harvey19 Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 Make it a pink badge then. The fact is that you want to mark out a group of people as "different", the defence that it is "equal but different" is pathetic. It might not be you that wants to actively discriminate, but once a group has been differentiated in the manner you suggest, it enables those that do. You are making out that one group is a victim. By being equal, with equal rights, but different stops there being victims or one class inferior. There will always be those who do not like homosexuals and no amount of legislation or changing of the definition of a word will change that in fact it may increase their dislike. No matter how one views the scenario an homosexual couple and hetrosexual couple are different as I have tried to explain many times, we may try to close our eyes to the fact but it is constant. Please try and understand what I am saying and not see my views as an attack on anyone or group of people which some on here perceive. The biggest form of discrimination will be allowing some homosexuals to marry in their church of choice and not others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 No one seems to be intersted in the knock on effect if same sex marriage is made legal. At present it s stated that certain religious bodies will not have to perform these ceremonies if they disagree with it. Is this discrimination where a couple are denied the right to marry by certain churches ? When this is challenged at the European Court and all churches are forced to carry out same sex marriages will the government have achieved its long term aims and are able to say it was never their intention but they have been over ruled in the matter and will ave avoided directly laying down religious policy ? What knock on effect? The same "knock on effect" racists had to comply with when particular laws were enforced? Or bigots had to comply with when particular laws were applied regarding the disabled? Maybe we should revert to the 1800's by abolishing laws which protected children from working in a pit 16hrs a day? Any good honest and just system introduces laws which apply to right and wrong..not majority or minority. No law has been introduced forcing an individual to perform an act they are uncomfortable with..the law is an introduction to institutions disabling them institutionally from not using discrimination. Any individual that has issue with that can leave that institution in the same way a racist or a bigot can from other institutions which have had laws applied. Hopefully over a short/mid term period all bigots will be weeded out by default..if not then additionally they are also hypocrites as well as homophobic bigots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quisquose Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 You are making out that one group is a victim. By being equal, with equal rights, but different stops there being victims or one class inferior. There will always be those who do not like homosexuals and no amount of legislation or changing of the definition of a word will change that in fact it may increase their dislike. No matter how one views the scenario an homosexual couple and hetrosexual couple are different as I have tried to explain many times, we may try to close our eyes to the fact but it is constant. Please try and understand what I am saying and not see my views as an attack on anyone or group of people which some on here perceive. The biggest form of discrimination will be allowing some homosexuals to marry in their church of choice and not others. Your own words insult you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 Your own words insult you. I am sorry you think that way, please explain why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 If you read my posts you would see that it was the ability to reproduce(and please don't start using the medically exempt or old to rubbish my point) that created the difference between a hetrosexual and homosexual couple. Regarding homophobia you imply that disagreeing with your viewpoint and others holding the same views could be based on this. And no I will not trawl through the thread to find examples. Maybe you could state that you do not consider it homophobic to disagree with same sex marriage when reasons are given. Is there anything incorrect in what I wrote? It's a very simple question which only requires a yes or no. Just in case you have forgotten what I'm talking about, here it is again... So let me get this straight... -Your argument is that gay couples shouldn't marry because they are biologically different to straight couples, but the comparison of blacks and whites is invalid -Straights are different because they can reproduce -By your own admission, reproduction is irrelevant to to the subject of marriage, it's just a difference between gays and straights -The comparison of blacks and whites being biologically different (and the historic effects of this) is invalid, because a black man and a black woman can reproduce, even though reproduction is irrelevant to to the subject of marriage, it's just a difference between gays and straights Is that right? So if your argument is that the union between same sex couples should have a different name because they are different to opposite sex couples, I take it you also think a mortgage between same sex couples should be renamed something like a "civil home owner's loan"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 What knock on effect? The same "knock on effect" racists had to comply with when particular laws were enforced? Or bigots had to comply with when particular laws were applied regarding the disabled? Maybe we should revert to the 1800's by abolishing laws which protected children from working in a pit 16hrs a day? Any good honest and just system introduces laws which apply to right and wrong..not majority or minority. No law has been introduced forcing an individual to perform an act they are uncomfortable with..the law is an introduction to institutions disabling them institutionally from not using discrimination. Any individual that has issue with that can leave that institution in the same way a racist or a bigot can from other institutions which have had laws applied. Hopefully over a short/mid term period all bigots will be weeded out by default. Who do you mean by bigots ? Is it the church men who have religious views. Are you agreeing with me that same sex marriages will be carried out in all churches eventually, if so how do you think this will happen ? ---------- Post added 11-02-2013 at 10:08 ---------- Is there anything incorrect in what I wrote? It's a very simple question which only requires a yes or no. Just in case you have forgotten what I'm talking about, here it is again... As before I am now certain you are arguing for arguments sake and have nothing constructive to add. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 As before I am now certain you are arguing for arguments sake and have nothing constructive to add. Asking a question and pursuing an answer is not arguing for argument's sake. You apparently don't want to answer the question and that's fine, you don't have to, but continually trying to distract and divert from it instead does not make the question go away. Is there anything incorrect in what I wrote? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronthenekred Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 You are making out that one group is a victim. By being equal, with equal rights, but different stops there being victims or one class inferior. There will always be those who do not like homosexuals and no amount of legislation or changing of the definition of a word will change that in fact it may increase their dislike. No matter how one views the scenario an homosexual couple and hetrosexual couple are different as I have tried to explain many times, we may try to close our eyes to the fact but it is constant. Please try and understand what I am saying and not see my views as an attack on anyone or group of people which some on here perceive. The biggest form of discrimination will be allowing some homosexuals to marry in their church of choice and not others. I'm sorry but this is twaddle on a monumental scale. There will always be murderers, paedophiles, rapists, embezzler's, all different from you and I..should we remove legislation which protects you and I from their difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 Asking a question and pursuing an answer is not arguing for argument's sake. You apparently don't want to answer the question and that's fine, you don't have to, but continually trying to distract and divert from it instead does not make the question go away. Is there anything incorrect in what I wrote? I answered in post 905 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 I answered in post 905 There's nothing in that response which relates to the question I asked. Unless you'd like to enlighten me, I will take the answer to be no. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.