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

B876 - Divorce Bill 2015 (Second Reading) watch

Announcements
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    Legally, the definition has changed, so ummm....get over it.

    No, it does not have anything to do with you. Why should some people be allowed to marry but not others?

    I honestly cannot take you seriously when you can't tell the difference between your and you're. Never the less, if we are always looking to the past, we will never progress in the future.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I don't care about the legal status. Marriage as an institution is a union between a man and a woman and does not apply to homosexuals.

    Homosexuals had civil partnerships/union with the same status as marriage. Marriage is and has always been a union between a man and a woman.

    Yes and in the future marriage should be defined between a man and a woman. It should be defended as an institution and not subjected to change. Save your liberal/leftist progressive views for yourself will you. Leftist scum.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Ali1302)
    I don't care about the legal status. Marriage as an institution is a union between a man and a woman and does not apply to homosexuals.

    Homosexuals had civil partnerships/union with the same status as marriage. Marriage is and has always been a union between a man and a woman.

    Yes and in the future marriage should be defined between a man and a woman. It should be defended as an institution and not subjected to change. Save your liberal/leftist progressive views for yourself will you. Leftist scum.
    Well, you kind of should because well, it's law. Marriage is defined by the law.

    It was not the same status, as heterosexuals got the benefits of marriage and homosexuals didn't get these same benefits.

    It should be defined between all people. It is not leftist. It's equality. And again, I'm not left-wing, not that it matters as plenty of Conservative Party members (irl and I'm sure on TSR too) support Same-sex marriage and they certainly aren't left wing.

    Also, I don't appreciate being referred to as scum, though if I'm scum it makes you a lot worse than what I could get away with saying on this website.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ali1302)
    The definition will never change and should never change. Marriage is between one man and one woman period. Plus your stupid argument doesn't apply to me because I'm vegan. No one gets to hijack or change the definition be it the homosexuals or those that believe in bestiality. Marriage will always remain between a man and a woman.
    Well then you've abandoned the "tradition" of your ancestors by not eating meat. A fan of viking burials? I hope so, that's your ancestral tradition

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    Well, you kind of should because well, it's law. Marriage is defined by the law.

    It was not the same status, as heterosexuals got the benefits of marriage and homosexuals didn't get these same benefits.

    It should be defined between all people. It is not leftist. It's equality. And again, I'm not left-wing, not that it matters as plenty of Conservative Party members (irl and I'm sure on TSR too) support Same-sex marriage and they certainly aren't left wing.

    Also, I don't appreciate being referred to as scum, though if I'm scum it makes you a lot worse than what I could get away with saying on this website.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    It has nothing to with rights or equality. It has to do with destroying the institution of marriage which you are actively doing right now. You don't care that much about the institution of marriage do you?

    Marriage has always been defined as a union between a man and a woman. It should and will always be recognised as such. The benefits given by the government were to incentivize marriage in order to encourage people to have natural children and families with a father and a mother.

    The conservative party members in this forum are all scum and traitors. They have no values and are all an insult to their ancestors. Go ahead and promote homosexuality and continue doing the gay communities bidding.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ali1302)
    It has nothing to with rights or equality. It has to do with destroying the institution of marriage which you are actively doing right now. You don't care that much about the institution of marriage do you?

    Marriage has always been defined as a union between a man and a woman. I t should and will always be recognised as such. The benefits given by the government were to incentivize marriage in order to encourage people to have natural children and families with a father and a mother.

    The conservative party members in this forum are all scum and traitors. They are no values and are all an insult to their ancestors. Go ahead and promote homosexuality and continue doing the gay communities bidding.
    As a Catholic I actually care massively about the istutition of marriage
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    Well then you've abandoned the "tradition" of your ancestors by not eating meat. A fan of viking burials? I hope so, that's your ancestral tradition

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I'm not even going to bother responding to your stupid arguments. You have no values and wish to try and destroy the institution of marriage which defined all of your ancestors unions.
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ali1302)
    It has nothing to with rights or equality. It has to do with destroying the institution of marriage which you are actively doing right now. You don't care that much about the institution of marriage do you?

    Marriage has always been defined as a union between a man and a woman. I t should and will always be recognised as such. The benefits given by the government were to incentivize marriage in order to encourage people to have natural children and families with a father and a mother.

    The conservative party members in this forum are all scum and traitors. They are no values and are all an insult to their ancestors. Go ahead and promote homosexuality and continue doing the gay communities bidding.
    Mhmm

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    As a Catholic I actually care massively about the istutition of marriage
    Then you have an obligation to protect the definition of marriage and not let homosexuals or those who believe in unions with animals to hijack or change the definition of marriage.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Ali1302)
    It has nothing to with rights or equality. It has to do with destroying the institution of marriage which you are actively doing right now. You don't care that much about the institution of marriage do you?

    Marriage has always been defined as a union between a man and a woman. I t should and will always be recognised as such. The benefits given by the government were to incentivize marriage in order to encourage people to have natural children and families with a father and a mother.

    The conservative party members in this forum are all scum and traitors. They are no values and are all an insult to their ancestors. Go ahead and promote homosexuality and continue doing the gay communities bidding.
    No, I do not. I'm an athiest and I believe that marriage is not needed. I'm not saying I hate marriage or that I'd never get married, I just don't see why there is so much value placed on it.

    Just because it has always been like that, doesn't mean things will stay like that. Change is inevitable.

    I really hope the rest of UKIP do not share your views

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ali1302)
    Then you have an obligation to protect the definition of marriage and not let homosexuals or those who believe in unions with Christianity hijack or change the definition of marriage.
    Actually I have an obligation to try and life my live according to the guidance Jesus, God's only son, gave to us. Would Jesus have denied equal rights to people? Would Jesus promote hatred or intolerance? Most certainly not. As Christians we should celebrate love, comittment and companionship regardless of gender, and faithful marriage is a fantastic way to do that.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PetrosAC)
    No, I do not.

    Just because it has always been like that, doesn't mean things will stay like that. Change is inevitable.

    I really hope the rest of UKIP do not share your views

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    They do. Not you or anyone else would destroy the institution of marriage.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Ali1302)
    They do. Not you or anyone else would destroy the institution of marriage.
    That's a shame. I'm sure some of their members do see sense though.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    Actually I have an obligation to try and life my live according to the guidance Jesus, God's only son, gave to us. Would Jesus have denied equal rights to people? Would Jesus promote hatred or intolerance? Most certainly not. As Christians we should celebrate love, comittment and companionship regardless of gender, and faithful marriage is a fantastic way to do that.
    Jesus, who sat at a table with prostitutes and thieves, who did not judge, who loved everyone equally, who spent everyday of his life helping the poor, who preached socialism, who preached equality. Does Ali really expect me, an Agnostic Christian, to believe that this great man would not have supported gay marriage?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Ali1302)
    They do. Not you or anyone else would destroy the institution of marriage.
    Marriage has never been defined as a union between a man and a woman, originally it was merely a trade agreement, if you'd like to go back to that then fair enough, otherwise you have no right to talk about tradition when you only mean homophobia.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Saoirse:3)
    Actually I have an obligation to try and life my live according to the guidance Jesus, God's only son, gave to us. Would Jesus have denied equal rights to people? Would Jesus promote hatred or intolerance? Most certainly not. As Christians we should celebrate love, comittment and companionship regardless of gender, and faithful marriage is a fantastic way to do that.
    Marriage has always been between a man and a woman. I'm not promoting hatred or intolerance I want to protect the institution of marriage which results in the creation of natural children and families. Families with both a mother and a father. Civil unions/partnerships have the same status as marriage. Marriage is used only to define the special and unique union between a man and a woman. No one should hijack or change this definition.
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by James Milibanter)
    Marriage has never been defined as a union between a man and a woman, originally it was merely a trade agreement, if you'd like to go back to that then fair enough, otherwise you have no right to talk about tradition when you only mean homophobia.
    Hear hear!

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by James Milibanter)
    Jesus, who sat at a table with prostitutes and thieves, who did not judge, who loved everyone equally, who spent everyday of his life helping the poor, who preached socialism, who preached equality. Does Ali really expect me, an Agnostic Christian, to believe that this great man would not have supported gay marriage?
    Marriage is a special union between a man and a woman that results in the creation of children and families with a mother and a father. It is the institution which the vast majority of men and women on earth are born out of. To change the definition of marriage is to destroy the special union in which most human life on earth is born out of. Marriage isn't simply based off of emotions but benefit society and the community as a whole. Marriage represents the self giving, life giving moral nature of God perfectly. Even if you aren't religious you have to understand the biological importance of this union and without it probably you and I wouldn't exist.
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ali1302)
    Marriage is a special union between a man and a woman that results in the creation of children and families with a mother and a father. It is the institution which the vast majority of men and women on earth are born out of. To change the definition of marriage is to destroy the special union in which most human life on earth is born out of. Marriage isn't simply based off of emotions but benefit society and the community as a whole. Marriage represents the self giving, life giving moral nature of God perfectly. Even if you aren't religious you have to understand the biological importance of this union and without it probably you and I wouldn't exist.
    Procreation happened along time before marriage.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Wiki Support Team
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by That Bearded Man)
    Procreation happened along time before marriage.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Would rep but I'm on mobile

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ali1302)
    Marriage has always been between a man and a woman. I'm not promoting hatred or intolerance I want to protect the institution of marriage which results in the creation of natural children and families. Families with both mother and a father. Civil unions/partnerships have the same status as marriage but using the word marriage is used only to define the special and unique union between a man and a woman. No one should hijack or change this definition.
    Change isn't a bad thing Sure, it typically has been between a man and a woman before, but for me as a Christian it's not what it's about. It's about the ultimate love, faith and partnership between people who are wholly comitted to each other, and that can happen regardless of gender.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: November 11, 2015
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?

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.