harvey19 Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 We aren't talking about physical equality, we are talking about equal rights within the law, a human institution which we control. Would it help you if I clarify the question? Are you actually saying that you are against equality for all mentally competent adults within the institution of the law of the UK? Can you answer that? ---------- Post added 29-05-2013 at 17:57 ---------- From the perspective of the law, simply equal. ---------- Post added 29-05-2013 at 17:59 ---------- Because it is not different. I don't believe it is short sighted to give equal treatment to gay couples. I consider it to be short sighted and potentially homophobic to insist that they not be given equal treatment. Consider that. I consider that you have completely twisted everything I have posted on this thread or are unable to understand another persons viewpoint. I suggest you reread my posts where you will find nothing homophobic or unequal in the treatment of different sections of society. When and if you reread my posts please do so with an open mind and try to understand why I do not consider the word marriage should be redefined Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 ....try to understand why I do not consider the word marriage should be redefined It's not being redefined, it's being modernised, as it has many times since marriage first became bound in English law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 We aren't talking about physical equality, we are talking about equal rights within the law, a human institution which we control. Would it help you if I clarify the question? Are you actually saying that you are against equality for all mentally competent adults within the institution of the law of the UK? Can you answer that? ---------- Post added 29-05-2013 at 17:57 ---------- From the perspective of the law, simply equal. ---------- Post added 29-05-2013 at 17:59 ---------- Because it is not different. I don't believe it is short sighted to give equal treatment to gay couples. I consider it to be short sighted and potentially homophobic to insist that they not be given equal treatment. Consider that. So you do not think there is any difference between men and women ? Why are men and women incarcerated in different prisons, why can't women serve in the infantry ? ---------- Post added 29-05-2013 at 18:16 ---------- It's not being redefined, it's being modernised, as it has many times since marriage first became bound in English law. This is a common argument but in fact marriage is being redefined in the most obvious of ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 So you do not think there is any difference between men and women ? Why are men and women incarcerated in different prisons, why can't women serve in the infantry ? ---------- Post added 29-05-2013 at 18:16 ---------- This is a common argument but in fact marriage is being redefined in the most obvious of ways. Is it? Why? As far as I can see it has undergone a series of modernizations over the years. What I cannot see however is it having been redefined, It's still the union of a loving couple, being bound and recognised in law. Since it first became part of English law that part has remained the same, and it is still so, but it has modernized over the years. Let's go into it and look at the details, let's pull it apart, and most importantly I ask that you enlighten us on this redefinition you claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 Is it? Why? As far as I can see it has undergone a series of modernizations over the years. What I cannot see however is it having been redefined, It's still the union of a loving couple, being bound and recognised in law. Since it first became part of English law that part has remained the same, and it is still so, but it has modernized over the years. Let's go into it and look at the details, let's pull it apart, and most importantly I ask that you enlighten us on this redefinition you claim. I have stated my reasons several times on this thread and have argued my viewpoint this afternoon with others. I do not see the point in starting again as I would only be repeating myself(again). Maybe you will see some validity in my arguments if you read them or maybe not but I am not going to start again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halibut Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 I have stated my reasons several times on this thread and have argued my viewpoint this afternoon with others. I do not see the point in starting again as I would only be repeating myself(again). Maybe you will see some validity in my arguments if you read them or maybe not but I am not going to start again. No, they're still rubbish. They hold no water at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 Come on Harvey I'm waiting. Let's start at which point in time you consider to be 'marriage', and why changes made since its formulation and since the period you consider you consider have no place in it. ---------- Post added 29-05-2013 at 18:34 ---------- I have stated my reasons several times on this thread and have argued my viewpoint this afternoon with others. I do not see the point in starting again as I would only be repeating myself(again). Maybe you will see some validity in my arguments if you read them or maybe not but I am not going to start again. I've read the thread, I've not seen the particular point made where you consider marriage is being redifined and not modernized. If you think I have missed this post please point it out. Which 'marriage' in history do you consider to be the correct one and why? Why do those things abandoned from marriage and those things suggested for it not cut the mustard as part of marriage as far as you're concerned? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 It would help you if you could clarify the question. Age discrimination has certain exemptions, as there are for sex discrimination. So do you mean equality, or do you mean discrimination. Can you define equallity, if that is what you are asking? You're desperately twisting and turning to avoid answering the question. I think that makes it clear what your stance is, you don't care about equality, in fact you favour inequality within the law, you wish the law to discriminate against (at least) gay people. ---------- Post added 29-05-2013 at 18:37 ---------- I consider that you have completely twisted everything I have posted on this thread or are unable to understand another persons viewpoint. I suggest you reread my posts where you will find nothing homophobic or unequal in the treatment of different sections of society. When and if you reread my posts please do so with an open mind and try to understand why I do not consider the word marriage should be redefined You don't think gay people should be allowed to marry, you wish it to remain legally impossible for them. You don't support equality within the law and want the law to continue to discriminate against them. You've given half a dozen spurious and unrelated reasons to support what appears to be at heart bigotry. ---------- Post added 29-05-2013 at 18:39 ---------- So you do not think there is any difference between men and women ? I don't think that the law should discriminate based on sex. Why are men and women incarcerated in different prisons, why can't women serve in the infantry ? So long as they are incarcerated then it's still equal. I'm not arguing for unisex prisons or unisex public toilets. Just equal legal treatment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harvey19 Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 Come on Harvey I'm waiting. Let's start at which point in time you consider to be 'marriage', and why changes made since its formulation and since the period you consider you consider have no place in it. ---------- Post added 29-05-2013 at 18:34 ---------- I've read the thread, I've not seen the particular point made where you consider marriage is being redifined and not modernized. If you think I have missed this post please point it out. As I said above I have stated my reasons several times earlier and can't see any reason to repeat myself. Sorry if you wanted to debate, I would have done earlier but think I have exhausted the topic now. I am sure others will oblige. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted May 29, 2013 Share Posted May 29, 2013 I think that makes it clear what your stance is, you don't care about equality, in fact you favour inequality within the law, you wish the law to discriminate against (at least) gay people. Can you define equallity, if that is what you are asking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.