Is gay marriage a threat to humanity?

44leto

stoneill wrote: »

If the KILL ALL HUMANS part of the same sex marriage vows was removed would that help?

That is a partial quote its "KILL ALL STRAIGHT HUMANS WHO CAN HAVE CHILDREN" you see its not kill all humans.

efb

Its fecking Slavery now Ted:
http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/gay-marriage-is-like-slavery-catholic-leader-says-3039454.html
(Does that apply if we use a safe word??? )

44leto

efb wrote: »

Its fecking Slavery now Ted:
http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/gay-marriage-is-like-slavery-catholic-leader-says-3039454.html
(Does that apply if we use a safe word??? )

LOL
See this is what I mean, you just nod your head and pat him on the head and say realllllllyyyy and then ask are the good people at the special home taking good care of you.

efb

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlUG8F9uVgM

Pacifist Pigeon

efb wrote: »

Its fecking Slavery now Ted:
http://www.independent.ie/world-news/europe/gay-marriage-is-like-slavery-catholic-leader-says-3039454.html
(Does that apply if we use a safe word??? )

Well according to that logic, so much being a member of the Catholic Church -- are we allowed to leave the RCC now? No, because Slave Master Ratzinger doesn't approve anymore.

Doc Ruby

I'd have thought it was more of a threat to huwomanity. Except for lesbians of course.

marty1985

There is an interesting piece in the Telegraph today, on how gay marriage issue became such a hot button issue, without the benefit of a mass movement demanding it or any civil unrest. Brendan O'Neill argues that it seems to be not so much a demand of the demos, but a tool of the elite.

The thing motoring the gay-marriage campaign, its political engine, is not any longstanding desire among homosexuals to get married or an active, passionate demand from below for the right of men to marry men and women to marry women. No, its driving force, the reason it has been so speedily and heartily embraced by the political and media classes, is because it is so very useful as a litmus test of liberal, cosmopolitan values. Supporting gay marriage has become a kind of shorthand way of indicating one’s superiority over the hordes, particularly those of a religious or redneck persuasion.

Brendan O'Neill is an atheist, and usually a very level-headed one, and made some excellent points at a debate at UCC recently about how the anti-Catholic rhetoric of a lot of New Atheists or just modern day Ireland borrows the tactics of old Catholic Ireland, demonising their opponents. Similarly, here he says those who are against gay marriage, whether it is Catholic bishops or conservative politicians, are not seen simply as old-fashioned or wrong-headed, but as morally circumspect, possibly even evil.

They are even branded as mentally disordered, being tagged as “homophobic” (that is, possessed of an irrational fear) if they so much as raise a peep of criticism of gay marriage. Here, ironically, gay campaigners rehabilitate the very same psychobabble that was once used to brand homosexuality as a disorder of the mind and wield it against anyone who now dares to say “I don’t like the gay lifestyle”.

Unfortunately, it is an issue where nuance is not allowed, there can only be one answer to the question at hand, seemingly.

The bizarre emptying-out of political debate from the issue of gay marriage, and its transformation instead into a clear-cut moral matter that separates the good from the bad, shows what its backers really get out of it – a moral buzz, a rush of superiority as they declare, to anyone who will listen, that they are For Gay Marriage.

O'Neill argues, that supporting gay marriage has become less a declaration of truly democratic instincts and more a kind of provocation. In declaring your support for gay marriage, you can provoke both fusty old religionists and the backward masses into expressions of disagreement or disgruntlement, and then bask in the glow of your own superior, better-informed outlook. Not sure if I agree with his last point, but his is an interesting view.

efb

The thing motoring the gay-marriage campaign, its political engine, is not any longstanding desire among homosexuals to get married or an active, passionate demand from below for the right of men to marry men and women to marry women. No, its driving force, the reason it has been so speedily and heartily embraced by the political and media classes, is because it is so very useful as a litmus test of liberal, cosmopolitan values. Supporting gay marriage has become a kind of shorthand way of indicating one’s superiority over the hordes, particularly those of a religious or redneck persuasion.

I'd disagree with this, People have long been campaigning for Marriage Equality. Thousands have been marching for this in Ireland each year.

Stark

marty1985 wrote: »

O'Neill argues, that supporting gay marriage has become less a declaration of truly democratic instincts and more a kind of provocation. In declaring your support for gay marriage, you can provoke both fusty old religionists and the backward masses into expressions of disagreement or disgruntlement, and then bask in the glow of your own superior, better-informed outlook. Not sure if I agree with his last point, but his is an interesting view.

If everyone only expressed support for things that they themselves personally availed of, we wouldn't have anything. So what if someone feels a little smug for voting what they believe is the right way?

Great article by the Huffington Post btw: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/greg-jenner/cardinal-keith-obrien-gay-marriage_b_1321068.html