walle, since you ignored my last explicitly direct question, let me ask you an other... In your eyes what is the union of marriage founded upon - sex, love or something else?
Guys, we're just going around in circles: (which incidentally reveals a very flawed understanding of gender, sexuality, psychology and child development.) To which Supermonkey said: Which walle again avoided answering: There's no point trying to have a rational debate with him. In any case it doesn't matter what he believes; what matters is that he thinks he is right to impose this belief on others. He keeps trying to flip that point, so he knows that is wrong. But then again the Taliban would also argue that we in the West are imposing our corrupt societal norms and values on people, while they are just trying to preserve their traditional, wholesome ones. The first step in becoming a tyrant is to convince yourself that you are acting in other people's interest.
I was out walking my dog this morning. I must have stepped in a massive marriage without even noticing cos I've been sitting at my desk and all I can smell is marriage. I check my shoe and it is absolutely plastered in a massive stinking marriage. Point being, no person, body, group, institution, dictionary, state, species etc. owns the definition of a word. Homosexuals don't own 'gay', African-Americans don't own the n-words, and no fabled 'institution' owns 'marriage'. I will define whichever words I choose how I please, thank you so kindly. I am aware that the use of certain words in certain circumstances might land me in bother, but that's because we live in oppressive times, not because anybody has the definitive definition of a word which we must all abide by. So debate it all you wants, there's no answer. Other than the apparent fact that Walle is a Wally for his "That's our word, we invented it, it belongs to us" nonsense. Now excuse me, I have an urgent need to go and dispose of a rather fruity and oversized marriage of my own...
I'd agree with this. However, my issues come when 'church marriage' is involved. Im not religious, but part of the vows, AFAIK are about the pro-creation of children, something that homosexuals cannot naturally do. I think anyone should be able to marry anyone they choose, but they should follow the rules of the institution of they choose to do so through.
I just attended a nice CoE wedding last week, of a couple who are both knocking on 50 (it was very romantic). No way they are still going to have children. So what about church weddings for heterosexual couples who cannot, or choose not to have children?
Or couples (same sex or otherwise) who have children by some method other than the "natural" one (whatever natural means in this instance)?
Indeed. Adoption, in vitro fertilisation, sperm donorship, surrogate pregnancy, mitochondrial donation, embryo genetic screening... welcome to life in all its diversity!
I largely agree with this. It may be viewed as rather self-indulgent quoting myself from the very thread I'm posting in (walle, take note), but: I'm all for homosexuals being allowed to marry - in fact I think it should be encouraged! However, I'm also grudgingly obliged to let religious folks abide by their traditions, which are also protected by law. There is a compatibility issue with most religious marriages and homosexuality, and that will always be the case. Which is a shame for organised religion in the Western world, because over time it will marginalise them even further further from mainstream society.
It's an opt-in law. The CoE can't even do that. No religions are forced to conduct same-sex marriage ceremonies. WHERE'S THE BEEF? If a religion is incompatible with homosexuality then homosexuals really should be sensible about it and concede that that religion is not for them. You can believe what you want without having to subscribe to a particular religion. Whose wedding did you go to where they included procreation in their vows?
If marriage can survive immaculate conception, surely a bit of fudge packing is nothing to worry about.
Wow. Nurse, get him to the burns unit! I think perhaps you may have taken things a little too literally.
Well aye, there's heated debate and then there's practically taking someone's viewpoint in bullet point form and then shredding it one piece of paper at a time. Then taking the shredded matter, loading it into a rocket and firing it into the sun. I'm wary of contributing anything further to the thread to assist it's progression (the quote dump earlier had only one reaction, meh) as the popular belief these days is someone who shows faith in religion is systematically torn a new one. It's proving very interesting with several enlightening viewpoints however
It shouldn't stop you from contributing though I thought your quote dump was interesting with regards to the opinion of homosexuality vs homosexuals.