The Marriage (Same-sex Couples) Act
Scroll to see replies
Original post by sophia_
Now you're just going off topic.
I didn't say the oppression was forced, I stated the opposite.
I didn't say or better, mean to say, that marriage is THE simplest, just one of them.
Yes, all Christian teachings should be upheld if it is a Christian state.
I didn't say the oppression was forced, I stated the opposite.
I didn't say or better, mean to say, that marriage is THE simplest, just one of them.
Yes, all Christian teachings should be upheld if it is a Christian state.
As we are not a christian state in anything but name.. its all lagely irrelivant.
for us to uphold all christain teachings would end badly, with people being stoned, having their hands cut off, men being able to force women into marriages, fathers owning thier daughters etc..
Any litteral working of 'christain teachings' is very outdate, and one which very very few christians are in favour of.
In reality no actual opression is taking place.
Instead this bill benifits significant parts of christianity, and helps gain them more religious freedom and protection..
Original post by fallen_acorns
As we are not a christian state in anything but name.. its all lagely irrelivant.
for us to uphold all christain teachings would end badly, with people being stoned, having their hands cut off, men being able to force women into marriages, fathers owning thier daughters etc..
Any litteral working of 'christain teachings' is very outdate, and one which very very few christians are in favour of.
for us to uphold all christain teachings would end badly, with people being stoned, having their hands cut off, men being able to force women into marriages, fathers owning thier daughters etc..
Any litteral working of 'christain teachings' is very outdate, and one which very very few christians are in favour of.
Again, completely different subject.
You are suggesting that Christianity is adaptable depending on what part of the world you are in/time period.
Please feel free to start a new thread, I'd be more than happy to contribute to it.
As far as this thread goes and my discussion with yourself, that is all.
Original post by sophia_
Again, completely different subject.
You are suggesting that Christianity is adaptable depending on what part of the world you are in/time period.
Please feel free to start a new thread, I'd be more than happy to contribute to it.
As far as this thread goes and my discussion with yourself, that is all.
You are suggesting that Christianity is adaptable depending on what part of the world you are in/time period.
Please feel free to start a new thread, I'd be more than happy to contribute to it.
As far as this thread goes and my discussion with yourself, that is all.
good...
as youve yet to provide any real exsamples of persecution, im glad its over
Original post by sophia_
According to a public survey of the UK, 56% say Britain is Christian, & 61% agree it should be Christian. The Queen is the head of state, the Queen is a Christian. So, as also stated by the Prime Minister, England is a Christian country.
Based on that, marriage in England has always, until now, been held in what the Guardian has described today as the 'natural' and 'Biblical' meaning. The meaning taken from Christianity. To change the definition is to suggest that the Biblical meaning is wrong, God is wrong, everybody who believes in the Bible (needless to say Christians) have it wrong. Today it has been more or less put in to legal standing that those mentioned are wrong.
I believe this is a form of oppression toward the Christians residing in the UK, also elsewhere.
I am not saying that I am against 'gay marriage', but I can hold the opinion above and support gay rights at the same time.
Edit: To not be able to think and express your religion freely in a country which is said to be of a certain religious nature, for fear of prosecution (offences related to homophobia), is also a part of the oppression, for all of this not to be true it would have to be clearly declared by the Queen and government that England is NOT a Christian country
Based on that, marriage in England has always, until now, been held in what the Guardian has described today as the 'natural' and 'Biblical' meaning. The meaning taken from Christianity. To change the definition is to suggest that the Biblical meaning is wrong, God is wrong, everybody who believes in the Bible (needless to say Christians) have it wrong. Today it has been more or less put in to legal standing that those mentioned are wrong.
I believe this is a form of oppression toward the Christians residing in the UK, also elsewhere.
I am not saying that I am against 'gay marriage', but I can hold the opinion above and support gay rights at the same time.
Edit: To not be able to think and express your religion freely in a country which is said to be of a certain religious nature, for fear of prosecution (offences related to homophobia), is also a part of the oppression, for all of this not to be true it would have to be clearly declared by the Queen and government that England is NOT a Christian country
Yes, it's so mean of us to deny the right of Christians to oppress others.
Original post by Joeman560
Also, why are the main advocates of gay marriage not even gay? Why don't the gays care?
Except for that massive 20+ year campaign we've just had, you mean?
Original post by Al-Mudaari
You don't get it.
50 years ago, these were the kind of adverts that were being shown on Western Public TV. No one at the time thought that in some decades time, gays would be allowed to marry. About 40 years ago, no one thought that bestiality would also become legal, which has become the case in various western countries. 30 years ago, people didn't think paedophilia would be encouraged through way of legalising the viewing of on-line child porn.
That's why, as social morals change, so too will acceptances. Incest will be legal, and if there's a way to get around the consent/abuse issue, so too will paedophilia. For this reason, this whole gay marriage bill is disappointing. Unless it's stamped out from the beginning, there will continue to be a domino effect which myself (and I'm sure many others) would rather not see. Nothing personal.
50 years ago, these were the kind of adverts that were being shown on Western Public TV. No one at the time thought that in some decades time, gays would be allowed to marry. About 40 years ago, no one thought that bestiality would also become legal, which has become the case in various western countries. 30 years ago, people didn't think paedophilia would be encouraged through way of legalising the viewing of on-line child porn.
That's why, as social morals change, so too will acceptances. Incest will be legal, and if there's a way to get around the consent/abuse issue, so too will paedophilia. For this reason, this whole gay marriage bill is disappointing. Unless it's stamped out from the beginning, there will continue to be a domino effect which myself (and I'm sure many others) would rather not see. Nothing personal.
Are you serious? In the past incest was legal, but now it is illegal. Some countries still allowed to marry cousins ect but they are seen as backwards. If you are going to make a statement about history get it correct
Original post by sophia_
Yes, all Christian teachings should be upheld if it is a Christian state.
Yes, all Christian teachings should be upheld if it is a Christian state.
So do you think crop rotation and wearing mixed-fabric clothes should be stopped too? Here's a hint - you won't be able to eat or wear anything!
And marriage predates Christianity.
Original post by patterson
What Is the World Coming To?
a better place
is where its getting tooOriginal post by Harrie Lyons
You know we are right, hence you want us to 'shut up' We are never going to 'shut up', as long as us and are children are alive you always have someone pricking your conscious: 'it's disgusting, your creator hates it, repent because 'as wax melts before the fire, so perish the enemies of God.'
Do you actually retain the ability to have an original thought, or is all from those stone age tribes?
Original post by Harrie Lyons
You know we are right, hence you want us to 'shut up' We are never going to 'shut up', as long as us and are children are alive you always have someone pricking your conscious: 'it's disgusting, your creator hates it, repent because 'as wax melts before the fire, so perish the enemies of God.'
I want you to shut up about it because your religious bluster bores the living **** out of me; not because you're slowly eating away at my very core with your poor excuses for "arguments".
Another law laid down by the mandatory totalitarian religious ideology, perversely named "Equality". So much for our critically thinking atheists. They're in hock to the only moral God that can enforce their so-called rights, the State.
The State in order to maintain its claws on power requires the population to be reliant upon it for their day to day living. The only threat to its dominance is strong, stable family units which can support themselves for generations. Thus their delight in pushing through Marxist nonsense like the creation of male-male "marriages" and teaching children from age 5 that this is normal and healthy. Broken homes and constant confusion means guaranteed votes. The creation of yet more victims it can then claim to "help" whilst making matters worse.
The State in order to maintain its claws on power requires the population to be reliant upon it for their day to day living. The only threat to its dominance is strong, stable family units which can support themselves for generations. Thus their delight in pushing through Marxist nonsense like the creation of male-male "marriages" and teaching children from age 5 that this is normal and healthy. Broken homes and constant confusion means guaranteed votes. The creation of yet more victims it can then claim to "help" whilst making matters worse.
Original post by thesabbath
Another law laid down by the mandatory totalitarian religious ideology, perversely named "Equality". So much for our critically thinking atheists. They're in hock to the only moral God that can enforce their so-called rights, the State.
The State in order to maintain its claws on power requires the population to be reliant upon it for their day to day living. The only threat to its dominance is strong, stable family units which can support themselves for generations. Thus their delight in pushing through Marxist nonsense like the creation of male-male "marriages" and teaching children from age 5 that this is normal and healthy. Broken homes and constant confusion means guaranteed votes. The creation of yet more victims it can then claim to "help" whilst making matters worse.
The State in order to maintain its claws on power requires the population to be reliant upon it for their day to day living. The only threat to its dominance is strong, stable family units which can support themselves for generations. Thus their delight in pushing through Marxist nonsense like the creation of male-male "marriages" and teaching children from age 5 that this is normal and healthy. Broken homes and constant confusion means guaranteed votes. The creation of yet more victims it can then claim to "help" whilst making matters worse.
I love how letting people do more stuff than they could before is totalitarian in your eyes.
Original post by mmmpie
I love how letting people do more stuff than they could before is totalitarian in your eyes.
Totalitarian: "of or pertaining to a centralized government that does not tolerate parties of differing opinion and that exercises dictatorial control over many aspects of life. "
well there's all the people who won't be able to work in the public sector if they disagree with it...
we'll see unlimited numbers of cases like this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2366000/Theyre-gays-village--Bowling-alley-chief-hits-lesbians-claim-refused-family-ticket-discrimination.html
there's the Government changing the dictionary definitions of "husband" and "wife"... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10147246/Men-can-be-wives-and-women-husbands-as-Government-overrules-the-dictionary.html
The "equality" doctrine becomes unchallengeable, because the cultural hegemony of the State says so.
A "marriage" no longer has meaning. It's now just a pairing of two (or more, coming soon) adults for tax benefits which is inexplicably closed to blood relations.
Original post by thesabbath
Totalitarian: "of or pertaining to a centralized government that does not tolerate parties of differing opinion and that exercises dictatorial control over many aspects of life. "
well there's all the people who won't be able to work in the public sector if they disagree with it...
we'll see unlimited numbers of cases like this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2366000/Theyre-gays-village--Bowling-alley-chief-hits-lesbians-claim-refused-family-ticket-discrimination.html
there's the Government changing the dictionary definitions of "husband" and "wife"... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10147246/Men-can-be-wives-and-women-husbands-as-Government-overrules-the-dictionary.html
The "equality" doctrine becomes unchallengeable, because the cultural hegemony of the State says so.
A "marriage" no longer has meaning. It's now just a pairing of two (or more, coming soon) adults for tax benefits which is inexplicably closed to blood relations.
well there's all the people who won't be able to work in the public sector if they disagree with it...
we'll see unlimited numbers of cases like this http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2366000/Theyre-gays-village--Bowling-alley-chief-hits-lesbians-claim-refused-family-ticket-discrimination.html
there's the Government changing the dictionary definitions of "husband" and "wife"... http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10147246/Men-can-be-wives-and-women-husbands-as-Government-overrules-the-dictionary.html
The "equality" doctrine becomes unchallengeable, because the cultural hegemony of the State says so.
A "marriage" no longer has meaning. It's now just a pairing of two (or more, coming soon) adults for tax benefits which is inexplicably closed to blood relations.
I forgot, you're another one that lacks the capacity for (independent) thought.
Original post by mmmpie
...was passed by Parliament a short time ago, and should receive Royal Assent tomorrow or maybe Thursday.
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by thesabbath
A "marriage" no longer has meaning. It's now just a pairing of two (or more, coming soon) adults for tax benefits which is inexplicably closed to blood relations.
Marriage has the same meaning it's always had - the formal union of a couple
Posted from TSR Mobile
My stance: We've still NOT reached FULL equality yet.
GOOD POINT: LGB (unsure for the rules on T) People can marry if they wish
BAD POINT: If full equality is to be reached, we need to apply this to civil partnerships
GOOD POINT: It sets an example for countries who are a) considering legalising - I guess we've looked at how successful the move has been in places like Spain, Belgium etc. b) ban homosexuality - it sets an example as to how LGBT people fit into society and could challenge the illegitimacy of homosexuality. C) Not a country, but the same could be said for homophobes. Say in a generation or so's time an LGBT marriage has survived to 20 years and still strong, it could change their perception on how 'harmful' it is
BAD POINT 2: There's still a hell of a lot of loopholes/rules for Transgender people which need to be changed to suit their rights.
GOOD POINT: LGB (unsure for the rules on T) People can marry if they wish
BAD POINT: If full equality is to be reached, we need to apply this to civil partnerships
GOOD POINT: It sets an example for countries who are a) considering legalising - I guess we've looked at how successful the move has been in places like Spain, Belgium etc. b) ban homosexuality - it sets an example as to how LGBT people fit into society and could challenge the illegitimacy of homosexuality. C) Not a country, but the same could be said for homophobes. Say in a generation or so's time an LGBT marriage has survived to 20 years and still strong, it could change their perception on how 'harmful' it is
BAD POINT 2: There's still a hell of a lot of loopholes/rules for Transgender people which need to be changed to suit their rights.
Don't understand people who are against gay marriage. If two lesbians want to get married, what has it got to do with you? Will the heavens fall? Will the world end? No. People also need to remember that no religious faith has the right to define marriage. Marriage in the UK belongs to the state, not church or faith.
What I don't get, is why all the anti lobby seem so obsessed with sex. It's kinda ironic, here is the gay community which is notoriously open about sex, and we're all watching with total bemusement while all the anti-same-sex marriage crowd froth at the mouth over it.
I was talking to some friends recently about it and we were just completely baffled that all these very conservative, all about the "sanctity of marriage" straight people seem to think that sex and it's side effects is the be-all and end-all of relationships. Most of us don't seem to attach that much importance to sex - it's great and all, but it's not the biggest deal in a relationship, nowhere near.
It just seems very strange to me. Straight people don't really identify sex with love do they? Or is it a generational thing?
I was talking to some friends recently about it and we were just completely baffled that all these very conservative, all about the "sanctity of marriage" straight people seem to think that sex and it's side effects is the be-all and end-all of relationships. Most of us don't seem to attach that much importance to sex - it's great and all, but it's not the biggest deal in a relationship, nowhere near.
It just seems very strange to me. Straight people don't really identify sex with love do they? Or is it a generational thing?
Original post by Student-Andrew
Are you serious? In the past incest was legal, but now it is illegal. Some countries still allowed to marry cousins ect but they are seen as backwards. If you are going to make a statement about history get it correct
Like the UK you mean
Original post by thesabbath
Totalitarian: "of or pertaining to a centralized government that does not tolerate parties of differing opinion and that exercises dictatorial control over many aspects of life. "
How is this any more "dictatorial" than any other law? Oh I see, it's just because you disagree with it.
I don't know if you can remember a few weeks ago, but I'm pretty sure there was in fact a lot of debate from both sides that was widely broadcast. Many MPs and Lords did in fact have a differing opinion to the government in power and those views were not suppressed in the slightest. If anything, they were given disproportionate air time considering they were the minority view (a fairly large minority, but still a minority).
And I don't see how they are dictating controls of an aspect of life. They are not forcing you to marry a man. They are not forcing religious organisations to perform gay marriages or accept them as part of their religion. They are not interfering with anyone's lives.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Why is it that every time I hear that someone is pregnant I automatically think about
- model answers macbeth jekyll and hyde
- .
- Marriage, sex and cheating
- Open relationships
- Being black (Somali), gay and Muslim
- Can a married man have a crush on a younger woman?
- Why is religion against sex?
- Am I aro, ace, or both
- Dolls' House compared to Bell Jar?
- muslim marriage advice
- Husband has never been physically intimate with me
- Help with Edexcel AS level politics question
- Relationships
- attracted to but deeply repulsed by guys at the same time
- Lesbian and my GF has no interest in sex
- Is it weird to be 23 and single?
- He's in love with me but ignoring me?
- What can I do once I am 16?
- Being a muslim girl (is sometimes hard)
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
