I think you mean no church should be forced to perform a same sex marriage or forced to hold one on their premises against their wishes? Which seems sensible to me anyway!

Yeah Conor, that’s what I mean. It’s sad they hold such beliefs, but its their right.
I very much look forward to the day marriage equality is a reality in Ireland.

Why does that make any sense? Would it be equally acceptable to opt out of marrying inter-racial couples? Homophobia is homophobia, even if you hide it behind religion. It wouldn’t be acceptable to discriminate on the grounds of religion against other minorities. Why is it ok to do so to homosexuals?

Such discrimination is shakey even on theological grounds. Discrimination against homosexuals is justified by a passage from Leviticus. There are a number of other diktats contained within which advocate all sorts of behaviour which would seem unacceptable by today’s standards, so why is institutionalised homophobia deemed to be less serious than owning slaves or stoning your wife?

As ridiculous as their beliefs are, it’s their right. You can’t force Jews to believe in Christ, or force the girl guides to let boys join.
By trying to force our beliefs on them makes us as bad them.
I don’t like it, but its their right to believe in a silly book.

I’ve no idea whose side you are on Patch. Here take this . It’s a full stop. Use it.

Indeed we wouldn’t want to discriminate against an organisation just because its against their beliefs. That would be totally hypocritical and also show a lack of empathy and understanding. After all we should hate the sin (discrimination) and embrace the sinner (organised hierarchical religions). Its the christian thing to do afterall.

No we’re not.

Thanks diarmuid, you have any idea why?

Well, for a start, the proposed new law only applies to England and Wales. Scotland and Norn Irn have their own rules and while I can see Scotland doing it I would imagine it will be a while before it is allowed in the North. I’m confident that we’ll get there first!

Thanks!

*they’re

Can’t believe I did that….

The thing is, not all church’s/religions think they are sinners.

Quakers are all for allowing marriage in their churches, its refreshing to see a progressive faith like that

I know that – but the COE and RCC does – and that makes up the majority of churches in the UK. Either way, the churches shouldn’t be forced to do it they don’t want to – and if they don’t want to marry you, why would you want to get married there anyway? Just go elsewhere and enjoy your day. It’s legal, and that’s all that matters. What some bigoted church thinks is irrelevant.

“progressive faith!”

Bit of an oxymoron there, but yeah, I agree.

I’m gay, and while I don’t actively practice any religion I would like to get married in a church, not for me, but for my parents, family and friends. A wedding day isn’t just for the couple, it’s for everyone.

James – I understand the church part of it would be nice on the day for family/friends/photos, etc; but why would you want to get married in a church that openly condemns your lifestyle and says you’re going to rot in hell? That baffles me… I wouldn’t want to be near people who thought that about me – especially on my wedding day.

Believe it or not I don’t particularly think about that part of it – when I do, I just think “meh”.
I think the problem is that people think far too much about the physical side of the relationship; whereas my relationship is the same as any other, we support each other, love each other, care, yada yada yada…!

the church condemns a large number of people who want to and do get married in a church…those who use contraception and have sex before marriage. a lot of people dont care about the condemnation cos they dont really believe in the church but want the church wedding because its what’s expected of people a lot of the time.

Damn predictive text, eh Sean? :-)

Morning James, while you might want to get married in a Church would you persist in trying to get married in a Church whose beliefs were that your sexuality was a sin and that performing said ceremony would be tantamount to blasphemy?

I don’t think it’s that, I think it’s because the church don’t quite understand what it means themselves, seeing as none of them can marry.
For me, it’s about equality and finality, if my sisters and brothers can marry their husbands and wives, then why shouldn’t I be allowed marry my boyfriend? I’m proud to be in love with my boyfriend, we’ve been together 15years, longer than many marriages, why shouldn’t I be allowed marry?

As Barry said, you’d always be welcome in a Quaker meeting. And while progressive faith might seem like an oxymoron to some people, ideas like ending poverty and refusing violence came out of religion as well – and Quakers try to live up to those!

Morning Damocles, oh God, no! I’d like to, but it’s not the be all and end all! I have a rake of other things to worry about before I worry about that; rent, bills, ironing my scrubs, cooking a dinner… If it becomes available I would take part, but if not; meh. What you gonna do! Their loss, not mine!

Fair play, James, I just cynically wonder how long it would be before Stonewall tried a test case along those lines.

It would mean more to me if churches did it willingly, as opposed to being forced into change. That would probably annoy me more actually.
If churches were to accept forced changes, to me it would wreak of “we’re only doing this because we were bad boys and told to, not because we accept your choices”.
For me; forcing churches into carrying out gay marriages would widen the divide more than any thing else.
Change has to be forthcoming from all sides.

If a person is baptised into a church, the church should marry them. I was baptised and confirmed roman catholic, and the church should accept me warts and all. I was gay then and I’m gay now. They accept people who use mixed fibres and shellfish so in biblical terms there should be equal treatment of “abominations”.

I think the church are a corrupt shower of b******s though, and if a priest came near me I’d ring the guards. Still though. I’m as card carrying a member as the people who use contraception, have sex before marriage and don’t go to mass on sunday. I’ll see ye all in hell lads! :)

“If a person is baptised into a church, the church should marry them.”

Should?

yeah, should. i’m sick of the selective abomination scale. If the roman catholic church (specifically, because that’s the one i was signed into) wants to keep talking about sin and cherry picking things from the bible about what is and isn’t evil/an abomination, then they should either tar the lot with the brush and excommunicate people or balls up and turn the same blind eye to homosexuality that they do to everything else. They’re happy enough to baptise babies born to teenagers outside of wedlock, and even have gay people as god parents, but they’ll put the foot down on marriage. I’m just sick of the church being selective about what biblical declarations are pushed on the masses. They should have as many pulpit orations about shellfish and mixed fibres and their own track record of sexual abuse, instead of going on about how homosexuality is the great big evil. Sorry if that sounds a bit black and white, but I’m sick of the selective nature of the whole thing.

The question of the buffet table of Leviticus is one I’ve wondered about myself (http://damoclesbda.wordpress.com/2012/05/10/leviticus-christianitys-buffet/).

But mainstream Christian clings to parts of it like a limpet (which are allowed in the buffet now, but of course usen’t to be). So there’s always the opportunity to eschew the mainstream, after all if you believe in bits of it and not in others are you still part of their mainstream at all, regardless of what they might consider you to be?

I can only speak for myself in terms of how I have experienced (and eschewed) this particular religion. The church itself is ala carte about what it chooses to preach, so people are well within their rights to approach it in the same way. I got a civil partnership which is non religious (and the only option available to me) and I wouldn’t bother my barney getting a church sanctioned wedding certificate, even if they were throwing the doors open to me. I think the church should cop on though, and take parishioners where they can get them. It’s kind of a “get your own house in order before you comment on mine” message that I would like to put out about the church. The church is narrowing and narrowing their definition of what’s acceptable. And that’ll do the most damage in the long run.

She’s not ‘gay now’, she was always gay

Waffler, some people do move up and down the Kinsey Scale.

I wouldn’t say no… *oogle google*

@ James …. Thanks for making me laugh

Glad I could help Jane.

So something thats existed for thousands upon thousands of years is medieval?

You realise that makes no sense right?

medieval period covers 5th – 15th century, yet marriage in one form or another has existed for even thousands of years before even the 5th century, it existed even long before the christian faith was created.

Marriage saves you money on taxes.
That’s the only reason to get married.

Yeah jo, when I was on bended knee proposing to my girlfriend (now wife ;) ) I was thinking the whole time, ” I hope she says yes so I can save FA on my tax bill”
Why so cynical?

All the more choice for the gay guys and gals!
Also; if its painful, you’re doing it wrong. Unless you’re into that kinda thing, in which case, away with you!

Yayyy 240 plus red thumbs – my best to date, I love winding up journal readers.
Competition with me n me mates, I win so far today.

I think ‘readers’ might be pushing it….

And your the person that lectures people about smoking cigarettes, the absolute hypocrisy of you !!!

When was the world sane in the first place? Back when we had slavery perhaps?

Care to explain why without raising long debunked theories about it being “unnatural” or children needing a “normal family”?

Why exactly is it insane to treat everyone equally?

It was coming down from the trees that was mankind’s first mistake. And fire.

He’s got a Nazi as his profile pic, don’t feed him

ssshhh Damocles, many religious people don’t like to believe in evolution, we don’t want to upset

“many religious people don’t like to believe in evolution”

Not that many. The Vatican accepts evolution.

@ john everyman, because not everyone is equal, hate to break the sad news to you but despite what they taught you in the media, we’re not all equal, it’s a myth. Saying a male / female couple is “equal” to a same-sex couple is just daft

@ Conor, you think slavery doesn’t exist anymore? How naive! I’ll rephrase, the world is gone more insane

George, people are equal across the board and as such should be treated as such.

We all share the same DNA regardless of if we are black, white, yellow or male or female,

Only narrow minded people like yourself like to believe that some people are above others, just curious on your basis for this…is it based on wealth, religion, sex?

What exactly in your book means that one person is lower then somebody else?

Conor, why do you have to constantly compare straight people to slave masters?

How sad George, getting so worked up and angry over something that won’t affect you. Just live your own life to your own beliefs and you’ll be much happier.
Anyway, marriage equality is coming and there is nothing you can do about it. Nothing. Do just accept it and enjoy your life.

@ Man on the street, do I appear angry? I’m not. I don’t really get angry.

“How sad George, getting so worked up and angry over something that won’t affect you” these things don’t affect me personally but they affect society as a whole. I don’t consider myself to be an individual, I consider myself as part of a community and these acts affect society as whole.

@ Barry, after reading your comment I can confirm that my thinking and your thinking are polar opposites, especially in the way you refer to people with different views to yours as “narrow minded”. I wouldn’t even enter debate with you because with comments like that I can see we’re not made of the same stuff and I would be wasting my time.

@ Sandra, it’s a feeble attempt to embarrass you and silence you. I’ve seen it a million times

@ Sandra, thought this definition of slavery might be of enlightenment to you

1. (Law) the state or condition of being a slave; a civil relationship whereby one person has absolute power over another and controls his life, liberty, and fortune

Perhaps the reason why Conor compares slave masters to straight people is because some of us try to control them, tell them what they must and must not do, refuse to see them as equal, deny them their liberty to live their lives as they wish, describe their
relationships as being ‘an abomination’ (your words from a previous post), that their wish to get married is sickening ( also your words from a previous post) and the one I love the best from you….. Classing their relationships as being ‘the ways if satan’.

Need I say more?

George said; “Saying a male / female couple is “equal” to a same-sex couple is just daft” but didn’t say how or why? In another post, he said that this development would be “hazardous to society”, again without saying how. can George or any other opponent of this equality actually say HOW gay marriage would be “hazardous” to society, to the institution of marriage or anything else for that matter?

How exactly does it negatively affect society George?
I really don’t get it. My sister is gay and I fail to see how her marring her partner will affect anybody other than them.

@ManOnTheStreet: George won’t answer our questions because he simply can’t. I always ask this question when these “objections” are raised and I have never once gotten an answer.

I know Chris, but I like to show them up for what they are.
Anyway, marriage equality is coming… Nothing they can do about it.

Yes, George, please enlighten us. You have several people now genuinely asking you to explain your views. If they are based in logic and reason rather than ignorance and bigotry, then I would truly like to hear them. As a gay man, I am curious as to people’s opinions about this issue. And I am looking for reasons beyond ‘because the church says it is’.

I see the word “abomination” referenced above. Deuteronomy decries homosexuality as an abomination. However, it also decries the eating of shellfish as an abomination without saying which is the greater abomination. Our conclusion is that if God hates the gays (as so many of his followers claim) he must also hate shellfish. I myself hate scallops but love prawns. Am I to be condemned to eternal hellfire? Is my marriage against all that is good and proper (e.g., my wife ate clams last week – and, no, that’s not a euphemism).

* CORRECTION (my bad): It’s Leviticus, not Deuteronomy. Apologies to the authors of both. (But God still hates shellfish – allegedly)

George: “I appear angry?”

Yes.

@George Again, what you have stated is not fact, it’s your opinion. Now could you please provide us with some reasons why “Saying a male / female couple is “equal” to a same-sex couple is just daft”?

You have not backed up your assertion with anything.

George L Rockwell was gay.
The person here using his name is gay.
In 2012/2013 the easiest way for a man to out himself is to spout homophobia.
We can all see that you are just attempting to deflect from your own very strong homosexual desires.
I love you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Lincoln_Rockwell#Assassination

George? George? You there George? We’re waiting…

himself and his buddies anthony and susan have mysteriously disappeared. the case of the disappearing trolls

Cat got your tongue, George?

@ Chris Dunphy – “George won’t answer our questions because he simply can’t” Some patience would suit, some of have to work for a living you know.

@ Jo Hickey – Please, that’s the oldest trick in the book and it’s pretty pathetic if you don’t mind me saying so. Rockwell was gay, what evidence apart from Wikipedia do you have to back that up? Nothing! Zero! You say i’m gay? Once again no evidence, nothing! They said the same about Jeorg Haider and why? To discredit him. I would suggest you grow up in a hurry

Still haven’t answered the question georgie boy…

@ Man on the street, as I’ve explained to your gay counterparts, I don’t have the luxury of staying at home all day leaving comments on here so patience please. Your sister is gay you told me and what difference does it make to anyone if she marries you ask. Well, what benefit is it to society that homosexuals be permitted to marry? Except because it will make them feel like normal straight couples. There are certain benefits given to married men and women to make their lives a bit easier to enable them to have children, which ARE of benefit to society. Why should gay couples have equal status and reap the same benefits as straight couples when they are not contributing to society in that way. Gay couples cannot produce children and in cases of adoption numerous studies, including one carried out by the university of Austin Texas have shown that children brought up with a father and mother of different sexes fare better than children raised in families of same sex parents. Sorry, not trying to be insensitive, its just fact. Now, i have answered your question, I did not insult you, i didn’t use offensive language and i gave some reference. I would appreciate if you now accept that is my opinion and whether you agree or disagree to respect it. If you have a counter arguement I would be open to hear it. Also if I don’t reply quickly, don’t assume I have run off, I just don’t have much time.

Hello again Sandra! I was going to reply with a statement that society evolves past religion, in the bible slavery is discussed profusely, yet modern society as evolved past it to ensure we dont have slaves anymore. Thus the same analogy can be used for attitudes / discrimination about homosexuality.

However Janes reply totally trumped mine for eloquence, so go and read hers.

Oh and you seem pretty obsessed with my commentary. Glad you are a fan!

Thanks Jane! Very very concise :)

@ Petr: Ah Petr my old arch nemesis, I appear angry? That’s not intentional, I may work on that

You still haven’t answered the question George of what harm to society does marriage equality cause.
Instead you listed benefits of straight marriage. Advocates of marriage equality never questioned any of this. You just avoided the question.
A study by Associate professor Michael Rosenfeld, of Stanford university found that children of gay or straight parents, whether adopted or biological, do equally well in life. His study was not opinion based but rather he mined all the facts from census forms.
Not to insult you, but its hard to find any logic in your beliefs other than plain old bigotry.

I’m familiar with the studies on the pro side but after looking at both I came up with the personal conclusion that it’s of no benefit to society whatsoever and is even dangerous to the quality of soiety as a whole. I have answered your question, but to elaborate, I don’t see why gay couples should get tax benefits when they are not like hetero couples who provide Children, the next generation of the society. So in short, for financial reasons I’m against it and for child development I’m against it. That’s two of multiple reasons but I won’t give other reasons as they will be considered offensive / bigoted personal opinions. I am not allowed to give a personal opinion but everyone on the pro side is without having to explain themselves. Why, except for your sister and that would you be so vigorously in favor of it? How would you see it being of benefit to society? I’m not being a smart @ss just interested in your opinion.

So by that logic, marrying a post-menopausal woman can’t be of benefit to society either. Should we restrict marriage to heterosexual couples of child-bearing age? Should we have some sort of compulsory fertility tests?

You are very welcome Conor

Emily, that’s not the topic of discussion, is it!

Avoidance again George. But there is no point in us continuing this discussion. I wont change your beliefs.
Luckily I don’t really need to. Marriage equality is a question of when not if.

On the basis of your argument, George, nobody should be declared married or qualify for tax “breaks” until they produce a child. There are lots of childless couples out there – some even by choice. Similarly, there are lots of gay couples successfully riasing kids: should those kids be discriminated against?I note, with interest, your frustration at not being able to voice your personal views. Perhaps I can help. A gay marriage opponent – for argument’s sake, let’s call him George – is discussing the issue with a friend, who we’ll call Chris.

George says “I’m against gay marriage.”

Chris asks, “on what basis?”

George replies “‘cos traditional marriage is one man and one woman and the Bible says so.”

“Actually, ” says Chris, “King Solomon had 700 wives. And traditional marriage – according to Deuteronomy – means that a man who rapes a woman must marry her. So try again.”

Finally George says, “I think gay people are icky.”

Chris nods and says, “there you go.”

Would that sum it up?

George, that’s exactly the discussion. You stated quite clearly that because a gay couple don’t reproduce, they do not benefit society like a straight couple do, and thus should not be allowed to marry. I’m straight and I never intend to have children, should I be denied marraige rights since I won’t ”contribute” to society the same way?

No Emily, I explained in a previous comment that numerous studies have shown that children brought up by homosexual couples fare worse than children raised by heterosexual couples. So if a couple in their 50’s decide to adopt they should be given the same status and privileges. Even though I personally think that’s a bit late to get into child raising.

@ Man on the street, i don’t know how I could make it so clear but yes, let’s agree to disagree. Marriage equality, it most likely will happen, for a while at least. society will get much worse before it gets better

Chris, at what point did I mention the bible? I didn’t so don’t try use that one on me!

Penelope I gave other reasons than that, it’s an option that’s there for heterosexuals for those reasons. I’m not sure why people would want to get married with absolutely no intention of starting a family

Well, at least you’ve admitted that your views are at least in part due to bigotry. Fair play, George. I have to summon up a little respect for someone who admits what they are. Thankfully, you’re of a dying breed. I wonder if you were about in the 60s (perhaps you were, I don’t know), would you also have been against interracial marriage? I suspect perhaps so.

Daniel that type of comment usually doesn’t merit a response, I usually disregard them but I would like to highlight the fact that you are a bit hypocritical, because you are making these comments yet being completely prejudiced yourself. Why do you presume I’m over 40 and Christian? Because you assume only people of that description think that way? You sir are the bigot. And I’m a 26 year old Agnostic so sorry to spoil your fun. Not that I think my personal details are relevant in the context.

You’re absolutely right, George, you didn’t mention the Bible. In fact, you could lift out that biblical reference and repalce it with your tax-based objection and still not need to change the final conclusion. So, taking all *that* into account, are your personal objections based on distaste?

george, you come across as a caricature of the stereotypical bigot. You’re against everything.

Ah Georgetaking into account your profile name and being against the mixing of races, I think we know all we need to know. Suffice to say, I’d find it impossible to take seriously or respect anything you’d have to say.

So, this is about children?

What about childless or childfree straight couples then? Are they to be denied marriage?

Oh, and, gay people *can* have children – either through surrogacy or adoption. In the case of the latter, quite possibly preventing a kid going through years of torment in the care system. Why is it only biological children that matter?

Why is procreation the only thing that matters to you anyway?

@George

So, this is about children?

What about childless or childfree straight couples then? Are they to be denied marriage?

Oh, and, gay people *can* have children – either through surrogacy or adoption. In the case of the latter, quite possibly preventing a kid going through years of torment in the care system. Why is it only biological children that matter?

Why is procreation the only thing that matters to you anyway?

Chris, fortunately for me, I couldn’t care less. In fact, if you were to say you agree with me completely I would probably reconsider my position

Hi Karen, I was explaining to someone earlier that I believe, from studies I have examined that children who are raised by homosexual couples fare worse, a lot worse, on average than children raised by heterosexual couples. One, probably the best study I can recommend is the one by the university of Austin Texas. I’d recommend it. I think, as a race-conscious man that procreation is immensely important. The key to a strong healthy society is the quality of its people. I believe that the purpose of having children is to breed the next generation, which should be superior than the current one and children should get the best start in life. This is how society advances. I think if we had 10 percent of the population’s children growing being raised by homosexual couples and the rest seeing this as acceptable, even admirable nothing good would come of that except the feelings of the minority. I hope this answers your question.

“Race-conscious”
Such a nice way to say racist.

George are you an adherent of eugenics? Just reading all your posts and just wondering. Trying to figure out where you are coming from as you come across rationally even though I disagree with you. I do respect your opinion though as you are thoroughly debating and doing it well.

Lol I will probably get thumbs down for saying that!

Thanks Conor, although I disagree with some of your viewpoints you are not resorting to silly name calling and I respect that. I would be in favour of eugenics and selective breeding yes. Probably sounds crazy in these modern times but I think it would be of major benefit to society.

Intersting indeed. Out of curiosity if it was discovered that gay people had less junk genes or had a genetic edge combating certain diseases would you be in favour of gay people producing more children in order to strengthen subsequent generations? Thats purely hypothetical by the way. I am very interested in genetics.

@ man on the street, “racist” usually refers to people who “hate” people of a different race, I don’t hate anyone for things that are out of their control but I wish to maintain a sense of racial rootedness, same way the Tibetans do and I don’t think many consider the Tibetans to be “racist”.

@Conor, if I heard that i would look at the research a bit, examine the sources and so forth and compare it then draw my conclusion then if I found it to be credible then i wouldn’t see a problem with it. i’m not saying gays have bad genes, I’m not a geneticist but from the research I’ve found I believe children with a mother and father in a settled home, on average (not in every case) fare buch better than children raised by homosexual parents.

@ Conor, i don’t mean to be rude but I have to run but I’ll reply to your comment in the morning, if you’re replying that is. Have a good evening

Call it what you like George. Unlike Conor, I don’t respect your beliefs just because you can rationally debate them. You believe in keeping races separate. You believe in selective breeding. You believe straight people are more worthy of equality than gay people.
Disgusting views. But they are minority views. And even though you think your type will reign once again, it will never happen.

Thanks George, think I understand you a bit more now. Good to see you understand the necessity of evidence based research. I don’t have problems with people offering a different opinion when they clearly have researched and formed their opinion. What really pisses me off is when people don’t think for themselves and use their brain a bit! They’re also usually the most zealous, fanatical and out of control.

He has tried to link pedophilia and homosexuality Conor. There’s no evidence based research for that.

Jazus lads, give it a break – please., why don’t youse swop emails and annoy the crap out of each other there, better still meet at dawn and buy a couple of handbags, put the fight up on you tube and we will vote in a winner.

Hey Manonthestreet. I know. I agree with you. I know theres no evidence of that. I was asking about his stance on genetics as I was trying to figure out where he was coming from is all. I was just very surprised to see someone say they think eugenics is good. George knows i disagree with his opinion. He hardly agrees with ours.

It was really good to read your debate though. You were both really articulate. I thonk meaningful and passionate debate with some intelligence behind it is lacking in our politics so it was good to see you two really go for it.

A monumental step backwards for humanity.

How, exactly?

I was surprised myself to see him admit he favours eugenics. Not something you usually come across. Thankfully.

Man on the street: I didn’t compare pedophilia at all, I admit I over simplified a statement to make a point. My point was someone said we should give equal status to “our fellow man” ie giving homosexuals equal marital status to heterosexual couples. I am aware of certain lobby groups that would want to reduce the legal age to 12 and permit mariage to minors, so by that persons logic aren’t they also our “fellow man” and shouldn’t we permit that. I’m not comparing homosexuals to pedophiles, I think pedophiles should be shot in the head, homosexuals I just think should have equal status, other than that i’ve no real qualm with them to be quite honest. What consenting adults do behind closed doors is none of my business, I start having issues with it when liberals start forcing me to not only accept it but to admire it. And when I say the world is going mad, or getting worse I am talking about the level of political correctness. that’s just my personal view and it’s your right to accept it or reject it and i would hope you are grown up enough not to get your nickers oin a twist over it, pardon the expression.

Again Conor, thanks, you risk saying unpopular things but you speak your mind and I can only respect that. I know some people with views similar to mine don’t do a tap of research and just draw their conclusions from thin air and are generally unable to back it up with anything and sometimes resort to various bible quotes etc but people on the pro side do that also (minus the bible quotes), and also on every other issue. They see what way the wind is blowing, they observe what others are saying then follow along, terrified of appearing unfashionable.

@ man on the street, sorry, typing error, was suppose to say i think they shouldn’t have equal status.

Haha, I’ll admit George, that typo had me very confused..

Yeah its just awful when you treat your fellow man/women with respect and treat them as equals….whatever is the world coming to?

Pedphiles are our “fellow men” too, should we permit them to do whatever they like also? I’m sick of this feel good politics, “it would make them feel good about themselves, so let’s allow them” never mind the fact that it’s hazardous to society as a whole.

There is a difference between rape and consensual sex George.

George, are you somehow suggesting being gay and a pedophile are somehow related?
If you are I’m afraid you’ll be very much mistaken on that one.

Being gay doesn’t hurt people, these people are consenting adults, its not for you to tell them that they can’t be married.

Don’t feed the troll! Just let him bask there in his ignorance, there’s no point!

@ James, just because I’m not in step with your views or in favour of people with your lifestyle doesn’t make me “ignorant”. You make cheap comments like that because it makes you feel better about yourself.

Good point. You’re not ignorant because you’re ‘out of step’. You’re ignorant because you’re ignorant.

Thanks Zoe for your “constructive feedback”

There is no need to introduce gay marriage in the UK as there is already civil partnership which protects the interests of gay couples . Why is Cameron et al pandering to a tiny minority, even within the gay community ? Surveys show that the majority do not want gay marriage even within amongst gays , apart from the metropolitan elites and stonewall backed by billionaires. Why do gays want to emulate a heterosexual fertility rite when it clearly does not reflect their concerns ? of course they should be no
discrimination within a modern democracy but why does difference have to be ironed out with sameness ? We are not all the same so why not recognise it ? On another point , we discriminate against Muslims and fundamentalist Mormons who believe in polygamy . We are not seeing (yet) a call for our concept of marriage to reject its western imperialist monogamic structures for those who want polygamous marriages . Why ? Is it ok to discriminate against Muslims ?

No problem George. I aim to please. Just ask my girlfriend. ;)

polygamy, I’m not sure there is enough work for two women in my house.

Hi Anthony, you’re missing a vital point. Civil partnerships are not the same as civil marriage. The vital component you are ignoring is the protections needed for gay families and their children. Now you obviously don’t agree with gay couples having children, but that doesnt matter. Such families exist and they need legal protection. And before you go on about biological connections and all that, there’s such a thing as assisted fertility, sperm donation/egg donation, adoption. And by saying that gay families should not be married despite these families existing, you’re actually implying that all families where assisted fertility is used should not be recognised.

Just because you don’t like something, doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be protected. There are families in Ireland and the UK that exist without legal protection, the child has no inheritance rights or connection to its parent, and that is wrong. Your position puts families in a subordinate place to those you deem “right”, when it is not your right to do so.

Bit difficult to do Zoe, considering I don’t know you or your girlfriend. Thanks for the offer but I will take your word for it

I like you George, you’re old school. I bet you’re nearly (or over) 40 and Christian right? You’re right a man has no place in society loving another man, if they do they’re definitely pedophiles or mentally deficient. We should stone them. Hmm, wait. Kind of sounds like those values and morals are medieval.

Wow – someone making controversial posts on theJournal from an anonymous/ironic Twitter account – how original…

It’s just one of those “amn’t I gas?!” profiles. Thinks he’ll get a following like the fake Queen’s “Gin O’Clock” twitter account.

He must have little to do.

He’ll get a following?
Couldn’t it be she’ll get a following?

Everyone doesn’t HAVE to be married,

But if people want to be married then why stop them? :)

What exactly do you mean before marriage became the “norm”?

“marriage” in one form or another has existed for thousands upon thousands of years…even long before the christian faith was invented approx 2 thousand years ago….its certainly not something new.

What makes you think anyone “has to” be married? They want to. Does that concept confuse and irritate you?

Marriage gives a sense of stability/finality to a relationship. Granted, there are other ways of obtaining that sense of stability whether its moving in together, having children, adopting a cat together, whatever!

Lmao, my evil alter ego….. That’s funny

Those minority groups of which you speak are of a different Faith.You are not comparing like with like. What gay people are looking for is equality within the Catholic and Anglican Church.

these are just incendiary arguments that bigots wheel out because they’ve nothing better than old tired tropes. I’m waiting for the “sure why cant a fella marry a sheep if that’s the case” argument. What will you do once marriage equality comes in? What other social issue will you turn to?

Exactly penguin nation. Backed into a corner where the bible cant be wielded and quoted from, when the comparison of gays to child molesters can’t be backed up, then other social issues are dragged up. Muslims and Mormons can’t he included in the argument as they are extremely homophobic therefore if polygamy were to be allowed gay people STILL couldn’t get married!!

imagine anthony and his like then, big hapes of gay people wanting to marry. Might be enough to make a few of them shuffle off their mortal coil. Ah yeah so Anthony, lets be having a bit of polygamy so. I’ll stick to same sex monogamy though if that’s alright.

Too late for that, he sits in Rome.

Cheers. My first laugh of the day. A good belly chuckle early in the morning really sets me up for a good day.

Didn’t need to be turned, the church already was turned when they abused kids and covered the whole thing up.

You can moan all you want but the statement about abuse to kids is a known fact and it is also a known fact that they covered it up.

Lol Sandra, I actually didn’t think your posts could become more ridiculous but then you come out with that gem.

By that reckoning when teenage heterosexuals discover their sexualities it’s a communication from god? I can assure you that when I realised that I was attracted to the same sex there was no “red rum” moment. I did quite enjoy myself though :)

Any church that peddles hate and stands over discrimination has already been turned by Satan.

Sandra appears to be a troll looking for a reaction. See here and here.

Aw yer joking. Shall I send you copies of the Ryan Report and the countless other documentations of cruelty, abuse and corruption? And that’s just in recent times; don’t get me started on the murder, torture and more over the centuries. Hello.

Aw I love Sandra! Its like she is the evil alter ego of Jane from a parallel universe!

Her comments always highly amuse!

If there was full equality there would be no “militant homosexual rights lobby”.