it would take is for the EU Human Rights pushers to get their claws into the issue and the next thing you know, they would be trying to push the same issue onto the churches.

    Although it's 'theory', it's all very good you saying "you know no-one is going to force any church etc." but when it comes to law it's all about the finer details such as these.

    And it is of relevance here in particular since this is posted in the Religion forum.
    Well I feel our society is much better due to the fact we stopped prosecuting people for witchcraft. The wiccans for example are able to practice their faith in peace without fear of persecution or imprisonment that the said abolition has ensured. Many of us do criticise the Saudis when they prosecute/execute people for that. How is freedom from this religious persecution/discrimination different from any of the other issues I raised?

    As for psychics conning people and there are have many people who claim that many churches do the same and they don't even have to pay tax on the money they take as opposed to psychics who probably do. So I am indifferent about that.

    I agree with you that the said law should come with a strong provision allowing any church not to perform same sex marriage if that is their belief. I believe that their freedom should be protected and probably enshrined in law. The Church should not however be allowed to keep depriving others the freedom to perform same sex marriage since they believe differently.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ufo2012)
    Yes and right now we don't know how many of those exist.

    But, those churches if associating themselves with Christianity should be ashamed to do so. They will not be, but they should be. Just shows you how churches have changed however, but doesn't mean it is a good thing.
    You know there are many of them out there such as the Quakers, Uniterian Universalists, some presbitarians and evangelicals, Lutherans and Reformed Churches, Reform Judaism, Reconsructionist Judaism and many others. Why do you want to oppress their voices and only listen to the rival beliefs?

    Who are you to pass theological judgements on those faiths? They happen have a different interpretation to the bible from yours. Christianity has almost always had those debates and divisions almost from its inspection. If you are interested you should read about what brought in the Council of Nicaea in AD325, Arianism, Nestorianism etc and you will understand that the church has always changed and will always change as long as they exist.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rarar)
    Being a (closeted) gay myself, I fail to see the standing against gay marriage. Only 50 years ago, blacks were being discriminated against, and the wedding of Dawn French and Lenny Henry was criticized heavily, as he was black. Now look - blacks get equal rights. So why not us homos, eh? No reason us a good enough reason to ban gay marriage.

    Homosexuality is found in nature, and appears to not be a problem amongst the animals...so why is it a problem with the "cleverest" species on the planet?

    Also, to the person who posted a few pages back, civil partnerships do not give gay couples the same rights as heterosexual couples. Which is why the issue of gay marriage is still that - an issue.

    This was posted from The Student Room's Android App on my MZ604
    I agree with your post but I would avoid using the nature argument.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Personal opinion on this is the biggest reason not to allow it is because of the number of people who get angry and upset over it.

    As a point. When black people wanted to be treated equally. They never asked to be called white people (bare with me here) they just wanted equal rights. My point really is that why should we let them take the title married? It originated from a religious ceremony to join a man and a woman til death do they part (well look how that turned you). So why not give make a title that can be given to a gay couple who are "joined"... We should call it... A CIVIL PARTNERSHIP!!! It's genius. I shall make millions and become a hero.

    But seriously I personally have nothing against gay couples being married but I cannot see why they are so bothered about it when they have something that is universally recognised as equal.
    • 27 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Griiv)
    Personal opinion on this is the biggest reason not to allow it is because of the number of people who get angry and upset over it.

    As a point. When black people wanted to be treated equally. They never asked to be called white people (bare with me here) they just wanted equal rights. My point really is that why should we let them take the title married? It originated from a religious ceremony to join a man and a woman til death do they part (well look how that turned you). So why not give make a title that can be given to a gay couple who are "joined"... We should call it... A CIVIL PARTNERSHIP!!! It's genius. I shall make millions and become a hero.

    But seriously I personally have nothing against gay couples being married but I cannot see why they are so bothered about it when they have something that is universally recognised as equal.
    The point is both that it isn't actually equal, but also it isn't universally recognised as equal. If they were universally recognised as equal, they should just be called the same thing (and actually be equal).
    I propose a counter suggestion to anyone who brings up this argument, if it isn't a big deal, why don't we just switch the terms around? Straight people keep saying that it doesn't matter, and gay people say they want to get married. So let's call the straight union a 'civil partnership' and the gay one 'marriage', everyone is happy right?
    Yeah, I don't think one straight person I've suggested it to has agreed with it, so this shows they aren't considered equal, or the straight person would take the civil partnership and leave marriage for the gay people.

    Haha, that just reminded me of the episode of QI I watched the other day where you would show someone was richer than you by offering to swap fortunes, kind of a similar premise.

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: October 9, 2012
New on TSR

GCSE mocks revision

Talk study tips this weekend

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.