General Discussion

[emw80]

---

PatC_PSN wrote:

---

emw80 wrote:

What gays are doing when they "fight" for rights to get wed in a church is abuse the rights of the people who own the churchs, to FORCE them to do something they dont want to allow on THEIR PROPERTY, dont mess with other peoples property rights.  

---

Your homophobia is becoming as tedious as it is predictable.

---

How is anything i wrote "bad" in anyway, ah i get it, you want it to look bad right?

To be clear, I have no issue at all if gay couples do or even want to get married in a church (I dont even care TBH), but as the property owners of the building and/or land the building sits on, then they as the property owners have THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE what they want to allow or not allow to take place on it, it IS that simple. (the only reason i mentioned it is down to this "accept us" nonsense)

Or do you think if a group wants to do something on your property then they should have the right to take away your rights so as they can do so?

BTW, just so YOU'RE clear on this,, IF I or other people choose to not accept something you have accepted, or they have opposing or dissenting views that you or even the majority of people don't agree with or accept, then that has NOTHING to do with anyone else unless there is physical harm or threats involved. But we're ALL entitled to voice our opinions.

Whether you take offence or not is down to the individual, but in no way shape or form should this mean you lose your right to voice your opinion or are made to feel that you shouldn't either.

Do you enjoy your free speech Pat, or do you just have an issue when other people say things YOU don't want to hear or agree with? Preserving your public image doesn't always mean you have to say or go along with the status quo, or the accepted norms of society.

[Dannehkins]

You'll find that some gay people are actually quite religious despite most religions not shining too kindly on homosexuality. So for them, I suppose it is a particular nuisance because in their religion, marriage is the usual done thing to bond two people who love each other; however, they're not allowed to do so.

But from another angle, but on the same point, I believe civil partnerships don't carry as much benefits as a marriage couple do. In my eyes, they should be on the same page regarding the benefits and other perks people receive when they are married.

And on the point above - not you my dear Pat - nobody ever got equal rights by just sitting around and hoping some person one day decided, "Oh I know, let's give them a break and make it all equal." They fight because effectively, that's the only way to get reform and change.

[Gawge]

I believe the campaign is for 'gay marriage' to be equal to any other marriage in the eyes of the law. Not about forcing any person/group to marry these people.

[xElfenLied_US]

What makes me laugh is, straight/homophobic people have no idea what it's like. Would you like it if we didn't allow you to marry because you're black? No, we had to move on from that time, because it's WRONG to discriminate someone for how they were born, so why are homosexuals any different? There is no difference between discriminating someone not marrying in a church because of the colour of their skin, than discriminating their sexuality.

You lived a day in a gay/trans persons shoes, and see what it's like to have silly rednecks not allowing us to be equal and just mind out own business and have a simple marriage.

Love is love.

Imagine if the gay churches didn't allow straight people to marry in their church? That it's against Christianity/their religion? That it's morally wrong to be straight? That you chose to be straight? That you are sinning?

Did you choose to be straight? No, you did not. So should you have the right to marry the gender ayou are attracted to? Yes, yes you should.

There's no straight marriage and gay marriage. Marriage should be marriage. It's 2012 for Pete's sake!

We are not murderers. We are not ill. We are not abnormal. We are normal. We are teachers. We are the cashier that serves you your shopping. We are your teacher. We are your emergency services. We are black. We are white. We are Asian. We are Latin American. We are people. We are you.

We just love the gender that we are, is that so wrong? We aren't hurting anybody.

[emw80]

---

Gawge wrote:
I believe the campaign is for 'gay marriage' to be equal to any other marriage in the eyes of the law.

I kind of disagree there.. kind of.. The way i see it (at least me anyway), is that a male and female getting married means their going to have a child, for the most part anyway i guess, so that's a benefit to the contuation of our species.. whereas same gender marriages aren't, so why promote that in anyway shape or form?

That's just my honest view on that, take it as it is or how you want too, skew it to fit your view of me if need be, but it is what it is and nothing more or less. But i don't see why the law cannot drag it self out of the dark ages with this problem, we're supposed to be a civilized and modern society afterall, so ammend the law to fit our modern society to meet the needs of the minority as well as the majority.

At the same time though i simply don't agree that you should be allowed to force down the door (claiming equal rights) of a building where the owner doesn't want you. its plain property rights for me, and this view i won't back up from, besides, group rights should NEVER override the individual rights.

EDIT: I should also add that for me personally,, I don't need a wedding "licence", nor do i want one, If i could I'd hand back my birth "certificate" and rid myself of the "national insurance number" i would do so in a heartbeat, why, because I'm not "property".

[xElfenLied_US]

---

emw80 wrote:

---

Gawge wrote:
I believe the campaign is for 'gay marriage' to be equal to any other marriage in the eyes of the law.

I kind of disagree there.. kind of.. The way i see it (at least me anyway), is that a male and female getting married means their going to have a child, for the most part anyway i guess, so that's a benefit to the contuation of our species.. whereas same gender marriages aren't, so why promote that in anyway shape or form?

That's just my honest view on that, take it as it is or how you want too, skew it to fit your view of me if need be, but it is what it is and nothing more or less. But i don't see why the law cannot drag it self out of the dark ages with this problem, we're supposed to be a civilized and modern society afterall, so ammend the law to fit our modern society to meet the needs of the minority as well as the majority.

At the same time though i simply don't agree that you should be allowed to force down the door (claiming equal rights) of a building where the owner doesn't want you. its plain property rights for me, and this view i won't back up from, besides, group rights should NEVER override the individual rights.

---

So adoptive kids may as well kill themselves right? If people only marry to have biological children, then just kill the adoptee kids. That's what you're saying.

[xElfenLied_US]

As for anyone else with anti-gay views, please don't bother commenting on this thread. Thanks.

[emw80]

---

xElfenLied_US wrote:

---

emw80 wrote:

---

Gawge wrote:
I believe the campaign is for 'gay marriage' to be equal to any other marriage in the eyes of the law.

I kind of disagree there.. kind of.. The way i see it (at least me anyway), is that a male and female getting married means their going to have a child, for the most part anyway i guess, so that's a benefit to the contuation of our species.. whereas same gender marriages aren't, so why promote that in anyway shape or form?

That's just my honest view on that, take it as it is or how you want too, skew it to fit your view of me if need be, but it is what it is and nothing more or less. But i don't see why the law cannot drag it self out of the dark ages with this problem, we're supposed to be a civilized and modern society afterall, so ammend the law to fit our modern society to meet the needs of the minority as well as the majority.

At the same time though i simply don't agree that you should be allowed to force down the door (claiming equal rights) of a building where the owner doesn't want you. its plain property rights for me, and this view i won't back up from, besides, group rights should NEVER override the individual rights.

---

So adoptive kids may as well kill themselves right? If people only marry to have biological children, then just kill the adoptee kids. That's what you're saying.

---

Isnt that just something YOU said... Do you really think that little of me to even suggest that this was something i could mean?

At no point did i imply that let alone say that, nor do i feel like that either, and nor would i support or allow such things to happen if i could do something to prevent it.

I honestly believe that It doesn't matter who looks after them PROVIDED that they look after them PROPERLY, with or without love. (within reason of course, such as ability to look after a child etc)

[emw80]

---

xElfenLied_US wrote:
As for anyone else with anti-gay views, please don't bother commenting on this thread. Thanks.

---

Now you're just being silly.

I'm NOT "anti" gay, but I'm not "pro" gay either. It's YOUR LIFE so I nor anyone else can MAKE you live it any other way that what you CHOOSE, and I would'nt have that any other way, choice and your right to choose is a good thing, no?

But it won't stop differing opinions or even dissenting ones, but this STILL doesn't mean I or anyone else is "anti" gay.

I don't like certain things others do, but those certain things might not take away my respect or admiration or simple like of that person,, I can hate something someone does without actually hating or disliking the person.. see what I'm getting at here?, or are you still blinded by rhetoric and black and white (either/or) script your brain is running on right now?

It's not a case of "If you're not with us, you're with the terrorists" (George Bush's ultimatum speech), it's not that kind of thing anyway LOL, we don't have to be "with you".

[Mike939]

I was here before this thread was locked