Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Do you agree with Same-sex marriage? watch

Announcements
  • View Poll Results: Do you agree with Same-sex Marriage?
    Yes!
    355
    77.34%
    NO!!!
    104
    22.66%

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Yes on a legal basis. No on forcing religions to accept it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Eigo-Jin)
    haha yes I admit that going through their site can make me giggle but still-there are intelligent people on the pro flat Earth side. A lot of them know their physics!
    No they don't!!!!!!! If they knew their physics, they'd very, very quickly realize it's impossible. I study the structure of the Earth's interior, exterior (as in the surface) and things like Gravity, Magnetism etc. They are so wrong. It hurts.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by driftawaay)
    What I said was factually correct, there is nothing 'open minded' or 'closed minded' about objective facts.
    ' Anybody who says something like that should be chained to a crucifix and left to die.'

    Yes, you're quite right, this is an objective, indisputable fact.

    That was sarcasm. In actual fact you're not really making much sense.

    Try not to be so nasty about people. Remember, Jesus loves you!
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by elliemayxo)
    It has everything to do with it.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Because...

    (Original post by footygirlx)
    Being opressed because of your race and not being able to marry even though there are civil partnerships is completely different.
    Yes, one's got to do with your race, the other, your sexual orientation.
    Civil partnerships and marriage aren't the same, see my other post to you regarding this matter.

    (Original post by saeed97)
    The irony of her calling people idiots.
    ...is that there is no irony? What a useless comment you made.

    (Original post by elliemayxo)
    You're not going to get very far in this world if you can't handle other people's opinions, whether you agree or not.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I'm going to quote SophieSmall here


    (Original post by SophieSmall)
    That doesn't mean it can't, or shouldn't be challenged.
    /line break/
    /line break/

    (Original post by SophieSmall)
    The issues are different, but I applied the exact same logic you used to show how your logic is flawed. Just because something exists for a reason and just because it's been around for a while does not necessarily make it right or okay.
    They just love the idea of a status quo. :laugh:

    (Original post by ravioliyears)
    In what way? That's such a blunt answer
    I'd say vague, and reiterative of her point without further adieu (her going round in circles), but yeah.

    (Original post by footygirlx)
    Slavery violets someones basic human rights regardless of what a relgiious text may say. Being able to marry does not if there are civil partnerships avaliable.
    ...And contribute to the stigma, and the antithesis of the integration.

    Also, see my other post about civil partnerships.

    (Original post by elliemayxo)
    Maybe, but at least I have the ability to respect other people's.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    That's called being passive.

    (Original post by elliemayxo)
    I've explained this too many times on TSR. If God wanted gay men then he would of created two men instead of a man and a woman.

    But guess what? A woman and a man were created because they can conceive, and it's the natural way.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    What about Adam and Adam, or Adam and Steve?! :gasp:
    Or even Adam, Steve and Eve, a threesome! :gasp: :gasp: The blasphemy!

    (Original post by driftawaay)
    Normal people don't respect bigotry.
    I'd say respectable people don't respect bigotry. :grin:

    (Original post by elliemayxo)
    Hahaha, I'm not homophobic. I don't agree with homosexuals, it's not like I have anything against them I just disagree with the acts.

    Grow up and stop labelling people as racist or homophobic just because you don't agree with their views.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The acts? There's no such thing as homosexual acts (apart from frotting, within the definition.)
    Homosexuals are those with the sole sexual attraction to the same sex, nothing more. Stop adding something more onto it.

    (Original post by footygirlx)
    Why does it have to be changed when equality already exists.
    Hardly.
    Are you actually ****ing kidding me?
    (About "equality already exists."

    (Original post by elliemayxo)
    Normal? What do you define as normal?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Valid question, 'cos I'd disagree with her semantically.
    In that context I presume she means morally good people.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JD1lla)
    No they don't!!!!!!! If they knew their physics, they'd very, very quickly realize it's impossible. I study the structure of the Earth's interior, exterior (as in the surface) and things like Gravity, Magnetism etc. They are so wrong. It hurts.
    Believe me, they find WAYS :eek:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by elliemayxo)
    I've explained this too many times on TSR. If God wanted gay men then he would of created two men instead of a man and a woman.

    But guess what? A woman and a man were created because they can conceive, and it's the natural way.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    So then are you saying that natural is best?
    Thus, painkillers shouldn't be used in birth, women shouldn't have access to tampons/pads, all artificial medicine created by science should be discarded, etc? Cancer treatments should be tossed out the window, phones and TVs should take a hike, the internet should be destroyed? These are all unnatural things, y'know!

    Sorry, it's just a too-obvious flaw, I couldn't help but correct it (even though I hate getting involved in these discussions, so please feel free to not reply to this. We'll have our difference of opinion and I will enjoy the fact that if I want to, I can marry another lady when I'm older)

    Honestly, (I'm assuming you're straight, forgive me if I'm wrong) it's not an issue that pertains to you - just like debates on ethnic minorities don't pertain to you (I'm assuming you're white, forgive me if I'm wrong). Or at least, that's my opinion. All I know is that tbh I find the idea of marriage and conceiving gross/terrifying (btw you just totally invalidated the existence of every infertile female in the world with your statement which is a little mean?? Like. You are worth more than your uterus. If you don't think that about yourself then that's really not healthy and please see someone about it because nobody should have self-worth problems) any which way, but if people want to then hey, they're not hurting anyone!
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    I hate it when people phrase the question do you 'agree' with it... it doesn't really make sense. I do agree that same sex marriage should be legal though.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XcitingStuart)
    No

    :grin: :laugh:

    (Well nothing's stopping you, but I'll criticise regardless Samosa-sama. )
    I just see it as a religious thing :dontknow:

    But at the same time, it's not really my right to dictate others lives.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathematicus65)
    This is totally incorrect. In Romans, homosexuality is referred to as "a shameful act" and an "abandonment of natural relations". In Jude homosexuality is defined as "immorality and perversion" . It also says in Romans that "homosexuality carries a due penalty" when it comes to inheriting the Kingdom of God. This is just the few I can think of currently. Homosexuality is a sin in both the new and old testaments, however admittedly language is softened in the former. Only flat-earthers could deny that the bible preaches homosexuality to be sinful
    No, not totally incorrect. That passage, and others using the Greek word arsenokoites, are highly debated. Heck, the word is extremely rare - used a grand total of 73 times in all Church writings - and it may have even been coined by Paul. It's ambiguous enough that the translation is up in the air, ranging from anything to "male prostitute" "homosexual rape" "anal sex" and all sorts of stuff like that by pro-homosexuality people, and things like "homosexual activity" "one who beds with a man" "Pederasty", etc. Not everyone can be right, and both sides have wildly varying 'translations' of a single word. It's certainly not enough evidence to justify slamming the entirety of homosexuality because of such slim, ambiguous evidence.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by elliemayxo)
    I've explained this too many times on TSR. If God wanted gay men then he would of created two men instead of a man and a woman.

    But guess what? A woman and a man were created because they can conceive, and it's the natural way.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    So are you saying god made a mistake when he put homosexuals and infertile people on this earth. Because that is what your logic (or lack there of) suggests.

    ...I'm sure you know how blasphemous it is to suggest god made a mistake.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eoe)
    Far too may Gay Rights Fundamentalists on here.
    What's wrong with that, exactly? Gay rights all the way - regardless of something as insignificant as sexual preferences - we are all human beings, and thus deserving of the same rights.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mathematicus65)
    Apologies for your Idiocracy but marriage DOES NOT predate Christianity
    Hello! As someone who does a lot of classics stuff, I can tell you that the early Ancient Romans (~600BC, pre-dating Christianity by a looooong time) had both marriage and divorce laws!
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by footygirlx)
    I know but what can we do about that.
    Invade them?
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by KingBradly)
    I completely support same-sex marriage but in one respect it's a shame that it was legalized. Christianity doesn't except homosexuality, full stop. It is a backwards, outdated, incredibly stupid religion that should just be left to die out, rather than adapted to suit the modern world.
    Technically, Roman Catholics now accept that people can't choose their sexuality, and also, Christianity doesn't agree with gay sex. How would I know? Bible college student at the Moorlands Bible College online. And yes I do support same-sex marriage as I'm gay
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by roarchika)
    Hello! As someone who does a lot of classics stuff, I can tell you that the early Ancient Romans (~600BC, pre-dating Christianity by a looooong time) had both marriage and divorce laws!
    And funny enough the Romans had same sex marriage too, so quite hilariously he is denying marriage existed before his religion...and yet same sex marriage existed before it. Oh the irony.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by elen90)
    No, not totally incorrect. That passage, and others using the Greek word arsenokoites, are highly debated. Heck, the word is extremely rare - used a grand total of 73 times in all Church writings - and it may have even been coined by Paul. It's ambiguous enough that the translation is up in the air, ranging from anything to "male prostitute" "homosexual rape" "anal sex" and all sorts of stuff like that by pro-homosexuality people, and things like "homosexual activity" "one who beds with a man" "Pederasty", etc. Not everyone can be right, and both sides have wildly varying 'translations' of a single word. It's certainly not enough evidence to justify slamming the entirety of homosexuality because of such slim, ambiguous evidence.
    Also (and this is only vaguely relevant), Propertius at least was hella bi/pansexual (had both male and female lovers and wrote about them both), and he was both pretty well-known and pretty well-respected, being one of the few Augustan Love Elegists!
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by roarchika)
    Also (and this is only vaguely relevant), Propertius at least was hella bi/pansexual (had both male and female lovers and wrote about them both), and he was both pretty well-known and pretty well-respected, being one of the few Augustan Love Elegists!
    Isn't history fun? :daydreaming:
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SophieSmall)
    Isn't history fun? :daydreaming:
    The fun-nest! Why, whatever would we do without history? I'd be down an A Level without history, and then I'd be saaaaaaaaad
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SophieSmall)
    Isn't history fun? :daydreaming:
    Love me some late-night history lessons :danceboy:
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by roarchika)
    The fun-nest! Why, whatever would we do without history? I'd be down an A Level without history, and then I'd be saaaaaaaaad
    I've always quite liked history, never pursued it academically though. It's a passing interest I read up on.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.