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

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

    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amankhanhussain)
    he asked do you agree with same gender marriage . my answer is NO. why on earth i give explanation . and evidence for what?
    I know.

    You give an explanation so your views can be criticised, and you can culture and develop your views.
    Oh I feel for humanity, so few people actually want to develop their characters and intellectual capacity.

    The point, evidence, and explain was just saying a general 3 things you should hope to achieve when making a post, like in a debate.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    well as a muslim, id say no, as the quaran teaches us that you get stoned to death for doing so. There is no but allah, mohammed is his messenger
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XcitingStuart)
    I know.

    You give an explanation so your views can be criticised, and you can culture and develop your views.
    Oh I feel for humanity, so few people actually want to develop their characters and intellectual capacity.

    The point, evidence, and explain was just saying a general 3 things you should hope to achieve when making a post, like in a debate.
    ok then. marriage is to make a family . have kids. and the generation keeps on. on the other hand you can't have kids. can't have a family . so no need for same-sex marriage.

    by the way you misspelled criticized ...
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XcitingStuart)
    The very act of not voting in favour of e.g. same-sex marriage helps prevent them from being allowed to get married, hence prevents them from just getting on with their lives.

    Very few people realise this.

    Though abstaining as opposed to voting against can be an admirable position.

    That's why I say you discriminate (or help discriminate to be semantic.)(Or contribute to the discrimination.)

    I know no one who truly adopts the "live and let live" principle for reasons like these.
    Because if you agreed with "live and let live", you'd vote in favour of allowance even if you personally disagree with it.
    And this can be applied to so many situations outside of those about homosexuality.

    But thanks for not supporting things like riots against them, and the unconditional love you say you hold, I suppose.
    I see your point, but do people really have to be married to be able to get on with their lives?
    I can't stop gay people from marrying, but I don't have to support it, and they can't demand a church, or anyone, to marry them, if they do not support it. This applies for all marriages, homosexual or heterosexual.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amankhanhussain)
    ok then. marriage is to make a family . have kids. and the generation keeps on. on the other hand you can't have kids. can't have a family . so no need for same-sex marriage.

    by the way you misspelled criticized ...
    No, criticise is the English spelling and criticize is the American English spelling. Good point though.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amankhanhussain)
    ok then. marriage is to make a family . have kids. and the generation keeps on. on the other hand you can't have kids. can't have a family . so no need for same-sex marriage.

    by the way you misspelled criticized ...
    You're giving me a panic attack... how dare you!?! How dare you criticise my spelling! My spelling is valid, and it's the British one, not the *******isation by Americans! The panic attack's due to the disgust I feel right now, and that your point is beneath my dignity.

    Get the hell off this British, student forum if you try to use that to attack me!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The_Internet)
    No

    Gay marriage is an abomination against God. It's not the natural order of things. We never had this "gay problem" until the 50's. It's a liberal western plot, to try and make people think they're gay. Not even animals are like this. It is wrong and should never be allowed.

    We should take all gay people and take them to the highest tower in the land, from where they can be pushed off.

    Spoiler:
    Show
    I don't really care if gay people get married or not; it doesn't affect me and no I don't hold those views
    Are you a recruiting sergeant for ISIS?
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XcitingStuart)
    You're giving me a panic attack... how dare you!?! How dare you criticise my spelling! My spelling is valid, and it's the British one, not the *******isation by Americans! The panic attack's due to the disgust I feel right now, and that your point is beneath my dignity.

    Get the hell off this British, student forum if you try to use that to attack me!
    I'm kinda torn here because I'm half English and half American...
    Both spellings are right okay - XcitingStuart;61342343 is right.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amankhanhussain)
    ok then. marriage is to make a family . have kids. and the generation keeps on. on the other hand you can't have kids. can't have a family . so no need for same-sex marriage.
    So by that rationale the millions of heterosexual married couples around the world that either chose not have children or are simply unable to do so should have their marriages declared null and void?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XcitingStuart)
    You're giving me a panic attack... how dare you!?! How dare you criticise my spelling! My spelling is valid, and it's the British one, not the *******isation by Americans! The panic attack's due to the disgust I feel right now, and that your point is beneath my dignity.

    Get the hell off this British, student forum if you try to use that to attack me!
    oh . you gonna kiss your mother with that mouth.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    So by that rationale the millions of heterosexual married couples around the world that either chose not have children or are simply unable to do so should have their marriages declared null and void?
    the point is they can . the heterosexual ca. and the homosexual can't .
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FollowingJC24/7)
    No, criticise is the English spelling and criticize is the American English spelling. Good point though.
    thanks for the precious info.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    Are you a recruiting sergeant for ISIS?
    Yes
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amankhanhussain)
    the point is they can . the heterosexual ca. and the homosexual can't .
    The point is that NOT ALL heterosexuals can and/or choose to. Your premise is that the sole purpose of marriage is to "have kids" so I'll ask you again - are those marriages that fail to produce offspring invalid?

    And, I'll ask you this; - since when was marriage needed to have children? Christian marriage as we know it today only started in 1184 at the Council of Verona. Did nobody produce children for the 100,000 odd years of man's existence prior to this time?
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    The point is that NOT ALL heterosexuals can and/or choose to. Your premise is that the sole purpose of marriage is to "have kids" so I'll ask you again - are those marriages that fail to produce offspring invalid?

    And, I'll ask you this; - since when was marriage needed to have children? Christian marriage as we know it today only started in 1184 at the Council of Verona. Did nobody produce children for the 100,000 odd years of man's existence prior to this time?
    Many jews don't support same-sex marriage.

    Also, on a human level, irrespective of religious belief, it is much better for the kid if you're married first, as it means that you are usually less likely to split up. This means the kid will most likely live with married parents, which on the whole is usually a lot better for them. The child should come first.

    Marriages without offspring are not invalid, of course, it often just makes more sense for people to be able to have kids if they want to, and they can only do this if they are with a partner of the opposite sex. If you want to have kids, unless you are an adulterer or adopt, you have to be in a heterosexual relationship.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by IBIB)
    well as a muslim, id say no, as the quaran teaches us that you get stoned to death for doing so. There is no but allah, mohammed is his messenger
    If that's the sort of thing the Qu'ran teaches you why not put it down a grab a telephone directory or a Yellow Pages - you'll find more wisdom in it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by FollowingJC24/7)
    Many jews don't support same-sex marriage.

    Also, on a human level, irrespective of religious belief, it is much better for the kid if you're married first, as it means that you are usually less likely to split up. This means the kid will most likely live with married parents, which on the whole is usually a lot better for them. The child should come first.

    Marriages without offspring are not invalid, of course, it often just makes more sense for people to be able to have kids if they want to, and they can only do this if they are with a partner of the opposite sex. If you want to have kids, unless you are an adulterer or adopt, you have to be in a heterosexual relationship.
    I don't care what many Jews do or don't support. And I'm not here arguing about the merits or benefits of marriage as a family arrangement within which children might be better raised.

    Let's stick to the point. The only reason put to me so far as to why gays shouldn't be allowed to marry is that the purpose of marriage is to have kids. Says who? Evidently untrue as millions don't or can't.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    I don't understand why people would be against it. If you don't like same-sex marriages, don't get one. Doesn't mean you should be a nuisance to other people and be against them living their life separately to yours?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amankhanhussain)
    the point is they can . the heterosexual ca. and the homosexual can't .
    So, you'd ban marriage for heterosexual couples past childbearing age, then? If a woman is, say, 45 or 50 or more, she can't have children any more, so she shouldn't be able to get married to a man? Is that your argument?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Howard)
    If that's the sort of thing the Qu'ran teaches you why not put it down a grab a telephone directory or a Yellow Pages - you'll find more wisdom in it.
    May be above their reading level
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
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.