Gay marriage

[Niall_Quinn]

I don't think that's the point. The point is that the definition of a civil partnership was written into law. A civil partnership is, as you were saying before, something separate from a marriage. It's different. The legislation that passed in the Commons is allowing gay people access to marriage, a separate union.

Oh, and to those who think homosexuality is unnatural, I'd suggest you watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YuK9pxjBwX8

Finally we agree, let's treat gays like wild animals.

I like the idea of the moral and rational types heroically overcoming their natural disposition and pretending to be comfortable with queers whereas the "fundamentalists" are condemned to wallow in their own bigoted filth. I assume a good reason will be found why the natural disposition of these slimy bigots can be entirely dismissed while the disposition of queers is held paramount?

[WMUG]

Finally we agree, let's treat gays like wild animals.

By that logic, you'd just as soon treat 'straights' as wild animals, given that we don't have a choice about who we want to fuck either, and we're just giving into our natural urges by fucking women.

I like the idea of the moral and rational types heroically overcoming their natural disposition and pretending to be comfortable with queers

I have no natural disposition to be uncomfortable with gay people. You're so up your own arse about thought police, how about not telling other people how they feel, eh?

whereas the "fundamentalists" are condemned to wallow in their own bigoted filth.

Feel free to believe whatever you want. The great thing about facts, though, is that they're true no matter what you believe.

I assume a good reason will be found why the natural disposition of these slimy bigots can be entirely dismissed while the disposition of queers is held paramount?

Find me a peer reviewed study showing that homophobia is an innate and heritable part of our genetics and I'll listen to you. Either way, you're still just another raging homophobe who's blinded by his own hatred and deluded self-righteousness with your moral crusade for people who think the same way you do.

[Syn]

Mods can you change 'homophobe' to 'brilltastic'. Wouldn't want them horrible labels that cruel society places on others to detract from, and provide an easy way to avoid, the main points.

[Niall_Quinn]

By that logic, you'd just as soon treat 'straights' as wild animals, given that we don't have a choice about who we want to fuck either, and we're just giving into our natural urges by fucking women.

I have no natural disposition to be uncomfortable with gay people. You're so up your own arse about thought police, how about not telling other people how they feel, eh?

Feel free to believe whatever you want. The great thing about facts, though, is that they're true no matter what you believe.


Find me a peer reviewed study showing that homophobia is an innate and heritable part of our genetics and I'll listen to you. Either way, you're still just another raging homophobe who's blinded by his own hatred and deluded self-righteousness with your moral crusade for people who think the same way you do.

Is this more of your tolerance bubbling to the surface? I was referring to the complete prick who narrated the video. Why don't you talk to him about his sweeping judgements and put your challenge to him? I tried to talk to him but wasn't morally superior enough.

Here's your argument in a nutshell - think what the loudest guy in the room tells you to think or else be branded. It's a nasty, divisive, illiberal, intolerant philosophy you have there. And your mask explodes when you're challenged.

I'm not a homophobe actually, or maybe I am. Who cares? What's it to you? Put me on ignore. What I really am is a bloke who enjoys pressing the big red plastic buttons on PC student types. And what's wrong with that? You run around shouting "press me, press me!" so what do you expect? Unless, but surely not, you are hoping I take the full 5 minutes hatchling experience of your latest third hand crusade and turn it into a religion with you are the core? Well why didn't you just ask? Or is that not in your nature?

[WMUG]

Is this more of your tolerance bubbling to the surface? I was referring to the complete prick who narrated the video. Why don't you talk to him about his sweeping judgements and put your challenge to him? I tried to talk to him but wasn't morally superior enough.

Dafuq you on about?

Here's your argument in a nutshell - think what the loudest guy in the room tells you to think or else be branded. It's a nasty, divisive, illiberal, intolerant philosophy you have there. And your mask explodes when you're challenged.

No, my argument is that people should be judged as who they are, not who they like to fuck. You're straight, Letters is straight. You're a complete prick and he isn't. Gok Wan's gay, Stephen Fry's gay. Wan's a complete prick, Fry isn't. Nothing to do with sexuality.

That's my argument. It has nothing to do with branding people, or the "loudest person in the room". Who are you even talking about when you say that? Genuine question, btw, I have literally no idea.

I'm not a homophobe actually

Well clearly you are, you hate gay people. You've made that pretty clear.

or maybe I am. Who cares? What's it to you? Put me on ignore.

I don't want to, this is fun. I have nothing else to do with my time

What I really am is a bloke who enjoys pressing the big red plastic buttons on PC student types. And what's wrong with that? You run around shouting "press me, press me!" so what do you expect?

You start off by denouncing the threat of being branded, then brand me and anyone who doesn't think like you as politically correct. Great fuckin' logic there.

Unless, but surely not, you are hoping I take the full 5 minutes hatchling experience of your latest third hand crusade and turn it into a religion with you are the core? Well why didn't you just ask? Or is that not in your nature?

No, I am not trying to set up a religion with me at the core.

[Niall_Quinn]

Didn't you even watch the video you posted up? Was the title enough to get you nodding? Well watch it.

Now you're getting ridiculous, of course Fry is a complete prick and if you can't figure out the simple stuff like that what chance do have with figuring who's the loudest in the room? Who's at the forefront of this gay marriage shit? Aside from the politicians who want to cover other shit which you don't seem the least concerned about or even aware of for that matter even though it affects you much more directly? Do you really believe stuff like this is about people getting together in perfect harmony? It's politics, actual politics and social politics.

Do you not know how a lobby operates? Or what happens when a lobby gets what it wants? For the sake of self sustenance lobbies just move on to the next mile when you give them an inch. That's the battle you seem oblivious to. You don't seem to register such things so keen are you to sing Kumbayah. That's why I asked about your self evident self adoration. Yeah I get it, you just want everyone to be nice to each other. Sweet. I'd like that too. Genuinely. And now back in the real world.

You come at me with an argument that says gays should be allowed to do what the hell they want on their own time provided nobody else gets hurt and I say fine - though maybe I'll disagree with the principle of being "allowed" because that in itself implies you need permission to be.

Hell, let them get married in the eyes of the state. Guess what, I couldn't give a fuck what the state proclaims so no skin off my nose. You start whipping up the shit about marriage under a banner of equality while refusing to recognise the concerns and beliefs of a billion people and then go further by marking those people out as somehow inadequate and I'll tell you to fuck off. This is what you represent as soon as you add your voice to the mainstream bullshit - what was the name of that stupid cow you were bowing to?

At least be independent in your beliefs. Because it keeps you on the straight and narrow which is where you need to be if you are going to talk on about ideas such as morality. Or at least gives you a hint at how to get to the real place you claim to be in rather than stand in somebody else's shop window doing their very dirty work.

Wave your gay banner, grovel to the state and get your rights (which were yours anyway and didn't ever need a fucked up state to endorse them) but accept that others have the right to their opinions and who they choose to associate with and under which banner and we have no problem.

You think a **** like Fry is cool though and that says a lot. Now you'll say I hate the fat fuck because he's gay. And you'll be wrong again. I hate the **** because he's an ultra hypocrite and a fucking baby. The anti-MLK front man who lacks balls in so many ways. The **** can quote word for word the sufferance of slings and arrows but his congratulatory personae doesn't work so well in the gutter where he's happy to trawl around in furtherance of suppressing the rights of others.

Same as that **** Tatchell, his violent hypocrisy on gay rights (at any expense in terms of the rights of others) is hateful. But I admire the **** for his stance on human rights. See how that works when you aren't intellectually handcuffed or chained to political correctness?

Are you the sort of guy who can admire Ghandi AND Fry at the same time without ever seeing the fundamental differences between the two, I wonder? Do you have both their posters on the wall? It's about what people do, not what they say in public. The moment you try to control speech or thought using tricks like hiding behind genuine inequality in order to promote further inequality, you lose all touch with morality no matter how loud you shout the word. You can still coerce people into line of course and beat them if they don't confess your bullshit to be gospel, that's what the PC lobby is for. And you seem willing to be part of it.

Or maybe this really is just a case of you having nothing better to do. But what a weird topic to obsess over.

[Xhaka Can’t]

Finally we agree, let's treat gays like wild animals.

[WMUG]

Didn't you even watch the video you posted up? Was the title enough to get you nodding? Well watch it.

I did, I just genuinely don't understand what you were saying about it.

Now you're getting ridiculous, of course Fry is a complete prick and if you can't figure out the simple stuff like that what chance do have with figuring who's the loudest in the room? Who's at the forefront of this gay marriage shit?

Yes, well, you see my point in any case.

Aside from the politicians who want to cover other shit which you don't seem the least concerned about or even aware of for that matter even though it affects you much more directly?

Who says I'm not concerned about other things in politics? Just because we're not talking about it here, doesn't mean I don't care. We're discussing gay marriage, nothing else. You want to discuss something else, start a thread about it.

Do you really believe stuff like this is about people getting together in perfect harmony? It's politics, actual politics and social politics.

Not getting along in perfect harmony per se, just treating people as equals.

Do you not know how a lobby operates? Or what happens when a lobby gets what it wants? For the sake of self sustenance lobbies just move on to the next mile when you give them an inch. That's the battle you seem oblivious to.

Ok, elaborate. What's the 'next mile' for the gay rights movement? It seems to my naïve and innocent mind that they've reached the end of the road in terms of what they could accomplish. Equality has now happened. By all means, put me right.

Yeah I get it, you just want everyone to be nice to each other. Sweet. I'd like that too. Genuinely. And now back in the real world.

I don't expect that, I expect the law to treat people equally, regardless of skin colour, who they like to fuck, what colour clothes they like to wear, whether or not they have a bedside table or any other arbitrary characteristic you could pluck out of thin air.

You come at me with an argument that says gays should be allowed to do what the hell they want on their own time provided nobody else gets hurt and I say fine - though maybe I'll disagree with the principle of being "allowed" because that in itself implies you need permission to be.

Hell, let them get married in the eyes of the state.

Great! So what's our disagreement?

Guess what, I couldn't give a fuck what the state proclaims so no skin off my nose.

Well, clearly from the way you frame your political beliefs, you give a massive fuck about everything the state proclaims, given that any state proclamation is, by nature of its existence, deeply immoral.

You start whipping up the shit about marriage under a banner of equality while refusing to recognise the concerns and beliefs of a billion people and then go further by marking those people out as somehow inadequate and I'll tell you to fuck off.

This entire thread has been a debate inclusive of the concerns of people regarding gay marriage. If you go back and read, I think you'll find that Letters and I, while disagreeing slightly, have not exactly been dismissive of one another.

I absolutely listen to the arguments of those who disagree with me when forming my own opinion. I do not, however, treat each argument as equal based on existence. If I think an argument is fundamentally flawed, then I'll dismiss it; I judge each argument based on its merits. If you want to make the argument that, for example, gay marriage shouldn't be legal because "marriage" is a term that inherently refers to heterosexual couples, and you want to keep it that way, then that's an argument I can consider as valid and take into account.

If you make an argument like "gays are unnatural", then that's just factually incorrect, and I'll call you out on your bullshit. Not every argument is equally valid. Every human is equally valuable.

At least be independent in your beliefs. Because it keeps you on the straight and narrow which is where you need to be if you are going to talk on about ideas such as morality. Or at least gives you a hint at how to get to the real place you claim to be in rather than stand in somebody else's shop window doing their very dirty work.

You have no idea how I come to reach my positions and I think you're being extremely presumptuous to state that I'm just 'jumping on a PC bandwagon' when making the argument for marriage equality.

Wave your gay banner, grovel to the state and get your rights (which were yours anyway and didn't ever need a fucked up state to endorse them) but accept that others have the right to their opinions and who they choose to associate with and under which banner and we have no problem.

Great. But realise that your freedom to associate with such people in no way limits my freedom to call what those people say abhorrent if it's abhorrent, or bigoted if it's bigoted, or factually incorrect if it's factually incorrect.

You think a **** like Fry is cool though and that says a lot. Now you'll say I hate the fat fuck because he's gay. And you'll be wrong again. I hate the **** because he's an ultra hypocrite and a fucking baby. The anti-MLK front man who lacks balls in so many ways. The **** can quote word for word the sufferance of slings and arrows but his congratulatory personae doesn't work so well in the gutter where he's happy to trawl around in furtherance of suppressing the rights of others.

Granted, I don't know all that much about the man, so if you have valid reasons to think he's a c*nt then fine. It's nothing to do with the fact that he's gay though.

The moment you try to control speech or thought using tricks like hiding behind genuine inequality in order to promote further inequality, you lose all touch with morality no matter how loud you shout the word.

I don't see that I'm promoting inequality in any way. Are you suggesting that I'm pushing for the views of people who disagree with homosexuality on moral grounds to be at a lower level than those who think it's fine?

You can still coerce people into line of course and beat them if they don't confess your bullshit to be gospel, that's what the PC lobby is for. And you seem willing to be part of it.

Aaand back to your conspiracy nutjob theories.

[PGFC]

So, are you two gays getting married or what?

[Letters]

I don't think that's the point. The point is that the definition of a civil partnership was written into law. A civil partnership is, as you were saying before, something separate from a marriage. It's different.

Yes, it's different because it's between two people of the same gender. So why can't the definition of a civil partnership be changed to afford the same rights as a marriage. Keep the name, change the rights. Everyone's happy, right?
I don't see any campaign to stop using terms like 'gay' and 'straight' in the name of equality.

This is just about equal rights, isn't it?

Be honest - this isn't just about equal rights, this is about an oppressed minority thumbing its nose at religious people who have oppressed them. Yeah, religious people will get offended by the definition of marriage changing because to them it means something special but screw 'em, they've oppressed us for millennia, why should we care that they think or believe?

If it was just about equality no-one would care what they called it if it gave the same rights as a marriage does.


I watched the video btw. Wow, could that bloke be any more condescending? He sneers at easy targets who clearly don't understand science but from the things he says about religion he doesn't seem to have made any attempt to engage with or understand Christianity. It's interesting how he says (with some justification, admittedly) that Christians pick and choose verses when he's done the exact same thing and not tried to understand any context for the verses he mentions.