MistyCheese wrote: » AFAIK the Catholic doctor, ine suggests that they don't have a problem with gay people, just the act of penetrative homosexual sex. Which would mean that lesbians are grand. Any toys, tools, strap-ons or dildos are a no-no for everyone, regardless of sexual preference. This means, in theory, that no Catholic person would have any problem shaking hands, breaking bread, working beside or even showering with people who are homosexual, they would just condemn the actual act of two men having sex.
Lyaiera wrote: » I have absolutely no idea. I would like to know what the member fees are to LGBT Ireland are. Do they run a Stitch n Bitch? I'd quite like to get back into knitting.
Trigger Happy wrote: » That there are different groups with different points of view and they are all entitled to that point of view. So criticising the catholic church for its view on SSM for eg is a futile excercise. They are entitled to their view no matter how much we disagree with it.
Joeytheparrot wrote: » No seriously. What are you on about? LGBT Ireland isnt anything
El_Duderino 09 wrote: » I think there is prohibition on 'man laying with man as he would lay with woman'. But it also prohibits sodomy and fornication which is any act which causes sexual gratification but is not penetrative vaginal sex with intention to procreate.
RobertKK wrote: » The church is a part of society, it should allowed to express it's views. We can't have censorship imposed on those who don't say what we want to hear.
Tzardine wrote: » The Catholic Church seriously needs to get with the times or face the reality of losing a great deal of followers. They can start by allowing same sex marriage and female priests. They are too stubborn to ever change but they will not last another 2000 years unless they do.
Trigger Happy wrote: » Sorry, got the name wrong. National LGBT federation.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » Having an opinion Is one thing, trying to dictate what people can and cannot do and trying to stop people from being happy is another.
Bootros Bootros wrote: » Since this isn't a pressing issue yet as the referendum is a few months away could it not go to A&A where it belongs?
mrsbyrne wrote: » Voting however you damn well please in a referendum is not dictating what people can and cannot do. It's democracy.
K4t wrote: » Nobody is asking for that, not myself anyway. Don't make them victims here. The fact is the church is given a platform by both the media and our government regularly and it is an incredibly strong lobby group with regards legislation. That is the biggest crime of all.
mrsbyrne wrote: » How on earth is it a crime ? Why do you want to deny freedom of speech to a body which represents more than 80% of the population according to the last census?
Daith wrote: » Sure it is. You're voting to say one group is not equal to another or they are equal and that vote goes to deciding what a group can do.
mrsbyrne wrote: » So what is the point in having a referendum if people are not just allowed to vote as they please? How do uou propose the issue of SSM be sorted?
MistyCheese wrote: » Ah, okay, so any kind of non-procreative sex is off the table and you're not allowed to get any pleasure out of it. That's lesbians out too then.
SpaceTime wrote: » I think this new Pope is a good PR man. However, don't forget the same conservative, institutionally homophobic organisation hasn't gone away just because it's now got Papa Trendy as the new front man.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » Voting how.you want to is democracy, being told to vote a certain way or you will go to hell is emotional/religious blackmail.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » Fine, but no need to force their beliefs on others right?
mrsbyrne wrote: » .....or maybe people just dont agree with SSM? Are you seriously suggesting that religious people or people who just don't agree with SSM not be allowed to express themselves? Do you realise at all how ridiculous that sounds? So what if some vote no because they think they'll go to hell? That's freedom of thought and freedom of speech. You can't force people to agree with you.
Joeytheparrot wrote: » Ideally we wouldnt have to have a referendum and it could be legislated for. I accept we do though.
mrsbyrne wrote: » That's good. I will be voting yes on the day snd I will defend to the death my neighbours right to think and vote as they damn well please irregardless of how they came to the desicion.