nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

The Gay Megathread (see mod note on post #2212)

PDN

Certain individuals seem to be somewhat obsessed with the subject of homosexuality. To avoid the Forum being over-run with numerous threads on this subject, I am launching a MegaThread similar to the ones we already have on other subjects.

Please note that the Forum Charter still applies to megathreads - so try to treat each other with respect and courtesy, even if the subject is one that makes you hot and bothered.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

galljga1

Black Menorca wrote: »

Oxymoron if I ever saw one given marriage is already equally available to each citizen of the country.

Part of a word leaped out of that statement.

galljga1

Black Menorca wrote: »

But marriage is between a man and a woman. Full stop. Available to all, equally.

Not after today.

Delirium

Black Menorca wrote: »

We're in agreement here. Any single man can marry any single woman in this country.

Everyone eligible has equal access to it.

No, we're not in agreement. A same-sex couple cannot currently marry even though a male+female couple can.

This means that couples are not treated equally under the current laws/rules pertaining to marriage.

Black Menorca

galljga1 wrote: »

Part of a word leaped out of that statement.

Touché Olé!

Black Menorca

galljga1 wrote: »

Not after today.

You're probably right there.

Black Menorca

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

And blacks can sit in the black part of the bus, while whites sit in the white part. Everyone is equal

Leave any racial prejudice out of this please. I have no time for racism of any form.

Polo_Mint

Black Menorca wrote: »

But marriage is between a man and a woman. Full stop. Available to all, equally.

And Soon to be Marriage between Man and Man and Woman and Woman equally.

Will Marriage in the future not have the same meaning as marriage in the past for you?

Black Menorca

SW wrote: »

No, we're not in agreement. A same-sex couple cannot currently marry even though a male+female couple can.

This means that couples are not treated equally under the current laws/rules pertaining to marriage.

I agree with you.

Marriage is an contract between a man and a woman.

Black Menorca

Polo_Mint wrote: »

And Soon to be Marriage between Man and Man and Woman and Woman equally.

Will Marriage in the future not have the same meaning as marriage in the past for you?

I have no intention of marrying now or in the future. I have no idea how it will change, if at all.

Peregrine

Black Menorca wrote: »

Leave any racial prejudice out of this please. I have no time for racism of any form.

But you're okay with discriminating against same sex couples?

Delirium

Black Menorca wrote: »

I agree with you.

Marriage is an contract between a man and a woman.

Exactly. It's not currently available to all couples equally.

Michael OBrien

Black Menorca wrote: »

Leave any racial prejudice out of this please. I have no time for racism of any form.

Your argument is an appeal to tradition, as long as the tradition suites your prejudice.
You say you have a problem with racism, however in the past there was laws against mixed marriages. So using your own logic, marriage THEN was equal and need not be changed. You could easily be quoted back then as saying:
"Marriage is between people of the same colour, so everyone can get married already".

Thumpette

Black Menorca wrote: »

We're in agreement here. Any single man can marry any single woman in this country.

Everyone eligible has equal access to it.

Is that to say that people who wish to have access to the right to marry should enter into a loveless marriage where they will spend their life unfulfilled and unhappy?

Is that a more respectful approach to the sanctity of marriage than a same sex couple in love and commited to a life long monogamous marriage?

Black Menorca

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

Then why do you have time for homophobia?

I don't, please retract such a comment.

galljga1

Thumpette wrote: »

Is that to say that people who wish to have access to the right to marry should enter into a loveless marriage where they will spend their life unfulfilled and unhappy?

Is that a more respectful approach to the sanctity of marriage than a same sex couple in love and commited to a life long monogamous marriage?

It works for a lot of people.

Black Menorca

SW wrote: »

Exactly. It's not currently available to all couples equally.

No, not all couples, but it is available to each and every citizen equally.

Delirium

Black Menorca wrote: »

I don't, please retract such a comment.

will you retract the comment about racism also?

Delirium

Black Menorca wrote: »

No, not all couples, but it is available to each and every citizen equally.

Marriage requires a couple, not one citizen.

Couples avail of marriage. It's clear as day that it is currently not available to all couples equally. You've said as much yourself.

Black Menorca

SW wrote: »

will you retract the comment about racism also?

I didn't bring race into it. I have no time for racism of any form.

Black Menorca

SW wrote: »

Marriage requires a couple, not one citizen.

Couples avail of marriage. It's clear as day that it is currently not available to all couples equally. You've said as much yourself.

Qualifying couples, yes.

Thumpette

Black Menorca wrote: »

No, not all couples, but it is available to each and every citizen equally.

You might have missed my question Black Menorca?

Black Menorca

Thumpette wrote: »

You might have missed my question Black Menorca?

Sorry, ask away.

Black Menorca

Doctor Jimbob wrote: »

And people with a qualifying skin colour can drink from the 'white' water fountain.

Do you really not see the parallels here?

Your obsession with bringing race into this isn't working.

Delirium

Black Menorca wrote: »

Qualifying couples, yes.

ergo some couples don't qualify, therefore not available to all couples equally.

[Deleted User]

Black Menorca wrote: »

Your obsession with bringing race into this isn't working.

It's analogous. Perhaps consider the point of bringing race into the conversation.

katydid

Black Menorca wrote: »

Leave any racial prejudice out of this please. I have no time for racism of any form.

But homophobia is ok?

Black Menorca

SW wrote: »

ergo some couples don't qualify, therefore not available to all couples equally.

I've never claimed marriage is available to all couples.

I might be in a ralationship with another woman who has left her husband, but if she's not divorced, I can't marry her.

I am equally discriminated against.

But I have equal access to marry another single woman.

Every eligible citizen has equal access to marriage as things stand today.

katydid

Black Menorca wrote: »

I agree with you.

Marriage is an contract between a man and a woman.

At the moment. What is your point?

Delirium

Black Menorca wrote: »

I've never claimed marriage is available to all couples.

I might be in a ralationship with another woman who has left her husband, but if she's not divorced, I can't marry her.

I am equally discriminated against.

But I have equal access to marry another single woman.

Every eligible citizen has equal access to marriage as things stand today.

Good to know we're on the same page.

Black Menorca

katydid wrote: »

But homophobia is ok?

Absolutely not.