harvey19 Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 We agree on something then! Definately one is what one is, and I think if a lot of the bickering was removed from this thread we would have a better understanding on why we differ on certain matters. Homophobia and discrimination don't figure in my reasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 If I met Bob and Paul [...] they would be married. So if two men can marry in Canada, is there a reason why two men should not marry here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stomp Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Definately one is what one is, and I think if a lot of the bickering was removed from this thread we would have a better understanding on why we differ on certain matters. Homophobia and discrimination don't figure in my reasons. I agree. I enjoy a reasoned debate, and see no need to reduce it to bickering, name calling or mud slinging! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 So if two men can marry in Canada, is there a reason why two men should not marry here? Oh Chris not again. If in a foreign country one man can have several wives why not here ? I don't think you answered last time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Oh Chris not again. I just don't understand your premise. Men cannot marry, because only men and women marry. OK, but when men do marry (in Canada, in this context) you accept they are married. I can't understand why we can't have the same laws as Canada. I don't understand your rationale. If in a foreign country one man can have several wives why not here ? Britain recognises polygamy, if it comes from abroad. If a man has married more than 1 wife then he has more than 1 wife. Why should he not marry more than 1 wife is a new topic. Do you consider that dodging an answer or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Yes. I believe that you are allowed, nay entitled to your view. I would love to hear it. Oh thankyou, but i have expressed my views on previous posts on this thread.There is no need for me to repeat them. I have said all i wish to now.I leave you to continue and enjoy the debate in peace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 I just don't understand your premise. Men cannot marry, because only men and women marry. OK, but when men do marry (in Canada, in this context) you accept they are married. I can't understand why we can't have the same laws as Canada. I don't understand your rationale. Because Canada allow something it does not automatically follow that another will change its laws and traditions to accomodate a minority of its citizens who do not fit the criteria for the present system and who have their own form of commitment and union. I do not have any less respect for either form of commitment and it baffles me why people cannot see the difference between the union of a man and woman and the union of a man and man or woman and woman. These unions are titled differently because they are different types of union. Britain recognises polygamy, if it comes from abroad. If a man has married more than one wife then he has more than 1 wife. But can a man marry several wives legally in this country ? According to your logic if it's alright abroad it should be alright here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 But can a man marry several wives legally in this country ? According to your logic if it's alright abroad it should be alright here. No, polygamy is illegal here, but that isn't my logic. I'd argue for it being illegal here with reasons, not tautology. There are arguments for making it legal, but I wouldn't agree with them. A man building up an harem (which seems to be the natural state of polygamous marriage) tends to be unjust, in my view. It places wives at a disadvantage. Two men marrying is not unjust to anyone. There are no sensible reasons against it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Having read through most of this thread,there is far more Christianophobia,then there is Homophobia. This must be those "militant atheists" that you have referred to. Care to explain how their intolerance of Christianity has made your life intolerant? Compare that to the intolerances that homosexuals have had to suffer, even in recent times. Sodomy was illegal prior to 1967, civil partnerships were not available until 2005, and the age of consent was unequal until 2009. At each stage there has been very vocal religious demands that these equalities be denied, as there is now. That is genuine intolerant interference in how other people chose to live their lives with no effect on their own lives whatsoever. I might be a 'militant atheist' in your eyes, because I express my views on a public internet forum, but I would self-identify as a secular humanist. I would fight for your rights to hold your views, and practice your religion, however you want to, up to the point where it might cause harm to others. So please tell me how "Christianophobia" has made your life in some way intolerable, and hearing views that differ from your own does not count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fruitisbad Posted March 19, 2012 Share Posted March 19, 2012 Thanks for proving my point. Name calling is so much easier than attempting to construct a rational arguement, isn't it? you will see the rational arguements trouncing the irrational on every page of this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.