Re: Referendum on gay marriage? : Fri May 17, 2013 7:30 am  

cod'ead wrote:

It does seem strange that so many are getting so animated over a proposal that will have zero impact on anyone other than the two people who want to marry. Yet they are content to sit on their hands as the NHS becomes divorced from the state

As I said some time ago, it's a parody of priorities.

And if some of these people are getting wound up from a religious perspective, perhaps they'd do well to spend some time asking themselves the old question: 'what would Jesus do?' about a number of things this government is doing – not least it's attacks on and demonisation of the poor and disabled etc.

Re: Referendum on gay marriage? : Fri May 17, 2013 8:42 am  

Mintball wrote:

As I said some time ago, it's a parody of priorities.

And if some of these people are getting wound up from a religious perspective, perhaps they'd do well to spend some time asking themselves the old question: 'what would Jesus do?' about a number of things this government is doing – not least it's attacks on and demonisation of the poor and disabled etc.

Jesus would have suggested "loving one another as I have loved you". A statement that many Christians seem to ignore when it comes to imposing their outdated and often bigoted views on others.

Re: Referendum on gay marriage? : Fri May 17, 2013 9:42 am  

Chris28 wrote:

Jesus would have suggested "loving one another as I have loved you". A statement that many Christians seem to ignore when it comes to imposing their outdated and often bigoted views on others.

I suspect that, for some at least, their religion has little to do with an actual belief in what one might consider the teachings of that religion, and more a 'belief' in the traditions, trappings, liturgy and culture of that religion, if not quite for their own sake, then for the sake of something not connected to faith in the mystical god etc.

Re: Referendum on gay marriage? : Fri May 17, 2013 1:40 pm  

I will say that there was an interesting point today on the daily politics.
Surely if marriage is for all then so should civil partnerships purely when looking at equality?

Before anyone asks I know it's only being raised as a means to trash the bill by hypocrites but it's still a valid point.

Re: Referendum on gay marriage? : Fri May 17, 2013 2:02 pm  

Anakin Skywalker wrote:

I will say that there was an interesting point today on the daily politics.
Surely if marriage is for all then so should civil partnerships purely when looking at equality?

Before anyone asks I know it's only being raised as a means to trash the bill by hypocrites but it's still a valid point.

It's an entirely valid point – and it's not just people wanting to trash the bill who are raising it. Peter Tatchell has been campaigning for civil partnerships to be available to heterosexual couple for some time, for instance.

Re: Referendum on gay marriage? : Fri May 17, 2013 2:35 pm  

Mintball wrote:

It's an entirely valid point – and it's not just people wanting to trash the bill who are raising it. Peter Tatchell has been campaigning for civil partnerships to be available to heterosexual couple for some time, for instance.

Well yes and I'll happily concede the point but it has being hijacked by some for that reason.
Infact there one such individual today who sat there saying he wasn't being a hypocrite when he clearly is.

Before anyone asks his name escapes me.

Re: Referendum on gay marriage? : Fri May 17, 2013 5:41 pm  

It being hijacked wouldn't surprise me, but it is a legitimate point. And yes, heterosexual couples should be allowed the choice of civil partnerships.

That doesn't mean it in any way invalidates moves toward equal marriage.

And the idea that the one changes the other is nonsense (and to clarify, that's not remotely pointed at you).

I. Many ways, people making that case for hijack points, actually illustrate why equal marriage is important. In effect they admit that it a very different thing.

On a personal level, I don't want to get hitched - i see no need. My relationship has already existed far longer than many married ones and I don't see that changing in the near future. So I feel no need to change its status. But that doesn't mean that I should say that everyone else should feel the same - and stand in the way of people for whom that would be important.

Re: Referendum on gay marriage? : Fri May 17, 2013 6:31 pm  

Mintball wrote:

It being hijacked wouldn't surprise me, but it is a legitimate point. And yes, heterosexual couples should be allowed the choice of civil partnerships.

That doesn't mean it in any way invalidates moves toward equal marriage.

And the idea that the one changes the other is nonsense (and to clarify, that's not remotely pointed at you).

I. Many ways, people making that case for hijack points, actually illustrate why equal marriage is important. In effect they admit that it a very different thing.

On a personal level, I don't want to get hitched - i see no need. My relationship has already existed far longer than many married ones and I don't see that changing in the near future. So I feel no need to change its status. But that doesn't mean that I should say that everyone else should feel the same - and stand in the way of people for whom that would be important.

I would have thought you would enjoy making an honest man of tb.

Re: Referendum on gay marriage? : Fri May 17, 2013 8:21 pm  

Anakin Skywalker wrote:

I would have thought you would enjoy making an honest man of tb.

Gawd no!

that would therefore mean me being made an honest women!

Re: Referendum on gay marriage? : Fri May 17, 2013 8:42 pm  

Mintball wrote:

Gawd no!

that would therefore mean me being made an honest women!

Well true