Same Sex Marriage (Poll on The Journal)

wp_rathead · 29-10-2013 1:39pm

joe swanson wrote: »

I voted no and will do so in any referendum. Having read the thread, thats the end of my input as i believe its a topic that cannot be debated on boards without descending into abuse, and the shouting down of people with differing view points eg retarded which i find offensive.

Reminds me of this gem of a quote from Karl Popper;

“Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society... then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them... We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.”

Jester252 · 29-10-2013 1:40pm

I wouldn't vote if I had to travel to do so.

old hippy · 29-10-2013 1:45pm

joe swanson wrote: »

Proof of my point. Im out.

See; it's not that difficult getting through the closet door

R.F. · 29-10-2013 1:46pm

joe swanson wrote: »

Proof of my point. Im out.

Why bother announcing your vote if you arent going to bother arguing it?

Its not a public vote, so you could have left it at that

old hippy · 29-10-2013 1:47pm

poundapunnet wrote: »

Yeah but they always say its not that, I'd like to hear their side of it like. Plus I think there's a better chance of convincing people if you don't immediately dismiss their views and try to reason it out with them instead, and I think convincing people is important

We'll never know now; Joe's too afraid to give his reasons against gay marriage

Tbh, I think he only came on this thread so he could make a dramatic flounce :P

poundapunnet · 29-10-2013 1:49pm

old hippy wrote: »

We'll never know now; Joe's too afraid to give his reasons against gay marriage Tbh, I think he only came on this thread so he could make a dramatic flounce :P

He was in no mad rush to take me up on my PM offer either for some reason :pac:

old hippy · 29-10-2013 2:03pm

poundapunnet wrote: »

He was in no mad rush to take me up on my PM offer either for some reason :pac:

Probably thought you were going to ask for his hand. Or something.

;)

Joshing aside, I do find it curious that some posters will attend a thread only to say that they are not allowed have their say

Methinks Joe knows deep down that his reasons against gay people getting married are quite ridiculous if held up to a modicum of scrutiny, hence the hasty exit, stage right.

AnonoBoy · 29-10-2013 2:07pm

joe swanson wrote: »

Proof of my point. Im out.

"I got my reasons but I ain't saying what they are because I know I can't back them up in reasoned debate. So peace, I'm outtie"

*Drops mic, walks off stage*

STICK IT TO THE MAN JOE!!!!!! :pac:

seenitall · 29-10-2013 2:09pm

old hippy wrote: »

Joshing aside, I do find it curious that some posters will attend a thread only to say that they are not allowed have their say

Methinks Joe knows deep down that his reasons against gay people getting married are quite ridiculous if held up to a modicum of scrutiny, hence the hasty exit, stage right.

I don't think it's anything self-aware as that. It's about giving the two fingers to the vast majority in this thread. You can bet he'd be happy to discuss his views if the majority were sharing them.

In other words, if he can't beat us, he most certainly won't be joining us!

Annasopra · 29-10-2013 2:11pm

joe swanson wrote: »

Proof of my point. Im out.

What is your point though?

40now · 29-10-2013 2:13pm

What is your point???

Friend Computer · 29-10-2013 2:13pm

Attention seeking. Why else would someone say they've something to say but they're not going to say it?

old hippy · 29-10-2013 2:15pm

mango salsa wrote: »

What is your point though?

It's icky, un-natural, wrong, scares the kids, end of society, gateway to marrying goats and is a divil to get the stains out?

realgolfgeek · 29-10-2013 2:19pm

My Vote is against same sex marriage.
I don't believe in it, I think it's wrong, and I think it's wrong to bring up children with two daddies, or two mummies.

theblaqueguy · 29-10-2013 2:20pm

I would also vote against it

old hippy · 29-10-2013 2:21pm

realgolfgeek wrote: »

My Vote is against same sex marriage.
I don't believe in it, I think it's wrong, and I think it's wrong to bring up children with two daddies, or two mummies.

Why is it "wrong", though? Surely if a child has two loving parents, that's all that matters? I often wish I had a happy family, regardless of who was married to who.

Is it also wrong for single parent families to bring up children?

GorillaRising · 29-10-2013 2:23pm

mango salsa wrote: »

What is your point though?

old hippy wrote: »

It's icky, un-natural, wrong, scares the kids, end of society, gateway to marrying goats and is a divil to get the stains out?

This is his point. People who are opposed to it are immediately insulted. You can say what you want about those opposed to it, but not the other way around it seems.

I personally can't think of a single reason for gay people not to be allowed get married.

Is it important to me? No. Will I vote? No. Do I have more pressing issues I'm concerned about? Yes, so I'll reserve my energy for those.

Let the abuse commence. :rolleyes:

realgolfgeek · 29-10-2013 2:23pm

old hippy wrote: »

Is it also wrong for single parent families to bring up children?

No, I don't think it's wrong, but I think it's very unfortunate.

old hippy · 29-10-2013 2:23pm

theblaqueguy wrote: »

I would also vote against it

Why? We all know from other posts that you like the ladies and you have an enormous member, so surely you can't feel threatened by two people who love each other...

old hippy · 29-10-2013 2:24pm

realgolfgeek wrote: »

No, I don't think it's wrong, but I think it's very unfortunate.

Why? If the child is loved isn't that the main thing? Would you prefer the single parent to have a partner? Would the partner have to be straight?

cletus van damme · 29-10-2013 2:25pm

old hippy wrote: »

It's icky, un-natural, wrong, scares the kids, end of society, gateway to marrying goats and is a divil to get the stains out?

I'm not against gay marriage.

But I'd like a distinction between the different types of marriage be that hetro, same sex , polygamy or inter human -goat marriage.
all with equal rights - I support them all.

However what i would really strive for is for the state(tax, inheritance etc.._) benefits of marriage to be extended to couple who choose to be dependant on each other but don't recognise the right of the church/state to validate their relationship.

theblaqueguy · 29-10-2013 2:26pm

old hippy wrote: »

Why? We all know from other posts that you like the ladies and you have an enormous member, so surely you can't feel threatened by two people who love each other...

because if there the only people left on the earth there will be no more babies because they won't be reproducing and the human race will cease to exist

29-10-2013 2:27pm

theblaqueguy wrote: »

because if there the only people left on the earth there will be no more babies because they won't be reproducing and the human race will cease to exist

Well have a little consideration and stop going around killing all the straight people then!

realgolfgeek · 29-10-2013 2:29pm

old hippy wrote: »

Why? If the child is loved isn't that the main thing? Would you prefer the single parent to have a partner? Would the partner have to be straight?

Yes, I would prefer the single parent to have a partner, and Yes, the partner would have to be straight imo.

CrabRevolution · 29-10-2013 2:34pm

The blame for the against side cant all be laid at the door of the old and religious. I know of a good few people around my age (20) who wouldnt know what the inside of a church looks like but would still be against gay marriage just based on not liking the idea.

cletus van damme · 29-10-2013 2:40pm

CrabRevolution wrote: »

The blame for the against side cant all be laid at the door of the old and religious. I know of a good few people around my age (20) who wouldnt know what the inside of a church looks like but would still be against gay marriage just based on not liking the idea.

agreed.
I have to admit that allegation of church loving is a fairly lazy accusation.

some people just don't want it and maybe don't have a reason other than that is how they feel.
I would have a similar opinion on my peers (30s/40s) who a decent minority would vote against it not for religious reasons but just cos they're given a choice and pick x instead of y

Absoluvely · 29-10-2013 2:42pm

realgolfgeek wrote: »

My Vote is against same sex marriage.
I don't believe in it, I think it's wrong, and I think it's wrong to bring up children with two daddies, or two mummies.

theblaqueguy wrote: »

I would also vote against it

You think that certain legal rights (e.g. eligibility to marry one of the Jedward twins*) should only be given to women and other similar legal rights should only be given to men.

You are sexists.

Do you agree that you are sexists?

If you don't agree that you're sexists, can you explain why gender-dependent legal rights isn't an example of sexism?

*no need to comment on my poor, yet arbitrary choice of males

Lollipops23 · 29-10-2013 2:42pm

I'm totally in favour of it and it's one of the few instances I can hand on heart say I know I'm 100% right and those opposed to it are 100% wrong.

There is literally not a single good reason to be opposed to it. No matter if it's based in religion or if you simply don't like the idea of gays being committed to one another in an official capacity- either way your view is rooted in bigotry and hate.

old hippy · 29-10-2013 2:43pm

realgolfgeek wrote: »

Yes, I would prefer the single parent to have a partner, and Yes, the partner would have to be straight imo.

But what if the single parent is gay? You don't want him or her to bring up the children on his/her own. What's your solution?

old hippy · 29-10-2013 2:44pm

theblaqueguy wrote: »

because if there the only people left on the earth there will be no more babies because they won't be reproducing and the human race will cease to exist

There have been gay people since the dawn of time. How are is the human race suddenly going to cease to exist?

Ron Burgundy ! · 29-10-2013 2:46pm

I have no problem with civil unions but marriage is a religious sacrament so it should be left for the church to decide not the government if the church decides its okay then I have no problem with it.

Absoluvely · 29-10-2013 2:47pm

Ron Burgundy ! wrote: »

I have no problem with civil unions but marriage is a religious sacrament so it should be left for the church to decide not the government if the church decides its okay then I have no problem with it.

Civil marriage is not a religious sacrament

OldNotWIse · 29-10-2013 2:50pm

Oh sigh.....Cue "they will destroy the sanctity of marriage" rant.

I think I'll emigrate - I can't put up with six months of pros/cons/fors/againsts/media peddling rubbish sh1teology :rolleyes:

We've just finished with the IMF and abortion. Could they not have given us a break before starting on the next contentious issue ffs

theblaqueguy · 29-10-2013 2:53pm

old hippy wrote: »

There have been gay people since the dawn of time. How are is the human race suddenly going to cease to exist?

As I said in my post IF gay people were the only people left on the planet then the human race would cease to exist because no one would be making babies anymore it may never happen but it is a possibility

Delirium · 29-10-2013 2:53pm

Ron Burgundy ! wrote: »

I have no problem with civil unions but marriage is a religious sacrament so it should be left for the church to decide not the government if the church decides its okay then I have no problem with it.

A person doesn't have to be religious to get married. They can get married without any involvement from a church.

Delirium · 29-10-2013 2:54pm

theblaqueguy wrote: »

As I said in my post IF gay people were the only people left on the planet then the human race would cease to exist because no one would be making babies anymore it may never happen but it is a possibility

I didn't realise that gay people were sterile.

Czarcasm · 29-10-2013 2:54pm

Lollipops23 wrote: »

I'm totally in favour of it and it's one of the few instances I can hand on heart say I know I'm 100% right and those opposed to it are 100% wrong.

There is literally not a single good reason to be opposed to it. No matter if it's based in religion or if you simply don't like the idea of gays being committed to one another in an official capacity- either way your view is rooted in bigotry and hate.

Thing is Lollipops you (not you specifically, your post is perfectly reasonable) don't overcome bigotry and hate with more hate, intolerance and derision as has been shown by some posters in this thread who are proponents of marriage equality.

That gets nobody anywhere, and only cements the NO voters in their position, whereas if the YES vote were to show some understanding as to why a person might be opposed to marriage equality on religious grounds, or opposed to it for reasons they can't sufficiently articulate, instead of ridiculing them, then those people might be more open to listening to the opinions of those who advocate marriage equality.

Dismissing them as "lesser intellectuals", etc, what does that achieve? They'll still be entitled to vote, only now you've just given them an extra reason to give two fingers to advocates of marriage equality.

Ron Burgundy ! · 29-10-2013 2:54pm

Absoluvely wrote: »

Civil marriage is not a religious sacrament

what I mean is civil unions and marriages are different things i'll fully support civil unions but marriage should be left for the church to decide

pl4ichjgy17zwd · 29-10-2013 2:56pm

theblaqueguy wrote: »

As I said in my post IF gay people were the only people left on the planet then the human race would cease to exist because no one would be making babies anymore it may never happen but it is a possibility

You know gay people being gay at whatever percentage of population will happen regardless of marriage rights, though, yeah? (also, we have kids too

)

Absoluvely · 29-10-2013 2:56pm

theblaqueguy wrote: »

As I said in my post IF gay people were the only people left on the planet then the human race would cease to exist because no one would be making babies anymore it may never happen but it is a possibility

Lots of fertile male and female gay couples who wanted babies, would agree to have babies. It happens.

Also; legalising gay marriage will eradicate heterosexuality?

Delirium · 29-10-2013 2:56pm

Ron Burgundy ! wrote: »

what I mean is civil unions and marriages are different things i'll fully support civil unions but marriage should be left for the church to decide

So no-one can get divorced and re-marry?

And the point was that civil marriage has nothing to do with the church.

Sarky · 29-10-2013 2:58pm

Anything approaching a cogent argument against gay marriage this time round?

Anything?

Guys..?

Czarcasm · 29-10-2013 3:00pm

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Oh sigh.....Cue "they will destroy the sanctity of marriage" rant.

I think I'll emigrate - I can't put up with six months of pros/cons/fors/againsts/media peddling rubbish sh1teology :rolleyes:

We've just finished with the IMF and abortion. Could they not have given us a break before starting on the next contentious issue ffs

This could be a major factor in the decision on when to hold a Referendum on the issue actually, you're not the only one ONW suffering from what's been coined "Referendum Fatigue", given there was only a 40% turnout of the Electorate for the last Referendum.

old hippy · 29-10-2013 3:04pm

theblaqueguy wrote: »

As I said in my post IF gay people were the only people left on the planet then the human race would cease to exist because no one would be making babies anymore it may never happen but it is a possibility

So, you have no actual bona fide reason to be against gay marriage?

wp_rathead · 29-10-2013 3:10pm

theblaqueguy wrote: »

As I said in my post IF gay people were the only people left on the planet then the human race would cease to exist because no one would be making babies anymore it may never happen but it is a possibility

...how is it possible that everyone on planet will suddenly be gay?

Iv heard some daft "slippery slope" arguments but this takes the biscuit

theblaqueguy · 29-10-2013 3:10pm

old hippy wrote: »

So, you have no actual bona fide reason to be against gay marriage?

I just think marriage should be between a man and a woman

Czarcasm · 29-10-2013 3:13pm

old hippy wrote: »

So, you have no actual bona fide reason to be against gay marriage?

Here's a novel idea hippy -

Instead of berating and mocking him for his admittedly assinine views, how about you give him reason to SUPPORT marriage equality instead of asking him why he's against it? You've established that he's against it- now you need to ask yourself, which matters more to you - showing off your perceived intellectual superiority, or trying to foster understanding and support for marriage equality?

I know which one matters more to me, and it's not whether or not I'm more intellectual or can argue more eloquently than the guy whose views I wish to change.

Being full of one's own self-importance is never very smart.

Absoluvely · 29-10-2013 3:14pm

theblaqueguy wrote: »

I just think marriage should be between a man and a woman

Are there any other equally arbitrary restrictions you think should apply to marriage eligibility?

Like regarding race, interest in sports, body shape, weight, height, skin colour etc, wealth...

Gender is an awfully arbitrary and needless restriction to place on marriage or any other legal rights.

All it is is a binary trait based on what your genitals looked like when you were born. That's all.

Daith · 29-10-2013 3:15pm

theblaqueguy wrote: »

I just think marriage should be between a man and a woman

Do you think that two gay people who are raising a child should not have the same rights as man and woman raising a child?

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 29-10-2013 3:15pm

theblaqueguy wrote: »

As I said in my post IF gay people were the only people left on the planet then the human race would cease to exist because no one would be making babies anymore it may never happen but it is a possibility

Technically, no. A gay man and a gay woman can still procreate.

theblaqueguy wrote: »

I just think marriage should be between a man and a woman

May I ask why? (Honest question)

Same Sex Marriage (Poll on The Journal)

Comments