Gay Marriage/Marriage Equality/End of World?

Actor

Helix wrote: »

so you're discounting bits of the bible happily, while sticking firmly to others?

why?

Do you know the difference (from a Catholic perspective) between the OT and the NT? If not, there's an internet out there for you.

Failing that, there are a bunch of very well-informed anti-Church atheists (bordering on obsessive) here who can fill you in on the details of Catholicism.

lazygal

Actor wrote: »

Do you know the difference (from a Catholic perspective) between the OT and the NT? If not, there's an internet out there for you.

Failing that, there are a bunch of very well-informed anti-Church atheists (bordering on obsessive) here who can fill you in on the details of Catholicism.

That's cool.

Meanwhile, back to sodomy. I'm wondering if you can post the quotes from the bible where Jesus was agin it? I'm still a bit unclear on how other people having sex affects my marriage.

Helix

Actor wrote: »

Do you know the difference (from a Catholic perspective) between the OT and the NT? If not, there's an internet out there for you.

Failing that, there are a bunch of very well-informed anti-Church atheists (bordering on obsessive) here who can fill you in on the details of Catholicism.

no im aware of the difference between them, but it's very convenient that you disregard certain parts of the OT but cling to others, don't you think?

so is the whole OT irrelevant then, or just the parts that it suits you to see as irrelevant? it seems to change based on who you talk to really

Sonics2k

Actor wrote: »

Sodomy is, quite frankly, disgusting. I'd sooner put my micky in a blender than have my sexual organ covered in faeces. Sodomy is the essence of my point against gay "marriage". There are also biblical references to the behaviour, but seeing as this is the atheist forum; we're not allowed to discuss them...

And "oh, but heterosexuals do it too" is not an explanation for the behaviour.

You know bugger all about sodomy and human biology.

NuMarvel

Actor wrote: »

Sodomy is, quite frankly, disgusting. I'd sooner put my micky in a blender than have my sexual organ covered in faeces. Sodomy is the essence of my point against gay "marriage". There are also biblical references to the behaviour, but seeing as this is the atheist forum; we're not allowed to discuss them...

And "oh, but heterosexuals do it too" is not an explanation for the behaviour.

Of course the bible is of no relevance to this. We're talking about civil marriage, not marriage in a Christian Church. I don't spout out equality legislation if a priest refuses to give me communion, you don't spout scripture when we're talking about civil, legal matters.

Links234

Actor wrote: »

Sodomy is the essence of my point against gay "marriage".

So as long as there's no butt sex, you've no problem with gay guys getting married? Gotcha

oldrnwisr

Actor wrote: »

Do you know the difference (from a Catholic perspective) between the OT and the NT? If not, there's an internet out there for you.

Failing that, there are a bunch of very well-informed anti-Church atheists (bordering on obsessive) here who can fill you in on the details of Catholicism.

Sorry, remind me again (from a Catholic perspective) where the Ten Commandments are?

NuMarvel

Links234 wrote: »

So as long as there's no butt sex, you've no problem with gay guys getting married? Gotcha

Obviously that requires the setting up of an Anal Virginity Testing Service so that the Government can regularly examine the anuses of married gay men to ensure that they meet the No Anal Sex requirement.

It could be like the anti-NCT. It would be carried out every year for the first ten years of marriage, and then every 2 years after that. Cause let's face it, if it's not happened by then, chances are it won't happen. They could even include special explanatory leaflets on how to prepare for the test, written by the thread's resident expert on all things anal.

Turtwig

NuMarvel wrote: »

Obviously that requires the setting up of an Anal Virginity Testing Service so that the Government can regularly examine the anuses of married gay men to ensure that they meet the No Anal Sex requirement.

It could be like the anti-NCT. It would be carried out every year for the first ten years of marriage, and then every 2 years after that. Cause let's face it, if it's not happened by then, chances are it won't happen. They could even include special explanatory leaflets on how to prepare for the test, written by the thread's resident expert on all things anal.

How would they distinguish between mass scaled constipation, anal sex and accidents potentially involving various types of rods?

Nodin

Actor wrote: »

Sodomy is, quite frankly, disgusting. I'd sooner put my micky in a blender than have my sexual organ covered in faeces. .....

Alas, if you only showed the same concern for your cranium....

Nodin

Actor wrote: »

Sodomy is, quite frankly, disgusting....

So you're against gay marriage because of Sodomy...

Do I take it then you've no problem with lesbians marrying?

NuMarvel

Jernal wrote: »

How would they distinguish between mass scaled constipation, anal sex and accidents potentially involving various types of rods?

I haven't a clue to be honest, but I'm sure the thread's resident anal sexpert will be happy to enlighten us any minute now...

Bannasidhe

Actor wrote: »

Sodomy is, quite frankly, disgusting. I'd sooner put my micky in a blender than have my sexual organ covered in faeces. Sodomy is the essence of my point against gay "marriage". There are also biblical references to the behaviour, but seeing as this is the atheist forum; we're not allowed to discuss them...

And "oh, but heterosexuals do it too" is not an explanation for the behaviour.

I am a homosexual and I don't have a micky to stick in a blender or anywhere else for that matter.

So why exactly can't I marry my partner (she doesn't have a micky either.)

Galvasean

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I am a homosexual and I don't have a micky to stick in a blender or anywhere else for that matter.

So why exactly can't I marry my partner (she doesn't have a micky either.)

I'm willing to wager he'll ignore that and return a bit later nd say "Sodomy is wrong."
Why are hardcore Catholics obsessed with sodomy?

IT-Guy

Sonics2k wrote: »

You know bugger all about sodomy and human biology.

I see what you did there...:p

Good to see Actor is at least attempting to explain how sodomy is bad for society even though his only line of reasoning so far is 'I don't like it/approve therefore it must be bad for everybody else'. Sheesh, with an attitude like that he'd have made the strictest censor ever.

Sappa

Some societies recognise homosexuals very early,in south east Asia I have seem cases where families accept their child is gay or wants to be a ladyboy at 5yrs old.
I witnessed one family who lived next door,who embraced this and their attitude was up to him.
Europe has come a hell of a long way from the days where a lobotomy was performed on a gay person,this was widespread even up to the early 80's leading to serious complications.
Gay people have to accept they are different in their sexual orientation and cannot demand the same as heterosexuals.
Let's face it,a married couple with children are under a lot more financial pressure on average to a working gay couple.
The hetero couple are doing society a service by creating life and future taxpayers who will inevitably pay for the gay couples pension.
Hence the married hetero couple deserve better conditions for making these sacrifices that a gay couple can never do.
Ireland has loads of rights afforded to homosexuals,they have their own bars,clubs,parades and are for the most part are left in peace here.
Some societies are more liberal than others ours is not as liberal as some but more than others.
Politicians who are in favour of it are point scoring and the general population is not up for it no matter what any poll says which are massively inaccurate .

Nodin

Bannasidhe wrote: »

I am a homosexual and I don't have a micky to stick in a blender or anywhere else for that matter.

So why exactly can't I marry my partner (she doesn't have a micky either.)

Not a one between yez? Jaysus, times are bad....

MagicMarker

Sappa wrote: »

Some societies recognise homosexuals very early,in south east Asia I have seem cases where families accept their child is gay or wants to be a ladyboy at 5yrs old.
I witnessed one family who lived next door,who embraced this and their attitude was up to him.
Europe has come a hell of a long way from the days where a lobotomy was performed on a gay person,this was widespread even up to the early 80's leading to serious complications.
Gay people have to accept they are different in their sexual orientation and cannot demand the same as heterosexuals.
Let's face it,a married couple with children are under a lot more financial pressure on average to a working gay couple.
The hetero couple are doing society a service by creating life and future taxpayers who will inevitably pay for the gay couples pension.
Hence the married hetero couple deserve better conditions for making these sacrifices that a gay couple can never do.
Ireland has loads of rights afforded to homosexuals,they have their own bars,clubs,parades and are for the most part are left in peace here.
Some societies are more liberal than others ours is not as liberal as some but more than others.
Politicians who are in favour of it are point scoring and the general population is not up for it no matter what any poll says which are massively inaccurate .

So you also think hetero couples who are unable to have children also shouldn't be allowed to marry?

Bloodwing

Galvasean wrote: »

Why are hardcore Catholics obsessed with sodomy?

AFAIK an in depth knowledge of sodomy is a requirement for entry to heaven. There's some sort of multiple choice quiz when you reach the gate and if you don't score at least 95% you go to hell, which is actually just a room where jesus spends hours "teaching" you all about it.

Sappa

MagicMarker wrote: »

Sappa wrote: »

Some societies recognise homosexuals very early,in south east Asia I have seem cases where families accept their child is gay or wants to be a ladyboy at 5yrs old.
I witnessed one family who lived next door,who embraced this and their attitude was up to him.
Europe has come a hell of a long way from the days where a lobotomy was performed on a gay person,this was widespread even up to the early 80's leading to serious complications.
Gay people have to accept they are different in their sexual orientation and cannot demand the same as heterosexuals.
Let's face it,a married couple with children are under a lot more financial pressure on average to a working gay couple.
The hetero couple are doing society a service by creating life and future taxpayers who will inevitably pay for the gay couples pension.
Hence the married hetero couple deserve better conditions for making these sacrifices that a gay couple can never do.
Ireland has loads of rights afforded to homosexuals,they have their own bars,clubs,parades and are for the most part are left in peace here.
Some societies are more liberal than others ours is not as liberal as some but more than others.
Politicians who are in favour of it are point scoring and the general population is not up for it no matter what any poll says which are massively inaccurate .

So you also think hetero couples who are unable to have children also shouldn't be allowed to marry?

Majority rules

jill_valentine

Nodin wrote: »

Not a one between yez? Jaysus, times are bad....

That's Fine Gael for you.

Nodin

Sappa wrote: »

............
Let's face it,a married couple with children are under a lot more financial pressure on average to a working gay couple.
The hetero couple are doing society a service by creating life and future taxpayers who will inevitably pay for the gay couples pension.
Hence the married hetero couple deserve better conditions for making these sacrifices that a gay couple can never do.
.......

You mean a married couple with children are under more pressure than a married couple without....

Do you propose a second tier of marriage for infertile couples or those who just don't want any?

What about gay couples who adopt/have artificial insemination? Do they get 1st tier marriage?

Wiggles88

Sappa wrote: »

Gay people have to accept they are different in their sexual orientation and cannot demand the same as heterosexuals.

Why?

Let's face it,a married couple with children are under a lot more financial pressure on average to a working gay couple.

If the gay couple have kids I dont see how they are in less financial pressure, equally if both herero and homosexual couples have no kids.

The hetero couple are doing society a service by creating life

Not all hetero couples have kids, should these couples have their rights taken from them too?

and future taxpayers who will inevitably pay for the gay couples pension.

Yeah because gay people dont pay taxes themselves...

Hence the married hetero couple deserve better conditions for making these sacrifices that a gay couple can never do.

lol they were some of the laziest excuses I've ever heard, try to put some effort into the next set of excuses you come up with.

Politicians who are in favour of it are point scoring and the general population is not up for it no matter what any poll says which are massively inaccurate .

If you dont trust the polls than what do you base this assertion on?

Delirium

Sappa wrote: »

Majority rules

Unless the majority happen to disagree with what you want, i.e. supporting gay marriage.

Nodin

Sappa wrote: »

Majority rules

We live in one of these....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_republic

Sappa

Sappa wrote: »

Gay people have to accept they are different in their sexual orientation and cannot demand the same as heterosexuals.

Why can't they demand the same rights? What's wrong with equality that transcends sexual orientation?

Let's face it,a married couple with children are under a lot more financial pressure on average to a working gay couple.
The hetero couple are doing society a service by creating life and future taxpayers who will inevitably pay for the gay couples pension.
Hence the married hetero couple deserve better conditions for making these sacrifices that a gay couple can never do.

A few questions:

If a gay couple were to adopt one or more children--if adoption were to be allowed--should they then, in your view, "deserve better conditions", as the married, child producing couple deserve?

If a hetero couple who are married do not wish to have children, should they be afforded the same rights as gay couples? Or do they deserve the same rights as child-producing, married couples, despite their unwillingness to have children?

You talk of those who can contribute to society deserving better conditions (whatever these conditions are). So, do those who are capable of contributing more to society--in the form of "future taxpayers", i.e. children, in this case--deserve "better conditions" than those who are incapable to contributing a lot to society? Say, for example, a severally mentally handicapped person: since they can't contribute to society to the same degree as a mentally functional person, do they deserve "lesser conditions"?

I find the idea that the "conditions" which one deserves being tied to how much one contributes to society to be disturbing, I have to say.

Zillah

Sappa wrote: »

Politicians who are in favour of it are point scoring and the general population is not up for it no matter what any poll says which are massively inaccurate .

There is this weird middle zone with some people whose brains seem so dysfunctional that I can't decide if they're incredibly stupid or actually insane. I'm trying to come up with a compound word for it, like mixing "idiocy" and "insanity" or something like that - it's hard though. It needs to convey that almost zen-like dissonance I feel when a person blithely sails from non sequitor to non sequitor in a cunning imitation of human thinking.

What I'm trying to say is that the thoughts in your brain don't work properly and you'll never understand why.

Bannasidhe

Sappa wrote: »

Some societies recognise homosexuals very early,in south east Asia I have seem cases where families accept their child is gay or wants to be a ladyboy at 5yrs old.
I witnessed one family who lived next door,who embraced this and their attitude was up to him.
Europe has come a hell of a long way from the days where a lobotomy was performed on a gay person,this was widespread even up to the early 80's leading to serious complications.
Gay people have to accept they are different in their sexual orientation and cannot demand the same as heterosexuals.
Let's face it,a married couple with children are under a lot more financial pressure on average to a working gay couple.
The hetero couple are doing society a service by creating life and future taxpayers who will inevitably pay for the gay couples pension.
Hence the married hetero couple deserve better conditions for making these sacrifices that a gay couple can never do.
Ireland has loads of rights afforded to homosexuals,they have their own bars,clubs,parades and are for the most part are left in peace here.
Some societies are more liberal than others ours is not as liberal as some but more than others.
Politicians who are in favour of it are point scoring and the general population is not up for it no matter what any poll says which are massively inaccurate .

Ok - I created a life, sent him to school, paid for child minders, school books, uniforms, what ever clothes were 'must have' that season, I personally kept lego profitable through the 80s and 90s, bought countless blasted Transformers, computers, games consoles and games, searched the country to get shoes/boots/trainers to fit his mutant size 13 feet, paid more then the GDP of a small nation for food to fill his bottomless pit of a stomach, paid a fortune for sports equipment so the sod could decide with a month or so that he didn't like riding/tennis/ice hockey/rugby/soccer but now wanted to play some other sport which required even more expensive equipment, sat up all night in hospitals when he had his latest accident while skate boarding/rollerblading/sunbathing on the kitchen roof, took him on holidays in Ireland and abroad every year, My OH and I worked -still do, paid our taxes - still do ( 50% rate back in the 80s :mad:), bought a house, paid my mortgage, bought another house - still paying that mortgage, I have paid for every single birthday party for my grandchildren (current total is 8 - #9 is next month), take my grand kids away for a week every Easter for a holiday in Ireland, bring them camping in Ireland for 2 weeks every July ....yet not once have I ever been charged less then heterosexual couples so I fail to see how was I under less financial pressure then they were?

I made my sacrifices. I contributed more then many of my childless straight friends - why the hell should I not be entitled to the same fecking rights as they have????

:mad::mad::mad:

MagicMarker

Sappa wrote: »

Majority rules

Reaaaallly?

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/frontpage/2010/0915/1224278900109.html

Two-thirds support gay marriage, poll finds
JUST OVER two-thirds of people (67 per cent) believe gay couples should be allowed to marry, according to an Irish Times/Behaviour Attitudes social poll.

It is one of a series of findings in a poll on “sex, sin and society” that indicates Irish people have adopted a more liberal attitude towards personal relationships and sexual behaviour.

http://www.thejournal.ie/poll-should-ireland-introduce-same-sex-marriage-446094-May2012/

Poll: Should Ireland introduce same-sex marriage?

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/elections/opinion-polls/more-than-six-in-10-now-want-samesex-marriage-legalised-2554026.html

More than six in 10 now want same-sex marriage legalised

THE majority of people want gay marriage to be legalised.

More than six out of every 10 voters believe same-sex marriages should be recognised by the State, according to the latest Irish Independent/Millward Brown Lansdowne survey.

The figures show just 27pc of voters are opposed to the idea of gay marriage.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/poll-73-of-public-back-allowing-same-sex-marriage-in-constitution-184849.html

Poll: 73% of public back allowing same-sex marriage in Constitution

Three in four people agree with allowing the principle of same-sex marriage in the Constitution, a poll has revealed.

The findings are part of research done in connection with last year’s referendum seeking to beef up the powers of Oireachtas inquiries, a referendum that was rejected by the electorate.

It's seems the numbers of bigoted, homophobic numptys are dwindling.

Bannasidhe

Nodin wrote: »

Not a one between yez? Jaysus, times are bad....

Can't even afford a dildo as the grand kids are bleeding me dry so even if I was inclined to try and persuade herself that sodomy was compulsory for all homosexualists and in the highly unlikely event that she didn't slap me upside the head for even suggesting bum sex I couldn't afford the equipment to enable us to have a go and see what the fuss is all about.