PHILINFRANCE Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 I agree with most of that, but don't call someone a homophobe for opposing Gay marriage on religious grounds. I am left of centre on most issues but believe marriage should be between a man and a woman. I am right of centre on most issues, but agree that marriage should be between a man and a woman. I have no problems with civil relationships and the like, but marriage is sacrosanct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Litoris Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 I am right of centre on most issues, but agree that marriage should be between a man and a woman. I have no problems with civil relationships and the like, but marriage is sacrosanct. I agree with most of that, but don't call someone a homophobe for opposing Gay marriage on religious grounds. I am left of centre on most issues but believe marriage should be between a man and a woman. I'd love to hear some reasons for that... Marriage, historically, has been little more than a means for man to control his wife. Just take a look at any post Victorian feminist writing and you'll see that. It is also not sacrosanct for that reason, it has developed into a commitment of love rather than a legal contract entitling the man to all of the woman's possessions and her body. I see no reason why a same sex relationship should not be allowed to marry. If it's because supposedly a make-believe magician in the sky "hates fags" then it's not really an institution worth defending. Religion is no grounds to defend inequality and bigotry, especially as it is merely an elaborate con orchestrated by the ruling classes of an ancient time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 I'd love to hear some reasons for that... Marriage, historically, has been little more than a means for man to control his wife. Just take a look at any post Victorian feminist writing and you'll see that. It is also not sacrosanct for that reason, it has developed into a commitment of love rather than a legal contract entitling the man to all of the woman's possessions and her body. I see no reason why a same sex relationship should not be allowed to marry. If it's because supposedly a make-believe magician in the sky "hates fags" then it's not really an institution worth defending. Religion is no grounds to defend inequality and bigotry, especially as it is merely an elaborate con orchestrated by the ruling classes of an ancient time. In which case, why would gays and lesbians want to get married? Surely if what you say is right, they would rather not have the stigma that marriage entails if the disagree with the history of it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Litoris Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 In which case, why would gays and lesbians want to get married? Surely if what you say is right, they would rather not have the stigma that marriage entails if the disagree with the history of it? Personally think marriage has changed, which was a response to the point that marriage is 'sacrosanct'. It is, thankfully, no longer an oppressive institution and in modern times, when to the majority religion means absolutely nothing, it has become a symbolic gesture of love and commitment. Why should that symbolism be out of reach to anyone regardless of sexual orientation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 Personally think marriage has changed, which was a response to the point that marriage is 'sacrosanct'. It is, thankfully, no longer an oppressive institution and in modern times, when to the majority religion means absolutely nothing, it has become a symbolic gesture of love and commitment. Why should that symbolism be out of reach to anyone regardless of sexual orientation? Marriage is a piece of paper that costs much in time and money to organise, that entitles you to x amount of your partners estate when it goes tits up. It is not what it once was and the symbolism can be got through other means. Marriage has the gone the way of Christmas, it means little and is more to do with being the brides big day and what she wants (I mean white dresses when most have been shagging since 16 or earlier :laugh:) than any real meaning of commitment to one another. The divorce stats will tell you that. Why gays and lesbians want to be part of such an expensive sham, god only knows! They want their bloody heads read! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Litoris Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 Marriage is a piece of paper that costs much in time and money to organise, that entitles you to x amount of your partners estate when it goes tits up. It is not what it once was and the symbolism can be got through other means. Marriage has the gone the way of Christmas, it means little and is more to do with being the brides big day and what she wants (I mean white dresses when most have been shagging since 16 or earlier ) than any real meaning of commitment to one another. The divorce stats will tell you that. Why gays and lesbians want to be part of such an expensive sham, god only knows! They want their bloody heads read! All true, (cynical but true) but the real point or question shouldn't be why do they want to but why shouldn't they be allowed to make that choice? We can discuss the merits of marriage until our finger tips have worn away. I've never once seen a reasonable or well made argument against gay marriage or equality. Why there's a distinction to be made between one relationship and another baffles me. Love is love, surely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRL Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 All true, (cynical but true) but the real point or question shouldn't be why do they want to but why shouldn't they be allowed to make that choice? We can discuss the merits of marriage until our finger tips have worn away. I've never once seen a reasonable or well made argument against gay marriage or equality. Why there's a distinction to be made between one relationship and another baffles me. Love is love, surely? Indeed, which leads to the question why have marriage, why not have another way of showing love for one another. Another symbolic ceremony which is legally binding that has zero background with the church. Marriage is dying. There should be another ceremonial symbolic jesture introduced that is held in the same light as Marriage. Then there would be none of this discussion. Marriage if we like it or not has its roots in the church. If you are religious (I am not) then stick with Marriage, if you are Gay or Lesbian which goes against religious teachings or heterosexual and don't believe in religion then go down another route. But this other route should be made mainstream and held up there in the same light as a proper religious marriage ceremony. Because as I see it, going to a hotel and getting married by a registrar, doesn't seem to have all the bells and whistles that Marriage in its most true sense seems to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Litoris Posted July 19, 2014 Report Share Posted July 19, 2014 Indeed, which leads to the question why have marriage, why not have another way of showing love for one another. Another symbolic ceremony which is legally binding that has zero background with the church. Marriage is dying. There should be another ceremonial symbolic jesture introduced that is held in the same light as Marriage. Then there would be none of this discussion. Marriage if we like it or not has its roots in the church. If you are religious (I am not) then stick with Marriage, if you are Gay or Lesbian which goes against religious teachings or heterosexual and don't believe in religion then go down another route. But this other route should be made mainstream and held up there in the same light as a proper religious marriage ceremony. Because as I see it, going to a hotel and getting married by a registrar, doesn't seem to have all the bells and whistles that Marriage in its most true sense seems to have. I would probably argue that marriage has out grown it's religious roots, mainly because religion is slowly dying a death in the west. Certainly the practice of the archaic customs associated with Christianity. In an ideal world what you suggest would be the ideal solution to the issue, however it will never work in reality such is the symbolism that the word marriage has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Skin Posted July 24, 2014 Report Share Posted July 24, 2014 Marriage, historically, has been little more than a means for man to control his wife. Just take a look at any post Victorian feminist writing and you'll see that. It is also not sacrosanct for that reason, it has developed into a commitment of love rather than a legal contract entitling the man to all of the woman's possessions and her body. Not sure if I was expecting Mike Litoris to be a feminist or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
downendcity Posted July 25, 2014 Report Share Posted July 25, 2014 Nicky obviously didn't make much money from the game as he could only to afford the very basic sex change operation. He couldn't stretch to the one with the good looks option so had to settle for the minger level instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B1ackbird Posted July 26, 2014 Report Share Posted July 26, 2014 Didn't he score v Sunderland in the 1st leg of the league cup only to lose the return 6-1? Dennis Smith manager of the Black Cats at the time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.