Cameron: "Let's export gay marriage!"

[MrGongGong]

That would be Christians, would it?

Terry and Mr ?
The phrase "ramming down the throats" seems awfully popular amongst the rabid traditionalists
I wonder why ? is there something they aren't telling us about the darker recesses of their minds ?
I've met lots of gay people and none of them have ever "rammed" anything down my throat !!

[scottycelt]

Marriage was about property, land and power which (unless you are part of the "Windsors" ) isn't what it is today
so it's meaning has changed significantly and has not been the same "for centuries" at all

Stop evading the issue! This is about sexuality not property, land and power which many marrieds do not possess!

Has Marriage been a heterosexual union for all these centuries or has it been a figment of our imagination doubtlessly inspired by all those fairies you love to talk about, Mr GG ... ?

[Flosshilde]

Stop evading the issue!

Has Marriage been a heterosexual union for all these centuries

Yes, it has. And now it isn't. Get used to it. It isn't going to go away.

[amateur51]

Stop evading the issue! This is about sexuality not property, land and power which many marrieds do not possess!

Has Marriage been a heterosexual union for all these centuries or has it been a figment of our imagination doubtlessly inspired by all those fairies you love to talk about, Mr GG ... ?

Calm down, scotty - things change. 'Marriage' has changed. You have the rest of your life to come to terms with that. Enjoy!

[MrGongGong]

Stop evading the issue! This is about sexuality not property, land and power which many marrieds do not possess!

Has Marriage been a heterosexual union for all these centuries or has it been a figment of our imagination doubtlessly inspired by all those fairies you love to talk about, Mr GG ... ?

FFS that's not the point
as many folk have pointed out , it has changed significantly over the years this is just another change to something that has always changed
like many so called "Christians" you have a hang up about who sticks which bits where , I blame "saint" Paul, the world would be much better without all of that stupid , stultifying and unnecessary guilt nonsense.
You can't say that you are NOT homophobic and constantly bang on about gay sex in a roundabout way ! If that's what you are really interested in then i'm sure you can find all the information you need on the internet (i'm sure the wonderful cardinal would be able to give you a few pointers !) BUT
guess what ? Gay people are just like those of us who are 'straight' they don't seem to spend their time thinking about which bits go where BUT , like the rest of us, seem in my experience to think about music, cheese , wine and the rest of the things that make life interesting......

It's a done deal, get over it !

[ahinton]

Terry and Mr ?

Oi! You leave her out of this! (and if you don't understand the meaning of this, you're welcome to PM me)...

[Pabmusic]

Well I suppose some of the more self-centred and absorbed feel exactly like that, Pab, and also consider themselves very cool and modern!

No. You don't get out of it so lightly. I was responding to a specific point, namely that "the current obsession with homosexualityisticism is spoiling things". If that is the case, it is right to ask in what way things are being spoilt.

...Let me throw the same sort of question back at you. What diminishes a homosexual relationship by the retention of the meaning of marriage that has existed for centuries? What gives non-heterosexuals the right to gate-crash an institution that has always been a heterosexual one? Homosexuals have Civil Partnerships which are barred to heterosexuals. Many homosexuals themselves have declared their opposition to any change...

No again. This is nothing but an attempt to move the burden of proof. It is not me who says that gay marriage is "spoiling things" - it is therefore for those that agree that it is to show in what way things are being spoilt.

...So what's the problem here apart from an intense desire by 'gay-rights' obsessed social liberals intent on ramming their views down the throats of an unwilling and perfectly reasonable (and sizeable) chunk of the population?...

No yet again. You are resorting to ad hominem attacks rather than addressing my question (it was you who quoted me in the first place, after all).

...I have always understood social liberals were supposed to be tolerant and respectful of the deeply-held views of others, especially minorities?

Does this mean that 'social liberals' (whatever they are) should demonstrate their tolerance by dropping any cause that offends you? You are the final arbiter? Really?

[scottycelt]

No. You don't get out of it so lightly. I was responding to a specific point, namely that "the current obsession with homosexualityisticism is spoiling things". If that is the case, it is right to ask in what way things are being spoilt.



No again. This is nothing but an attempt to move the burden of proof. It is not me who says that gay marriage is "spoiling things" - it is therefore for those that agree that it is to show in what way things are being spoilt.



No yet again. You are resorting to ad hominem attacks rather than addressing my question (it was you who quoted me in the first place, after all).



Does this mean that 'social liberals' (whatever they are) should demonstrate their tolerance by dropping any cause that offends you? You are the final arbiter? Really?

A lot of negative responses here. And I see we are back to the familiar tack of asking questions of others that we prefer to dodge ourselves!

I have answered your question. Shock horror, I believe men and women are different and thank goodness for that! It is absurd in my view to suggest that a same-sex partnership is the same as that between a man a woman. Why should it now be considered some sort of crime to state the rather obvious? You appear to be saying that if 'gay marriage' doesn't affect me directly why should I care? That could be applied to anything and everything. Of course I care. Just like you do presumably. So are you to to be the final arbiter, Pab? Really?

People of goodwill who cannot agree normally come to a compromise and that's exactly what Marriage and Civil Partnerships were supposed to be all about. Cameron himself said as much and had 'no plans for further change'. Suddenly, and completely out-of-the-blue, we now have wholesale change, no doubt as part of the Coalition agreement with the Lib Dems. People who believe marriage is between a man and a woman are basically told to go away and shut up, and some of them have lost their jobs simply because they continue to believe what they have always believed. Scary.

It is social liberals who always boast about their 'tolerance'. Maybe some of them could start to show a bit more of it and not simply demand it of others!

[jean]

People who believe marriage is between a man and a woman are basically told to go away and shut up, and some of them have lost their jobs simply because they continue to believe what they have always believed.

Who?

[KipperKid]

Who?

If you get googling, you'll see that many people have been fired for opposing same sex marriage.

[amateur51]

If you get googling, you'll see that many people have been fired for opposing same sex marriage.

I think you'll find that they have demonstrated through their actions that they are not fit to provide a service to the general public because of their negative attitude towards lesbians and gay men.

[jean]

I think if there's any googling to be done, then it's up to those who make assertions to produce the evidence in support of them.

I remember the housing manager in Trafford who was demoted for Facebook comments about gay marriage, which it was later ruled he should not have been.

Who else?

[amateur51]

I'm getting fed up with this pointless bickering. The battle for the emancipation of lesbians and gay men has taken a major step forwards in England & Wales and I for one am entirely happy with it. It was debated at great length in both Houses of Parliament and on this Board. I suggest that those who are not content should sit back for ten years and observe how it all plays out. We can reconvene then to discuss further

[Flosshilde]

Agreed. It's a waste of time arguing with those who refuse to evolve - they'll die out eventually.

[KipperKid]

Agreed. It's a waste of time arguing with those who refuse to evolve - they'll die out eventually.

Shame you edited your post, I liked the original one with the delicious double-entendre!