Gay people? Should they be allowed to marry?

Fil, what's wrong with u? We are humans, not animals. My friend from Uni was gay and he tried to deny it for a long time but he couldn't suppress his genetic instincts. It's not sth u can control he told me.

OK, u could argue that certain people are born psychopaths and they shouldn't be accepted as normal but gays are doing no wrong. They consent to the activity and don't cause intentional harm. This is a VERY important difference. The great majority of society will always be heterosexual so natural procreation will always take place.

Forget paranoia and bias. Greg, u seem like a bored bigot

Completely agree.
Anyone who is gay and Christian/catholic is just a hypocrite.

Of course that they should be allowed, thus I oppose any changes in our law. Really, nobody here try to find out who is gay and who is not. Although I would not advice woman to to marry gay people. :)

Hehe, good one ;)

Who are we to say who should and should not be married? Marriage exists for all people, in a church or otherwise. As a Catholic, I don't feel as a hypocrite to suggest that a gay couple get married in a church. Regardless of how you read the letter of the Bible on this matter, you cannot argue that above all Catholicism and Christianity teaches acceptance and love, treating others as you wish to be treated.

well i didn't but since it's your arguement then i'll ask what the point is then?
and at what point ought a "central authority" select which people have what rights?
if you can't see what a poor analogy that is then you truly are a pathetic thinker and i'll thank you to only attempt reproduction with the horses you fantasize about marrying.
also a poor attempt. who are you to decide who is or is not a freak? what is the objective criteria you've come up with? and what authority are you on the matter?
Your head is obviously too far up the horse's backend to present anything of eloquence or value on the topic. adieu

How 4 people (2 couples) getting married would be somehow worse than 2 men doing the same ? Why should they be discriminated ? Why a "central authority" should select which people have what rights ?



I'm a free man but obviously a super duper supporter of human rights like you likes free speech only until someone is talking about things you agree with, otherwise is a bigot and a nazi.



Yawn...

legal and financial rights and liberties? well we now have a difference in terms of numbers, 4 as opposed to 2 so you've answered that already. There are societies which make that work so the idea isn't fundamentally wrong (it would seem) but legally it might be very difficult to administer but hey, maybe it might work, what would be the legal rammifications of such an idea?

Following your logic leads us to the end result of only men and women who can and do procreate and or raise children (somehow) should be the only benefactors of the union of marriage.


You tell me where i called you either and then you can play the victim, until then, that is a punk move. i like free speech but wish that you had applied the laws of universality to your arguement before you spouted off.

indeed.

At 11.11 I will wish this thread to be merged to the other [pathetic] thread which negatively concerns homosexuals... *groan*

<round of applause>

Some of you are waaaayyy too worried about other what other people do in their own public and private lives.

Especially when it is something you think you are ok with doing but they are not. Typical of the mindset here.

Not me. Each to his own.

2 mixed couples in a relationship are not any worse than 2 men, actually that's much more natural.



And that's obvious. The only logic on this issue, which deserves its name. You either agree with that or have to abandon the whole construcion of society.

Actually gregorz there is tons of evidence of gay animals! LOL Come on uve never seen a male dog hump another male dog? I have!

What's the topic of this discussion? Gay marriage? Is there anything against it then?

Just because some frustrated old men wrote 2000 years ago that they hated gays (probably because they got rejected or something), all the world hates gays? Come on, grow up. There have been gays for millenia...There is a stone found in ancient Greece, where the act of homosexual deeds were described in detail. And this was inscripted 4500 years ago. Pls, this is a non-discussion.

Edit: but that is the point of religion as such: in the 21st century ppl are still following something that some old delusional geezers dreamt up thousands of years ago...Think about it.


M-G

hasnt this subject been done to death...?

havent we already established that gays, regardless of how many there are in the village, should be denied all rights, be made to sit in the corner with the G hat on and under no circumstances be allowed to reproduce less they pass on their homosexual genes and the whole world ends up as a bunch of raving shirtlifters... as for marriage... why on earth should that be allowed... how can such people possibly be in love with someone else.... duh...

this is the 21st century people - get a grip

Exactly, one man and one woman, otherwise this is cannot be called a marriage at least in our civilization.

so i guess then we've abondoned the old construction of society then. as, currently and as has been for some time, marriage has not been deemed by the "authorities" to be only for procreation and child rearing.
well that is very debatable as it seems homosexual relationships and activities seem to be far more commonplace (read "natural") than 4 person commitments. aside from that, a society would experience generational unintentional incest in the long term, why you advocate such things is beyond me. However, one must remember you're also the internet persona who suggested a horse would somehow be willing to consent to a legaly binding relationship. So that really dismisses your ability to think critically on this particular subject, doesn't it?

What kind of cr*p is that? Marriage is just a word that solidifies two ppl's love for each other into a legal binding. As far as I know, nowhere it states that these two ppl have to be a man and a woman. And by the way, it's just a name... Some gays have been together for so long that it's virtually already a marriage. So if they want to turn this into some official thing, I would say, grant them the pleasure. They're hurting no-one with this. Only a couple of narrow-minded and very, VERY old fashioned ppl. But these ppl should just grow up and accept that there is homosexuality as part of society. It's not an illness, it's not a choice.

M-G

This is your own definition. Could you please show me some evidence in the history when people widely considered relationship between two man to be a marriage?

Politically correct crowds tend to redefine the meaning of obvious words. Are you one of those who would abandon "mother and father" to "parent A and parent B"?

some people on this forum have grown up in a backward, restrictive society and have brought their inhibited mind-set into the new reality they now live in - things are different and its not always easy to abandon what they have been told is true and correct and now they are fighting against people who are telling them they are wrong... the truelly sad part is that whilst these people claim discrimination against them, they are only too happy to discriminate against others...

But Greek men like it up the batty so I dont see what your problem is....Me think someone is protesting a tad too much!

Live and let live, if two people want to get married then so be it, as for gay people with children, I have two friends (male) who foster children, Im not aware of them teaching homoerotic ways to the kids they foster, I am aware that these kids go into a stable loving environment, funnily enough its hetrosexual parents that make their life a misery...does that mean all hetrosexual parents are bad?

Good posting ShelleyS!! None of this holier than thou conservatism that is quite pervasive here. Informed consent and toleration, that's what the 2 central issues are

so as long as we can all agree that anyone with different lifestyle beliefs from us should be burnt then we are getting somewhere... no?

all this talk about adopted children somehow picking up homosexuality is rubbish, pure and simple. It doesn't at all explain how gay children grow out of heterosexual marraiges.

Some others in super-progressive society which will turn to Islam some day. It is worth so much...

as long as we can all agree that adopted children should be burnt otherwise they will grow up as homosexuals then we're moving forward... no?

^considers Islam to be super-progressive^

as long as we all agree that adopted gay muslims should be burnt then we're making progress... no?

This society is so f....ing tolerant that will allow millions of Muslims to settle and finally adopt their religion. Sharia law like British bishop have said.