Halibut Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 I must admit your question has got me thinking and I know it is not a direct answer but eligibility is a major issue. Which takes us back to equal but different. What do you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 Thankyou for that! And also a bit of the religious teaching section. ---------- Post added 11-02-2013 at 16:17 ---------- What do you mean? Marriage at present is between man and woman and so an homosexual couple is not elgible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lotusflower Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 We will have to agree to disagree because I was brought up to be polite no matter what I thought of someone. Another cop-out! There is nothing impolite in putting someone right. ---------- Post added 11-02-2013 at 16:20 ---------- I listened to the whole programne until it cut out a minute or so into the relevant interview !!!!! Try again from the 30 minute mark. That's the part that refers to Denmark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janie48 Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 Homophobia, like all insidious discriminatory behaviour, has no place in a civilised society. It is the moral duty of those who consider themselves civilised or at least to be striving towards it to challenge it. In order to challenge it effectively it is necessary to identify it. To classify is not to insult. To challenge discrimination is not a negative and insulting act it is the positive affirmation of tolerance and diversity. I've heard religious leaders and politicians say much the same thing,and i applaud it,but they are probably the ones who don't support gay marriage,how do you explain that? probably by describing them as hypocrites i suppose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikem8634 Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 I've heard religious leaders and politicians say much the same thing,and i applaud it,but they are probably the ones who don't support gay marriage,how do you explain that? probably by describing them as hypocrites i suppose? Well, that would depend on the individual case and I'd have to look closely at the positions taken and rhetoric used. I imagine, however, if the situation proved exactly as you describe then the word hypocrite may well be apposite, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altus Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 It is not scoring points and it is not unfair. If the possibility of procreation is essential to the definition and validity of marriage in your opinion then the absolute nature of your rule should apply to all. It is hypocritical to exclude those who cannot have children from your absolute rule because you feel sorry for them. If one the reasons that gay marriage is unpalatable to you is that there is no possibility of procreation then the marriage of a heterosexual couple who cannot have children should, in logical and reasonable terms, be equally unacceptable and invalid. The possibility of procreation argument is likely to become untenable at some point due to advances in science. Stem cells can already be used to produce many different types of tissue, what happens when someone figures out how to produce a sperm or an egg? (Being able to fertilise an egg using material produced from stem cells is even more likely.) If we allow different sex couples to benefit from the likes of IVF and surrogate mothers, why not couples (same sex or otherwise) to benefit from stem cell derived fertilisation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikem8634 Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 We will have to agree to disagree because I was brought up to be polite no matter what I thought of someone. I don't recall you asking posters who have suggested that homosexuality should be illegal or that homosexual acts are disgusting to be more polite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 [quote=Swami Dhyan Try again from the 30 minute mark. That's the part that refers to Denmark. I am exhausted with this thread now and am only waiting until we reach page 50 to say my goodbyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikem8634 Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 The possibility of procreation argument is likely to become untenable at some point due to advances in science. Stem cells can already be used to produce many different types of tissue, what happens when someone figures out how to produce a sperm or an egg? (Being able to fertilise an egg using material produced from stem cells is even more likely.) If we allow different sex couples to benefit from the likes of IVF and surrogate mothers, why not couples (same sex or otherwise) to benefit from stem cell derived fertilisation? Interesting stuff indeed. You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted February 11, 2013 Share Posted February 11, 2013 Interesting stuff indeed. Oh, can you just imagine the outrage? Elton John and partner have already used a surrogate mother I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.