Originally posted by McDuck
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Gay Marriage - why?
Collapse
X
-
You can find me at: Energise Web Design
-
Originally posted by drelly View PostNot so... "Rational" would be a belief supported by a reasoned argument. I have yet to see any reasoned argument from the "anti-gay marriage" crowd in this thread.
Comment
-
Comment
-
Originally posted by drelly View Post
You’re probably unaware that you are wandering into territory that runs outside the ability of reason to handle.
If you want to be gay then go ahead. Why do you need the rest of us to pat you on the back?
Comment
-
I'm not going to get into this argument but what really annoys me is when someone has an opinion that dosn't happen to agree with the PC views of some parts of our society the bigot/racist/sexist card comes out.
Just because someone disagrees with something dosn't necessarily make them any of these things. It makes it harder for ordinary people to speak their mind for fear of being labeled something they are not.
If a civil union had the same rights etc in NZ law as marriage would that suffice or are homosexual couples wanting the married label ?
Marriage has always been between men and women so in my mind same sex couples can't be "married" because they are not man and woman simple as that.
Just the way my car is a corolla, it has four wheels doors and an engine but it's not a Honda.
I can call it a car just as a Honda owner can call his Honda a car but I can't call it a Honda because it's not.
So in my mind a same sex couple can have a union the same as marriage but dont call it marriage because it's not.
does that make me a bigot?
Comment
-
Originally posted by McDuck View PostReason is just a tool developed by the early Greek thinkers to systemise and categorise a small section of the entire spectrum of the experiences of man, probably with the view to control and benefit from that. You’re probably unaware that you are wandering into territory that runs outside the ability of reason to handle. If you want to be gay then go ahead. Why do you need the rest of us to pat you on the back?
Originally posted by frazzledfozzleI'm not going to get into this argument but what really annoys me is when someone has an opinion that dosn't happen to agree with the PC views of some parts of our society the bigot/racist/sexist card comes out.
Originally posted by frazzledfozzleIf a civil union had the same rights etc in NZ law as marriage would that suffice or are homosexual couples wanting the married label ?
Originally posted by frazzledfozzleMarriage has always been between men and women so in my mind same sex couples can't be "married" because they are not man and woman simple as that.
Originally posted by frazzledfozzleJust the way my car is a corolla, it has four wheels doors and an engine but it's not a Honda.
I can call it a car just as a Honda owner can call his Honda a car but I can't call it a Honda because it's not.
So in my mind a same sex couple can have a union the same as marriage but dont call it marriage because it's not.
does that make me a bigot?You can find me at: Energise Web Design
Comment
-
Originally posted by drelly View PostAll you've done this whole thread is run around in ever decreasing circles, avoiding questions, going off on tangents. No one said anything about back-patting.
This whole discussion is way out of your depth.
If you want to engage legally in once illegal physical connection, fine, you’ve got that. If you want to have legal rights to property etc in that association with your boyfriend fine, you have that.
Why you want have everyone else pat you on the back and pretend that gender doesn’t exist… sorry.. our particular species (and culture) has gender as said a property of.
Maybe you should join up with worms say…they’re interesting.
Comment
-
Originally posted by drelly View PostMcDuck. More waffle. No answers. I'm not gay you twat.
What difference does it make if you get slightly misclassified as gay…
I thought it was just a word.
You seem pretty keen on having your status in a gender system well defined.
Funny that.
I’m just playing with you… no offence; it is the coffee lounge after all.
Comment
-
Originally posted by McDuck View PostI thought it was just a word. You seem pretty keen on having your status in a gender system well defined.You can find me at: Energise Web Design
Comment
-
Originally posted by drelly View PostActually, you support a point I made. Gay used to mean "happy". The meaning of the word "marriage" is changing as well. And I didn't know this until I Googled it but same sex marriage is nothing new: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_same-sex_unions
"In the southern Chinese province of Fujian, through the Ming dynasty period, females would bind themselves in contracts to younger females in elaborate ceremonies.[5] Males also entered similar arrangements. This type of arrangement was also similar in ancient European history.[6]"
......" While the relationship was clearly approved by the wider community, and was compared to heterosexual marriage, it did not involve a religious ceremony binding the couple.[7]"
"It should be noted, however, that conubium existed only between a civis Romanus and a civis Romana (that is, between a male Roman citizen and a female Roman citizen), so that a marriage between two Roman males (or with a slave) would have no legal standing in Roman law (apart, presumably, from the arbitrary will of the emperor in the two aforementioned cases)."
No one is going to argue that homosexuality isn't something natural that's being going on for years and years but homosexual marriage was never a mainstream thing, yes the article does talk about one greek ruler who married a young boy but that doesn't exactly make it mainstream, more like an abuse of power:
"Amongst the Romans, there were instances of same-sex marriages being performed, as evidenced by emperors Nero[17][18][19] and (possibly - though it is doubted by many historians) Elagabalus,[20] who both supposedly married men, and by its outlaw in 342 AD in the Theodosian Code,[21] but the exact intent of the law and its relation to social practice is unclear, as only a few examples of same-sex marriage in that culture exist.[22]"
This article helps prove our point about civil unions.
Comment
-
Originally posted by drelly View PostI don't think it's about the label. I think it's about removing legalised discrimination.
For example, normal sized people get discriminated against every day at airports.
To explain.
A passenger with a total body/luggage weight of 150kg has to pay for the extra 50kg over their baggage allowance of 20kg if the passenger weighs 80kg whereas a passenger with a total body/luggage weight of 150kg pays nothing if the passenger weighs 140kg.Last edited by Keys; 23-03-2013, 04:27 AM.
Comment
-
I do not see a marriage as a religious union. I am not religious myself and I see a marriage as a union of two people who love each other and it does not matter if these two people are heterosexual couple or homosexual couple. Gay people are obviously discriminated. You say they try to be different and have gay parades and etc. Why can't they? People of different nationalities, backgrounds and religious views have their own clubs, gatherings and etc. So they can and why gay people can't?
Comment
Comment