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

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Heteronormative)
    Bloody hell you gays are rubbish arnt you?
    why do you think I'm gay?
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Very Important Poster
    Peer Support Volunteers
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Heteronormative)
    I always assumed that they were no longer atheists; thats why they take their vows before God - if they acknowledge God in their lives why do you call them atheist?
    Why do you assume gay people aren't Religious?

    (Original post by Heteronormative)
    No, your view is too narrow and naively simplistic. Marriage is a legal construct recognizing two families combining to produce offspring and combining estates to propagate their continued existence - homosexual relationships do not yet fulfill this criteria because they are a dead end genetically.
    Marriage:

    1.0 The legally or formally recognized union of a man and a woman (or, in some jurisdictions, two people of the same sex) as partners in a relationship
    1.1 The state of being married

    Sorry, but I don't see anything about offspring there

    (Original post by Heteronormative)
    Why? I've already said "Marriage is not "a recognition of a loving relationship" because there are arranged marriages and no real mechanism/test for detecting 'love', its an arrangement; sometimes ppl just do it because they have children and unifying would be better for the children even if the initial infatuation has long worn off." So stop trying to pull that same old lame gay trick. What the heterosexual couple have is the offspring or the intention to produce or the hope of producing genetic offspring an area where gays are mute so you avoid it. Marriage separates itself from civil partnerships because its a family building foundation.
    Not every heterosexual couple has children, but a lot of same-sex couples do. If arranged marriages are enough of a warrant that love can't be a reason for marriage, then infertile couples are enough of a warrant for children not to be a reason either.

    (Original post by Heteronormative)
    If you just want your perverted 'love' claim recognised - civil partnerships are sufficient.
    Claim? What make it any more of a claim than a heterosexual couple?

    I was asking for evidence that homosexuality will 'cause society endless problems'. This is not that.
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    yes

    (fashionably late to this debate)
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Sure. Can't think of a single reason why not.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Trying to think of a reason why I don't support gay marriage, not coming up with any reasons. Oh wait, it's because it's none of my frickin' business. It effects me in absolutely no way, however I'm not so sure I agree on them being able to adopt because I'd want studies to show it has no negative impact. Non biased studies because I definitely do believe it is a huge burden on the children. Then again plenty of children have one parent/no parents, so not sure if that is any better. That one is more of a grey area.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saxsan4)
    It doesn't harm anyone, Love is love and it is taking away rights from the LGBT community.
    I don't agree with it.

    I believe marriage is a religious ceremony and same Sex plus registry ceremonies should carry the same legal rights but be a civil partnership


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shadowdweller)
    Why do you assume gay people aren't Religious?
    I made no such assumption. I said if they were Bible Believers [Christian] they would obey what it says in the Bible about same sex coupling - If they believed that, it would invalidate their 'marriage'.

    Marriage:

    1.0 The legally or formally recognized union of a man and a woman (or, in some jurisdictions, two people of the same sex) as partners in a relationship
    1.1 The state of being married

    Sorry, but I don't see anything about offspring there
    Typical gay arsed cheap trick, rip a few verses out of a [US] dictionary completely out of context to UK law and the Necessitarian Theory on which it is based, well OK, you have to start somewhere so I'll build on that. A dictionary definition is not a stipulation of law and carries no legal weight; ius naturalehowever does and that is the foundation of UK law. Also recognised here:
    Article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights declares that
    "Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. ."[1]

    Sorry, but I do see something about offspring there

    Not every heterosexual couple has children, but a lot of same-sex couples do. If arranged marriages are enough of a warrant that love can't be a reason for marriage, then infertile couples are enough of a warrant for children not to be a reason either.
    No same sexed couple has ever had genetic progeny entirely of their own DNA.
    As for the emboldened: asked and answered but never rebutted here:

    "Infertility" here is a medical diagnosis which can be incorrect or reversed. Marriage is arranged regardless because one or both of the couple doesnt know/accept or doesnt trust the diagnosis or expects a correction or lives in hope of a medical intervention at some stage that will reverse their fortunes and allow conception - this position does not contradict the marriage. Now [in the case of two [perverts] trying to use this same logic they must not know/accept or not trust their perverted lifestyle choice or expect a correction or lives in hope of a medical intervention at some stage that will reverse their mis-fortune to be a [pervert] - this position would contradict the validity of their pervert 'marriage' if they expected to be cured from gayness during the lifetime of their gay marriage wouldnt it?"
    Claim? What make it any more of a claim than a heterosexual couple?
    Didnt you mean to say "any less", never mind - I'm maintaining for now that a claim is just a claim and uncontested could be falsehood. I didnt say ones claim was better than another but natural law may speak better of that than I can.
    I was asking for evidence that homosexuality will 'cause society endless problems'. This is not that.
    No you never asked that - repost/link to where you asked that!
    • TSR Support Team
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    (Original post by Heteronormative)
    Typical gay arsed cheap trick, rip a few verses out of a [US] dictionary completely out of context to UK law and the Necessitarian Theory on which it is based, well OK, you have to start somewhere so I'll build on that. A dictionary definition is not a stipulation of law and carries no legal weight; ius naturalehowever does and that is the foundation of UK law. Also recognised here:
    Article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights declares that
    "Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. ."[1]

    Sorry, but I do see something about offspring there
    Actually you don't unless you're purposefully reading it wrong. You have the right to marry and you have the right to start a family. They're two separate rights and one does not necessitate the other.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Stiff Little Fingers)
    Actually you don't unless you're purposefully reading it wrong. You have the right to marry and you have the right to start a family. They're two separate rights and one does not necessitate the other.
    Thats your interpretation of the UDoHR, I would argue why did they word it that way if not alluding to ius naturale which is intrinsic to the UK legal code which is what we are talking about here.
    If you are a non-Christian, maybe its not to you, but if you are a non-Christian why would you want to get married? If you are a Christian then one right would have to necessitate the other and in the UK where we have ius naturale then its already recognised by our lawmakers that the two are interrelated. All this conspires to exclude perverts from the process of marriage.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Heteronormative)
    Thats your interpretation of the UDoHR, I would argue why did they word it that way if not alluding to ius naturalewhich is intrinsic to the UK legal code which is what we are talking about here.
    If you are a non-Christian, maybe its not to you, but if you are a non-Christian why would you want to get married? If you are a Christian then one right would have to necessitate the other and in the UK where we have ius naturalethen its already recognised by our lawmakers that the two are interrelated. All this conspires to exclude perverts from the process of marriage.
    Because marriage is a state institution that was adopted by religion, not the other way around.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    I voted yes. Or rather it's one of those things I don't get the big deal about. If they want to get married, then let them.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Heteronormative)
    Even if I were to give you that - it was still heterosexual wasnt it? so perverts were always excluded from the process state or church anyway.

    Now explain to us why battyboys and muffdivers should have marriage?
    You should give me that, as it's a fact, but I'll pass over your blatant disregard for that.

    The only reason homosexuality was ever seen as immoral/was outlawed is because people used to/do base their morals on their holy book. As society has moved away from religion being the only moral code, and more towards atheism/agnosticism/moderate interpretations of religion, we don't have this bigoted view that homosexuality is something immoral or to be criminalised. Our moral systems now - in Europe generally speaking - are based less off the rules and codes set out in moral books and more on what we feel and view as morally correct, such as allowing all people the freedom, and their basic right, to marry the person they wish to, regardless of their gender.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I liked, and then I saw your comments about it being a burden on the child ...
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    I have no idea why people get so angry with same sex couples getting married. If you don't like gay marriage, don't marry someone of the same sex, simple. Why does it also have to be accompanied by so much innane moralising?
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Peer Support Volunteers
    • PS Reviewer
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Very Important Poster
    Peer Support Volunteers
    PS Reviewer
    (Original post by Heteronormative)
    I made no such assumption. I said if they were Bible Believers [Christian] they would obey what it says in the Bible about same sex coupling - If they believed that, it would invalidate their 'marriage'
    Because clearly people follow every single thing stated in the bible?

    (Original post by Heteronormative)
    Typical gay arsed cheap trick, rip a few verses out of a [US] dictionary completely out of context to UK law and the Necessitarian Theory on which it is based, well OK, you have to start somewhere so I'll build on that. A dictionary definition is not a stipulation of law and carries no legal weight; ius naturalehowever does and that is the foundation of UK law. Also recognised here:
    Article 16 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights declares that
    "Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. ."[1]

    Sorry, but I do see something about offspring there
    Except that contradicts what you said. That states they have the right to found a family, not that having offspring is a criteria of marriage.

    (Original post by Heteronormative)
    No same sexed couple has ever had genetic progeny entirely of their own DNA.
    As for the emboldened: asked and answered but never rebutted here:

    "Infertility" here is a medical diagnosis which can be incorrect or reversed. Marriage is arranged regardless because one or both of the couple doesnt know/accept or doesnt trust the diagnosis or expects a correction or lives in hope of a medical intervention at some stage that will reverse their fortunes and allow conception - this position does not contradict the marriage. Now [in the case of two [perverts] trying to use this same logic they must not know/accept or not trust their perverted lifestyle choice or expect a correction or lives in hope of a medical intervention at some stage that will reverse their mis-fortune to be a [pervert] - this position would contradict the validity of their pervert 'marriage' if they expected to be cured from gayness during the lifetime of their gay marriage wouldnt it?"
    Except that that's nonsense :lol:

    People get married in the full knowledge that they will never be able to, or never want to have children. Some may hope their diagnosis was wrong, but others will not, and they still marry.

    (Original post by Heteronormative)
    Didnt you mean to say "any less", never mind - I'm maintaining for now that a claim is just a claim and uncontested could be falsehood. I didnt say ones claim was better than another but natural law may speak better of that than I can.
    No, I meant any more. A claim is just a claim with any sexuality, no?

    (Original post by Heteronormative)
    No you never asked that - repost/link to where you asked that!
    In the post I quoted, you said "until then they will continue thinking that they are normal and cause decent society endless problems", that's what I was asking for evidence of. You didn't make any claims about a cure, simply that you thought there should be one; and that doesn't need supporting evidence.
    • Very Important Poster
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by Quantex)
    I have no idea why people get so angry with same sex couples getting married. If you don't like gay marriage, don't marry someone of the same sex, simple. Why does it also have to be accompanied by so much innane moralising?
    This what I don't get. It doesn't affect me, therefore, I don't have a right to be angry.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Anyone else getting a really gay vibe from Heteronormative?

    Never seen such an embarrassing case of a closet homosexual who, riddled with self-loathe and insecurity, is being driven to homophobia to convince themselves that they're not 'one of them'.

    It's okay mate, we're here for you.

    (Either that or your parents are genuinely terrible people for indoctrinating you with such spiteful and close-minded viewpoints towards other people - regardless, I feel sorry for you. We're all a big family here on TSR and happy to help you with your troubles).
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Yes I agree with same sex marriage...Live and let live....
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    Do not agree with it because I do not agree with any sort of marriage. Marriage ought to be abolished entirely - such an out of date institution
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    No
 
 
 
Poll
Do you think parents should charge rent?
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.