UKIP: PM 'picking fight' over same-sex marriage

[Red Rackham]

My views on this are more important than some people's because they're not rooted in hatred.

No you're so very wrong, your views are not more important than anyone elses views. Particularly since you are in the minority, I know over the past few years thanks to tragically poor politicians, minority groups have had the upper hand over the silent majority. However, that silent majority are getting more than a little pisssed off with the staus quo. We in this country (Or whats left of it) supposedly live in a democracy, which means majority rule! do you accept that concept?

[Rebirth]

No not at all. The Bible makes it very clear that homosexuality is a severe sin. If you read what God is likely to do to you if you are homosexual then you will get the general picture.

It was written 2000 years ago and was simply social engineering at the time.

Regarding sex before marriage, well I'm no expert on this, but I think what the Bible has to say is that what you should do is to have sex in a committed relationship and for the purpose of creating children. It makes perfect sense because if a child is born without a loving relationship then all manner of evil is likely to ensue. Marriage is a kind of formalism of such a relationship. So it's all a matter of intent, and the Bible warns against lust and temptation. Think about it though. Think how a casual relationship makes you feel or how if you have a relationship with a woman and then that woman goes off with some other bloke because he has a flashier car or whatever. All of this bad feeling stuff is a manifestation of evil, and the church is there to control it. So far from the general perception of the church being some bad spoiler of fun times, it is there to make your life pleasanter.

People get married because they love each other, and want to spend a lifetime together. It is symbolic. Also, God is supposed to be the finger snapper, the one that created everything, therefore it is illogical to believe homos are unnatural, when it exists in so many species, even species that don't live under Socialism.

Sure, the Church has the right to defend their institutions, but I just feel dogma will not win the day. Personally, I just don't see what the fascination is and why a Gay would want any involvement in the Church. It is an interesting state of affairs that's for sure.

[Red Rackham]

I disagree on both counts.

65% of people in Britain tell poll they are not religious

Source: ekklesia.co.uk

Is English your first language? sweety...

[Baron von Lotsov]

It was written 2000 years ago and was simply social engineering at the time.



People get married because they love each other, and want to spend a lifetime together. It is symbolic. Also, God is supposed to be the finger snapper, the one that created everything, therefore it is illogical to believe homos are unnatural, when it exists in so many species, even species that don't live under Socialism.

Sure, the Church has the right to defend their institutions, but I just feel dogma will not win the day. Personally, I just don't see what the fascination is and why a Gay would want any involvement in the Church. It is an interesting state of affairs that's for sure.

I have had the 'other species argument' thrown at me before. I guess it is the bull$hit the establishment teach these days. Check out the number of species and then get the figure for the number of species that are said to be homosexual.

[Rebirth]

I have had the 'other species argument' thrown at me before. I guess it is the bull$hit the establishment teach these days. Check out the number of species and then get the figure for the number of species that are said to be homosexual.

So what you are basically saying is that my opinion is based on the establishment's dogma (which is wrong) and it should instead be based on the Christian dogma (which is right) and that I don't have my own mind or understanding of reality.

Cheers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...exual_behavior
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosex...ior_in_animals
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/wil...ls-be-gay.html

[Steve Morson]

It has nothing to do with religion.....

A comment too stupid for serious response.

[Steve Morson]

Should we legalise polygamy too?

What has this to do with the subject under discussion?

[Steve Morson]

No you're so very wrong, your views are not more important than anyone elses views. Particularly since you are in the minority, I know over the past few years thanks to tragically poor politicians, minority groups have had the upper hand over the silent majority. However, that silent majority are getting more than a little pisssed off with the staus quo. We in this country (Or whats left of it) supposedly live in a democracy, which means majority rule! do you accept that concept?

I'm not "wrong" at all. As I say, my views (when compared to someone's that are based in hatred), will always be more important, because I bear no-one ill will, and I'm not trying to deny one section of society the rights the rest enjoy, just because I don't like them. I couldn't give a monkey's that I'm in "the minority" - which I'm probably not anyway. If the 'majority' here are homophobic bigots (who are usually questioning / confronting their own orientation issues), then I'm delighted to be in the 'minority'.

Depends on the majority. 85 % of the voters in my constituency voted for the 3 traitror parties in 2010, when they could've had me! So, yes, OK, fine. To say a man and woman can marry, but 2 women can't because you think if they do it will empower them to persuade you that you're actually gay, is mentally deranged.

Now, answer my question that you've been avoiding: "Who is my 'little but vociferous band of followers' from post #17?"

[Steve Morson]

No not at all. The Bible makes it very clear that homosexuality is a severe sin. If you read what God is likely to do to you if you are homosexual then you will get the general picture.

Regarding sex before marriage, well I'm no expert on this, but I think what the Bible has to say is that what you should do is to have sex in a committed relationship and for the purpose of creating children. It makes perfect sense because if a child is born without a loving relationship then all manner of evil is likely to ensue. Marriage is a kind of formalism of such a relationship. So it's all a matter of intent, and the Bible warns against lust and temptation. Think about it though. Think how a casual relationship makes you feel or how if you have a relationship with a woman and then that woman goes off with some other bloke because he has a flashier car or whatever. All of this bad feeling stuff is a manifestation of evil, and the church is there to control it. So far from the general perception of the church being some bad spoiler of fun times, it is there to make your life pleasanter.

What utter bilge.

"The Bible makes it very clear that homosexuality is a severe sin.?" Leviticus states that most of these are punishable by death: Eating shellfish, gathering sticks (kindling) on Sunday, menstruation, getting raped (yes, that's right, getting raped is the sin, not being a rapist), talking back to your parents, wearing clothes made of mixed fabrics... and on and on it goes. Oh, one feature of all the discussion on the Bible, Talmud etc. is that sexual activity between a man and his own daughter is not forbidden.

It might be your book, but I think it's nonsense on stilts, way, way past its sell-by date. The things that have been done by the religious establishments; should I mention Catholic priests and the church cover-up (you know, where it's male priests are required to live a chaste life and forbidden from marrying)?

Why I or any other sane and rational person should be expected to live by it is a mystery to me. It's 230 years or so since the Age of Enlightenment; can we act like it, please?

[Little_Englander]

We live in a society which has been constructed in the Christian perspective. One element of the Christian perspective is the sanctity of the union between a man and a woman, which it defines as marriage. Christianity is not the only organised body of values that defines nuclear families as the essential building blocks of a cohesive society.

However, marriage, as defined above, ought to be able to exist without suppressing same sex couples right to live together in a loving relationship. The difficulties start when there is a movement to alter marriage itself. Many believe that marriage will continue to exist in name only, if its very structure is altered to include other than man and woman.

A government may decide to change the structure of marriage within its statutory purview, and legal definitions sometimes seem at odds with general language usage by the population at large. The fear is that once the legal definition of marriage has been widened, then the equality industry will, sooner or later, force religions to allow same sex unions in their places of worship.

With past punitive legal actions by homosexuals, against those with religious convictions, the fear seems justified. UK governments cannot be trusted, and no matter how fervent the promises of one government, that legislation will not interfere with religious conscience, that promise will be effectively worthless in respect of the future.

Common sense, not to mention societal cohesion, would seem to indicate that marriage should be allowed to co-exist with same sex partnerships, but nothing further.