Same Sex Marriage

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by schmenke

Now that is a tricky question, as it’s an issue that introduces the welfare of the child into consideration.

---

An adoption by a same-sex couple should be considered using exactly the same criteria as one by a heterosexual couple. What's the difference? I hope you're not suggesting that a child's welfare is somehow at more risk as a result of adoption by a same-sex couple.

Honestly, I don't understand why any of these questions are deemed 'tricky' at all. It all strikes me as extremely simple. There are no sound practical reasons to withhold rights of any kind based merely on sexuality. This is not a hard concept.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Again, so what? I ask that not to be rude, but because I genuinely cannot understand why it matters, or what your point is. Should gay people, in your eyes, not be allowed to adopt or marry simply because people of the same sex cannot reproduce together? What is the end result of which you are so scared?

As I said, I find genuinely insulting the idea that I would not be suitable as a father simply on the grounds of my sexuality, or that my sexuality should disbar me from marrying if I so wish. It's like me saying that you are inherently a poor father, or should not marry, based on some spurious notion.

---

I could well be a poor father, that's how opinions work.

Try to understand - this is my opinion. Does not make me any more or less correct, it's just how I feel.

Lets say you and your partner adopt a child - a boy for arguments sake. I don't agree with that, but I'm not going to go hunting you down or start burning crosses on your lawn.

How do you broach the subject, come the right time, as to girls, and courting. Until that child is old enough to understand, he will see two men as his father as normal. Now, if he is gay, no problem.

But, if he is heterosexual, do you not suppose that he might be a little confused up until that point of understanding?

How then would you bring up a girl?

I'm sorry, but seriously, I really don't see how it can work.

Good luck to you, whatever you do. But my opinion will be as it is.

I don't think you are inferior (which I think you think that's what I think), but I don't see how you can expect to have the same rights to children when, naturally, it cannot happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

What's the difference?

---

Seriously. Kids get beaten up by other kids for being fat, spotty, or wear glasses. What's going to happen to the kid with two dads?

Maybe you don't want to think about it, but kids see things very simplistically and they pick on 'different'.

That's not opinion; that, I am afraid, is fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Seriously. Kids get beaten up by other kids for being fat, spotty, or wear glasses. What's going to happen to the kid with two dads?

Maybe you don't want to think about it, but kids see things very simplisticly and they pick on 'different'.

That's not opinion; that, I am afraid, is fact.

---

It's only 'fact' because the view gets ingrained by people like you, with deep-seated, irrational dislikes for and mistrust of people different to a very narrow-minded view of what constitutes a norm.

I feel sorry for your children, having as they do an unreconstructed bigot for a father.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

It's only 'fact' because the view gets ingrained by people like you, with deep-seated, irrational dislikes for and mistrust of people different to a very narrow-minded view of what constitutes a norm.

I feel sorry for your children, having as they do an unreconstructed bigot for a father.

---

Well, I respect your opinion, but forgive me if I don't agree with it.

Why don't you address the points in my previous post? You may well enlighten me and save my kids.

Maybe I am old fashioned, but 'so what', as you like to type a lot?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Well, I respect your opinion, but forgive me if I don't agree with it.

Why don't you address the points in my previous post? You may well enlighten me and save my kids.

Maybe I am old fashioned, but 'so what', as you like to type a lot?

---

You're not worth the bother.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

You're not worth the bother.

---

So, you are going to avoid the issue then? That is dissapointing.

You must have thought about it. I am genuinely interested.

It is your opportunity to prove me wrong isn't it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Not at all. Am I disappointed that someone should go through university and, afterwards, freely admit that they 'don't have the time or desire to research anything' before offering an opinion? Yes. Your studies strike me as having been of questionable value if they didn't leave you with a desire to look into things more deeply.

---

I don't see what me going to university has anything to do with this topic at all. You are making it personal by bringing things like this into the discussion.

Quote:

---

Anyway, in this instance, I still feel you're skirting around one issue in particular, one touched upon by others: that your view on the subject of same-sex marriage is probably based on an underlying homophobia. You seem to dress it up in religion, without apparently being especially religious yourself — why? What, exactly, is the basis of your view that same sex marriage is so desperately undesirable?

---

Very predictable.

I disagree with same-sex marriage in a church and you then move that opinion onto me meaning i'm a) against same-sex marriage entirely, and b) homophobic.

This is tiresome - just because some disagrees with something about sexuality does not automatically mean they are "homophobic". I wondered how long it would be until you brought this "modern term" into the conversation.

And again, you've exaggerated my opinion to make yours seems more valid. "Desperately undesirable" - come on, spare me the Shakespeare!

Here's my opinions in cold facts:

I am straight
I am all for civil-partnerships
I have no ill-feeling towards homosexuals
People can do what they want in their own homes
I disagree with same-sex marriage in a church setting

Homophobic? Really?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

So, you are going to avoid the issue then? That is dissapointing.

You must have thought about it. I am genuinely interested.

It is your opportunity to prove me wrong isn't it?

---

Your notions regarding how a gay couple would bring up children are based solely on your own homophobic prejudices — specifically, your lack of any sense of realisation that gay people aren't that different to anyone else. All of the situations you describe would be dealt with by a gay couple in the manner in which they saw fit, just as would any other parent or parents. If a child with two fathers gets bullied for that reason, whose fault is that? If a child grows up believing that having two mothers or two fathers is normal — good.

Believe me, I would rather a child was brought up by two fathers or two mothers than a heterosexual couple with bigoted attitudes and closed minds any day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bezza

This is tiresome - just because some disagrees with something about sexuality does not automatically mean they are "homophobic". I wondered how long it would be until you brought this "modern term" into the conversation.

---

It's hardly a 'modern term'. And maybe the fact that, as you've noticed before, you often get accused of racism and homophobia on here is because what you say sometimes has, at the very least, racist or homophobic overtones.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bezza

Here's my opinions in cold facts:

I am straight
I am all for civil-partnerships
I have no ill-feeling towards homosexuals
People can do what they want in their own homes
I disagree with same-sex marriage in a church setting

Homophobic? Really?

---

But why do you disagree with same-sex marriages in a church setting? What actual damage would it do, were they to be allowed? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you're especially religious, are you? If that is the case, why this view of yours that the sanctity of church marriage needs to be preserved? There must be an underlying reason behind it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Your notions regarding how a gay couple would bring up children are based solely on your own homophobic prejudices — specifically, your lack of any sense of realisation that gay people aren't that different to anyone else. All of the situations you describe would be dealt with by a gay couple in the manner in which they saw fit, just as would any other parent or parents. If a child with two fathers gets bullied for that reason, whose fault is that? If a child grows up believing that having two mothers or two fathers is normal — good.

Believe me, I would rather a child was brought up by two fathers or two mothers than a heterosexual couple with bigoted attitudes and closed minds any day.

---

Bigoted to you, with a chip on your shoulder because (you think)the whole world is against you, when actually, I see things from a heterosexual point of view.

If that's your idea of a bigot, then fine.

Your attitude stinks, you act like you have no tolerance to other points of view. Isn't that what you are getting on your high horse about 'homophobia'. Again, you are right, no one else is.

Hypocritical methinks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

what you say sometimes has, at the very least, racist or homophobic overtones.

---

Not at all. It depends upon how paranoid and insecure the person reading it is, and exactly what they make of it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

It's hardly a 'modern term'. And maybe the fact that, as you've noticed before, you often get accused of racism and homophobia on here is because what you say sometimes has, at the very least, racist or homophobic overtones.



But why do you disagree with same-sex marriages in a church setting? What actual damage would it do, were they to be allowed? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you're especially religious, are you? If that is the case, why this view of yours that the sanctity of church marriage needs to be preserved? There must be an underlying reason behind it.

---

What changes if the church does allow same sex marriage?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Bigoted to you, with a chip on your soldier because (you think)the whole world is against you

---

I don't, actually, because I'm confident that gay marriage will be legalised in the UK.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

I see things from a heterosexual point of view.

---

Rubbish. Yours is one point of view; not all heterosexuals would agree with you, thankfully.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Your attitude stinks, you act like you have no tolerance to other points of view. Isn't that what you are getting on your high horse about 'homophobia'. Again, you are right, no one else is.

Hypocritical methinks.

---

On this issue, I have no tolerance at all for your view, because I find it very personally offensive that you think I shouldn't get married or adopt kids — especially the latter, given that you believe that I and others like me would actually do damage to a child's prospects. Does this make me hypocritical? No. My lack of tolerance is towards one viewpoint. Your lack of tolerance is towards a whole group of people and is based on nothing more than simple unfounded prejudice. I know with which I'm more comfortable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

What changes if the church does allow same sex marriage?

---

Same-sex couples stop being discriminated against. Quite a big thing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

It's hardly a 'modern term'. And maybe the fact that, as you've noticed before, you often get accused of racism and homophobia on here is because what you say sometimes has, at the very least, racist or homophobic overtones.

---

That is because you and others are always too quick jumping to the wrong conclusion. Always the extreme. You don't seem aware it is possible to have a strong opinion, that disagrees with your views, that isn't such an extreme.

Unfortunately, this is part of society now. If somebody dares to disagree with something - then the extreme is always the point that is gone to. Be it sexism, racism or homophobia.

Quote:

---

But why do you disagree with same-sex marriages in a church setting? What actual damage would it do, were they to be allowed? Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you're especially religious, are you? If that is the case, why this view of yours that the sanctity of church marriage needs to be preserved? There must be an underlying reason behind it.

---

It doesn't sit well with me if I'm honest. I just think it is one step too far. What is the matter with civil partnerships and why this sudden need to get married in a church! I'm sorry but that is as much of an answer you're getting from me.

I know you want more eloquent and better-based opinions from me, but thats as good as its getting! That is my opinion, end of.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Not at all. It depends upon how paranoid and insecure the person reading it is, and exactly what they make of it.

---

Again, complete rot. If your attitude was true, no-one would ever be categorised as racist or homophobic, because the fault would always lie with the person being offended.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bezza

It doesn't sit well with me if I'm honest. I just think it is one step too far. What is the matter with civil partnerships and why this sudden need to get married in a church! I'm sorry but that is as much of an answer you're getting from me.

I know you want more eloquent and better-based opinions from me, but thats as good as its getting! That is my opinion, end of.

---

You'll forgive me when I say that this is a really weak argument. I suspect you know it is, too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

You'll forgive me when I say that this is a really weak argument. I suspect you know it is, too.

---

I don't care what type of argument it is. In your eyes, it devalues my opinion. If you feel like that, fine. But this is not a contest and there is no quiz at the end of the debate.

People have feelings and opinions can be based on feelings too you know. Would you say Michael Schumacher is the greatest F1 driver of all time just because he has won more races than anybody else?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bezza

I don't care what type of argument it is. In your eyes, it devalues my opinion. If you feel like that, fine. But this is not a contest and there is no quiz at the end of the debate.

People have feelings and opinions can be based on feelings too you know. Would you say Michael Schumacher is the greatest F1 driver of all time just because he has won more races than anybody else?

---

Certainly not. But, in that scenario, I could at least offer some opinions as to why.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

gay people aren't that different to anyone else.

---

From a parenting and natural birth point of view - mothers bonding, breast feeding etc - I think you may find there is a difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

From a parenting and natural birth point of view - mothers bonding, breast feeding etc - I think you may find there is a difference.

---

Marriage is about more than just child-rearing and parenting. You may as well forbid it to a heterosexual couple who have no intention of having kids.

Well, well.... I speak of aggressive gays and there he is... Tearing apart everyone who disagrees with him. Now no-one can say they don't know one who's sticking in everyone's faces.


Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 2

The famous philosopher Groucho Marx once said: "I don't want to belong to a club that will accept people like me as a member".
My question to BDunnell and other homosexuals is: "Why do you so desperately want to belong to a club that will not accept people like you as a member"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Marriage is about more than just child-rearing and parenting. You may as well forbid it to a heterosexual couple who have no intention of having kids.

---

There'd be no point, in my opinion, in the couple needing to be married in that case. If they split up, there are no kids lives destroyed so no need for a legal bond to tie the two together. No need for a ring on the finger to say 'I'm taken' etc.

Again, feel free to call me old fashioned. But that is what I see as the reason behind Church marriages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big Ben

Well, well.... I speak of aggressive gays and there he is... Tearing apart everyone who disagrees with him. Now no-one can say they don't know one who's sticking in everyone's faces.

---

Can you not understand why I feel so strongly about this, and why I might be rather irritated by people saying I'm some kind of inferior citizen, not worthy of the same rights as everyone else, just on the grounds of what happens to be my sexuality? Furthermore, how dare you describe me as an 'aggressive gay'. I wouldn't call someone an 'aggressive straight', so why make the distinction based purely on sexuality?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

An adoption by a same-sex couple should be considered using exactly the same criteria as one by a heterosexual couple. What's the difference? I hope you're not suggesting that a child's welfare is somehow at more risk as a result of adoption by a same-sex couple.

Honestly, I don't understand why any of these questions are deemed 'tricky' at all. It all strikes me as extremely simple. There are no sound practical reasons to withhold rights of any kind based merely on sexuality. This is not a hard concept.

---

The point I was trying to make is that the debate of same-sex marriage is a straightforward as it involves only the couple. The debate is expanded when adoption is introduced because the wellbeing of the child needs to be considered.

I’m sure that a same-sex couple is more than capable of nurturing a child but I can only assume that there are potential psychological issues to be considered for a child raised by parents of the same sex in a world where the majority is the opposite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

There'd be no point, in my opinion, in the couple needing to be married in that case. If they split up, there are no kids lives destroyed so no need for a legal bond to tie the two together. No need for a ring on the finger to say 'I'm taken' etc.

Again, feel free to call me old fashioned. But that is what I see as the reason behind Church marriages.

---

I do see this as very old-fashioned, yes, and also unduly restrictive. What's so bad about giving everyone a free choice within the law?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Can you not understand why I feel so strongly about this, and why I might be rather irritated by people saying I'm some kind of inferior citizen, not worthy of the same rights as everyone else, just on the grounds of what happens to be my sexuality? Furthermore, how dare you describe me as an 'aggressive gay'. I wouldn't call someone an 'aggressive straight', so why make the distinction based purely on sexuality?

---

You still think I think you are inferior and that I am a bigot? That my kids are unfortunate because of my opinions?

I make jokes about many things that I find funny. Sometimes, that may include a sexually themed joke.

If you chose to see that as derogatory, when I quite often poke fun at myself, then so be it.

That's me, deal with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I do see this as very old-fashioned, yes, and also unduly restrictive. What's so bad about giving everyone a free choice within the law?

---

Free love within marriage and all that (not bigamy)? Is that what you include free choice?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by schmenke

The point I was trying to make is that the debate of same-sex marriage is a straightforward as it involves only the couple. The debate is expanded when adoption is introduced because the wellbeing of the child needs to be considered.

---

Of course, but this applies equally to all adoption cases, no matter what the gender of the parents might be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by schmenke

I’m sure that a same-sex couple is more than capable of nurturing a child but I can only assume that there are potential psychological issues to be considered for a child raised by parents of the same sex in a world where the majority is the opposite.

---

Only so long as societal norms are viewed in too narrow a fashion. What I object to is the notion that a problem would automatically ensue.

I should add that I have no desire either to get married or adopt kids. My argument is with the viewpoint that I should be automatically forbidden from doing either should I so desire, and on such spurious grounds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

I do see this as very old-fashioned, yes, and also unduly restrictive. What's so bad about giving everyone a free choice within the law?

---

I happen to think if we were all a little more restrictive in respect of marriage, there would be a lot less unhappy kids left from single parents thinking it's ok to sleep here there and with everyone.

Not a lot of accountability.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

You still think I think you are inferior and that I am a bigot? That my kids are unfortunate because of my opinions?

---

In a word, yes. Though I don't think 'inferior' is quite the right term.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

I happen to think if we were all a little more restrictive in respect of marriage, there would be a lot less unhappy kids left from single parents thinking it's ok to sleep here there and with everyone.

Not a lot of accountability.

---

Those are no grounds to seek to restrict marriage to mixed-sex couples.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Though I don't think 'inferior' is quite the right term.

---

I was using your terminology from an earlier post.

Presumably then, you think that, at night, before giving them a kiss goodnight, I tell them to stay away from those nasty gay people?

And that ensuring they have a safe and loving environment is outdated?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

I was using your terminology from an earlier post.

---

In which case, my term wasn't quite right.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Presumably then, you think that, at night, before giving them a kiss goodnight, I tell them to stay away from those nasty gay people?

And that ensuring they have a safe and loving environment is outdated?

---

Not at all. I make that observation based on how I think you come across — which is, amongst other things, as somewhat bigoted. And I'm sure you don't need me to tell you that you, and people with your views, don't have a monopoly on offering your children a safe and loving environment. Don't try and equate the two things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Those are no grounds to seek to restrict marriage to mixed-sex couples.

---

Again, for me, marriage is the first step toward a man and a woman preparing to have a family.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Again, for me, marriage is the first step toward a man and a woman preparing to have a family.

---

Why be so intolerant of any diversion from this? To some degree, this is why I brought your children into the discussion. I believe fundamentally that children need to be taught that there are ways of doing things other than one very restrictive, very prescriptive norm. Indeed, the word 'normal' I find, in some ways, quite problematic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Why be so intolerant of any diversion from this? To some degree, this is why I brought your children into the discussion. I believe fundamentally that children need to be taught that there are ways of doing things other than one very restrictive, very prescriptive norm. Indeed, the word 'normal' I find, in some ways, quite problematic.

---

Because, my parents, both their parents, all the way back to great great great grampy wilko with the gammy leg, that is what was passed down as normal.

Worked for us.

Again, I won't stop you or the next bloke from having a civil ceremony - do what you like. I, however, do not agree with it.

To me, learning from my folks, has taught me what I know.

That is why I have reservations with same sex adoption - not because I think they are bad people, but because of my upbringing. Also, having been bullied, I know that other kids - wether they understand what and why they are doing - can be down right evil.

And no, it would not be your fault, but I suspect you would feel bad if you found yourself in that position.

Seriously - I'm not having a pop. I don't think I'm better than you. I just see things differently and, perhaps, struggle to convey my opinions well on screen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BDunnell

Same-sex couples stop being discriminated against. Quite a big thing.

---

I’m not sure if discrimination is the correct term here.

A church is an organization with voluntary membership by those who subscribe to its faith, customs and beliefs. People who disagree with those would not subscribe to the church, as it would contradict their personal beliefs. This is not discrimination.