spaman

Sorry - I strongly disagree with that - government should be promoting the family and supporting family life...........and that means hetrosexuality and marraige between men and women

Nobody has yet convinced me that homosexuality is moral

It is a governments responsibility to provide guidance on morals

As for other "lifestyles" - they should not be banned - but they should not be promoted either........ the gay lifestyle has been given so much attention of late, that it becomes offensive. It should be allowed to find its own place in society, without the constant (PC) nagging we get about it

mkpdavies

I agree, but why do you think your choice of lifestyle should be promoted, while others should be ignored. AS long as people don't hurt anyone, they should be able to live whatever lifstyle they want.

The government should butt out when it comes to telling people how to live, that is for people to work out for themselves.

__________________
http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/
http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/
http://lpuk.org

My ignore list

Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Paul Birch

I agree, but I have some sympathy for the other view. What I think you may both be missing is that there are at least two distinct questions here. The first is: should government be regulating morality? Most of us here would I think say: no. The second is: given a government and establishment actively promoting homosexuality and wrongfully helping to destroy traditional morality, etc., should UKIP weigh in on the other side and support the underdog? That's a trickier question to answer.

I do think that UKIP should take a stance against the imposition of libertine morality in schools, compulsory pro-homosexuality propaganda, etc.. Likewise against the political correctness that threatens to criminalise people who believe - and say - that homosexuality is a sin. So we should not hypocritically attempt to discourage our own members from promoting their own moral and religious beliefs, through fear that they might be politically embarrassing. However, as policy, we would do well to promote the honest enforcement by the courts of all freely-entered contracts, irrespective of the religious, political, racial or sexual preferences of the contractees (and that would include homosexual cohabitation contracts as well as traditional marriages - neither of which are currently honoured enough).

Anthony Butcher

I have never seen any evidence of the promotion of homosexuality in schools, nor have I ever heard any evidence that "promotion" has the slightest effect on anyone's sexuality.

I dare anyone to try and make me gay through advertising.

If society no longer tells people to oppress their inate homosexuality, to prevent marriage break up later in life, then I think that is both right, practical and desirable. Surely the last thing we want people to do is pretend to be heterosexual and end up in an unhappy family situation?

Percy the Poodle

As someone who is at the end of the education system i have never been encouraged in any aspect of a homosexual lifestyle (though i have been subjected to propoganda about the EU).

I am glad this is the case and it should be the universal experience.

However i have seen many boys of 8 and under called gay when singled out and bullied by others. This is not right either. While sexualities should not be encouraged no one should see this as an excuse for bullying or discrimination. There are good people in all groups.

cuthhyra

With reference to morality it comes down to a question of whether or not government should be the moral guardian of society. If you agree that it should it implies that people cannot handle morality or moral issues by themselves and require government intervention, however the question then arises; how are the government (consisting of fallible people) any more qualified to decide moral issues than the population at large?

Furthermore if you want parties or the government of the day to set a moral agenda then it is hard to complain when that agenda does not happen to match your own. Better to leave morality to the individual and adamantly oppose official sanctioning of any particular moral stance.

Sarumano

I thought the position in this country was that legal problems were sorted by the judiciary, moral problems by the church?

What is a family, can we call two gays pairing up a family? Those are questions UKIP could be passing to the Archbish. Or to the Rabbi Chief , or the Head Imam.
Whatever.
UKIP is a POLITICAL party and has no need to impose moral decisions on free thinking humans.

PS what about the Muslim faith, which allows four wives and a divorce on hubbies' say-so? What about Mormon fundamentalists who can marry as many women as they like? Both proscribed in Britain. Do we throw them out when we find them?

Alex McKee

In my opinion there should be no promotion of any particular lifestyle.

We can't promote Homosexuality because it would unfair to Heterosexuals nor should we promote Heterosexuality and marriage as this would be unfair or even demonise homosexuals.

It's always been a difficult one to call though.

I think the best the Govt. can do is to put all the info in accessible places - not promoting but making accessible - regarding all lifestyles and let people choose for themselves!!!

If someone is Gay the lack of teaching of "Gay issues" is not going to stop them following what feels right to them.

and Vice Versa.

Regards,

Alex

__________________

Anything I post on this web forum is my personal opinion only.

Users on Ignore list: None.