Jessica23 Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 Peter Tatchell is spot on. I really don't see how the fact that marriage has been around a long time contradicts the claims he makes about its basis in patriarchy, inheritance and control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_Sleeps Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 No. Marriage originated when mankind originated or very soon thereafter. When did mankind originate? When did marriage follow? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 Except of course that Peter Thatchell has his "facts" wrong. Marriage has a long history of sexism and patriarchy; being originally devised to ensure the male sexual control of women and the inheritance of property through the male line, from father to son. No. Marriage originated when mankind originated or very soon thereafter[/Quote] and you can of course back this up with evidence? As we celebrate gay pride Nothing to celebrate there. Doesn't pride come before a fall?[/Quote] Ironic that, as most of the anti gay marriage lobby are proud of the institution of marriage in its current form and hence fight tooth and nail to stop it being extended to same sex couples. For all these reasons, I am not a great fan of marriage No, he wouldn't be. But so what? That's merely his personal preference; and he's never actually been married anyway. I love being married, and I support same sex union 100%, does being married affect your opinion on marriage? mmm maybe, one to ponder there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jessica23 Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 I think marriage is an awful institution but I still support equal marriage. There just aren't any grounds for not supporting it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 Except of course that Peter Thatchell has his "facts" wrong. Marriage has a long history of sexism and patriarchy; being originally devised to ensure the male sexual control of women and the inheritance of property through the male line, from father to son. No. Marriage originated when mankind originated or very soon thereafter. Does that mean that it doesn't have a history of sexism and patriarchy? As we celebrate gay pride Nothing to celebrate there. Doesn't pride come before a fall? No in this case pride comes after many years of homophobia, violence and repression For all these reasons, I am not a great fan of marriage No, he wouldn't be. But so what? That's merely his personal preference; and he's never actually been married anyway. You don't need to be married to have a view on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 Anything that harms or has a negative affect on marriage is not good. Things are still unsure from the link thay I posted. But there is a thought that marriage will surrer by extending it to other groups. Pure speculation. Unsupported by any evidence. Marriage is less important than it was, According to who? it may die out, it may change conciderably. Perhaps we have reached a point where we need to decide what marriage is for. We are deciding at the moment that it is for everyone, not just straight couples. Is it a religious matter, a legal matter, something about love or something about children; or a mixture of all. It can be any and/or all those things to different people. I cant see the UK suffering the trouble that the french have had, but it seems its quite an import issue - and the public need to discuss it, without calling people biggots. The only reason it needs discussion at all is because the bigots don't like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 The only reason it needs discussion at all is because the bigots don't like it. Why are you doing the name calling, I thought we were just having a nice discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 Why are you doing the name calling, I thought we were just having a nice discussion. Why have you taken to avoiding my questions again? Here you go If less straight people get married why does that concern you? Can you think of any reasons why gay people shouldn't be able, or won't be able to get married? Should those gay people with children be allowed to marry and the straight ones that don't have to have a civil partnership? What do you consider harming or having a negative affect on marriage? Two people in love getting married? Why is that in any way harmful or negative? What does marriage entail religiously in Britain? What does marriage entail legally in Britain? What does marriage entail regarding love and commitment in Britain? What does marriage entail regarding children in Britain? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 Why have you taken to avoiding my questions again? There is no point, because you are not listening; and you are not responding to my questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaliRichard Posted May 30, 2013 Share Posted May 30, 2013 There is no point, because you are not listening; and you are not responding to my questions. :hihi: Brilliant. I am listening, hence why I put forward the questions in the first place. They are based on the things you said, and I want to explore those things in more detail. The details, alas, seem to be the things that you, not just you, but the anti gay marriage lobby in general, avoid like the plague - whenever the details of what you said are in the spotlight, whenever they are held up to be explored, you all seem to avoid the questions or do little pretty dances around them. I'm quite happy to answer your questions, but your questions seem to be exlusively placed in positions of destraction from my questions - and by answering them it seems to make you forget to answer mine. It provides me with a difficulty, you see when I do answer your questions I ask a counter question, or remind you that you haven't yet answered a question - yet when you ask questions you very rarely attempt to answer (or give deliberately vague answers to) my questions in return. It's been your tactic since our beginning this discussion, so the easiest thing for me to do to avoid distracting you is avoid your questions. So I'll make a deal with you, I'll answer your questions if you employ my tactic of answering in full first and then asking a counter question, rather than asking a counter question by means of distraction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.