Gay marriage

[Letters]

And, of course, sexiest of all, Lezzariage.

Ba-da bow bow!

[LDG]

And, of course, sexiest of all, Lezzariage.

Ba-da bow bow!

[GP]

Remember that episode of the simpsons where (and I'm sure Letters will correct me) Marge was bored so she 'married' Snowball II and Santa's little helper?

That's what gay marriage is, tbh.

[Xhaka Can’t]

I'm sick of people undermining the sanctity of marriage with sham inter-species marriages.

If you want to get with an aardvark, that's your business, but don't call it 'marriage'.

[MissHandbag]

I personally think that the definition of marriage, being a partnership between a man and a woman, should remain.
If the gays want to have a partnership with the same rights as marriage then fine but I personally don't think it should be called marriage. Not sure I can justify that really but it's how I feel. I'm not sure why the gays would be bothered what it's called so long as it has the same legal status.

I think you'll find it's called a 'civil partnership' not a marriage

[Letters]

It is at the moment. I thought this thread was about it being marriage.

[LDG]

I'm sick of people undermining the sanctity of marriage with sham inter-species marriages.

If you want to get with an aardvark, that's your business, but don't call it 'marriage'.

Bet they give good blowies though.

#justsayinolliesgay

[MissHandbag]

It is at the moment. I thought this thread was about it being marriage.

You're objecting to the word marriage but apparently not the concept - The word marriage originates 'apparently' from many cultures and religions and dates back for thousands of years - No one religious or cultural group has a monopoly on or patent for the term so why shouldn't anybody be entitled to use the term marriage?

[MissHandbag]

Sorry, but all I'm doing is stating what is self-evident. Do I say I hate them or want to infringe on their rights or well being? No. Do I say their lifestyle choice runs contrary to nature itself, yes of course because procreation is one of the fundamentals of nature. Do I say they should get on with their own lives and keep their noses out of the affairs of other groups who have traditional beliefs and practices? Absolutely. It appears some (and only some) who demand what they perceive as a right (when in fact it is no such thing at all) include in those demands the perversion or destruction of the traditional choices of others. I have no issues with whatever the state proclaims in terms of their contractual regulation of private matters because the state has no business being involved at all. So Cameron can do one, his role as puppet in chief gives him no jurisdiction over reality and he is entirely limited to the theatre stage on which he prances and pretends. Quite obviously is is impossible for gays to be married in the traditional and natural sense because they cannot fulfil the terms of marriage. It is a bit like me demanding the right to be female when I am male. Even if the state introduced such a ludicrous right, what would be the point? Would their legislation change reality?

Cameron will have his self-serving law I suppose and then you'll see the other shoe drop. Then it will be time to ban those awful institutions like the church and their wicked rules in favour of holy homosexuality. The homosexual lobby is pernicious, it seeks to harm society as a whole rather than benefit a minority that has been discriminated against. This is about politics, not sexuality or love. This lobby does as much harm to homosexuals as to the rest of us. Any minority fanatic is counter-productive to the stated cause, animal rights groups who use violence on sentient animals to prevent violence on dumb animals, anti-abortion activists who kill the born to protect the unborn and homosexual activists who seek equality by destroying the rights of others. What do any of these lunatics have in common with the minorities they claim to represent?

Did I say you say you hate them? No

Did I disagree with you about the politics - No (but thanks for the rant anyway - I agree with quite a lot of it)

One point I disagreed on and you haven't swayed me - Homesexuality is not against nature.

Furthermore - it's not usually a lifestyle choice to be homosexual as most homosexual will tell you.

[Letters]

Why would the gays mind what it's called anyway so long as they have the same rights? Isn't that the issue?
The word marriage has a well defined and understood meaning in the West. I see no reason to change that.
It's not the biggest issue ever but it's how I feel.