[Closed] Gay Marriage

deadlydarcy - Member
"There are plenty in the aggressive homosexual community that see this as but a stepping stone."

I'm part of the aggressive community, and I see this as a stepping stone to having my aggression rights enshrined in law.

What I don't get with all this, is they're saying this amendment to allow heterosexual civil partnerships will cost 4bn or whatever - are there tax/inheritance benefits available to people in a civil partnership but not a marriage? 😕

And are there really significant numbers of heterosexual people who won't get married but would love to have a civil partnership? 😕

I think it makes you a homoseXCual...
no? really? sorry... there's been wine...

I've got your coat for you already.....

That's not mine, mine is the one with the fabulous cut and pink sparkles...

*and pockets full of stereotypes.

Not read any of this thread but bet its the second most boring of the year.

aggressive homosexual

Ahem.

😯

I think he said aggressive rather than pirate

I think the whole homophobia thing is on its way out anyway. Once the current crop of vocal bigots have died off, it'll go the way of racism: frowned upon by the vast majority of society, at least publicly, and those that still harbour ill-feelings towards "the gays" will at least keep it to themselves.

Can't happen soon enough.

There are plenty of people who oppose it.

There's a loud shouty minority making lots of noise. I get the impression most people really couldn't care less one way or the other (and that includes gay people I know).

Not read any of this thread but bet its the second most boring of the year.

Link to the most boring please.

I was sitting next to that Cardinal Keith O'Brien on the plane the other day and he was looking a bit down.*

So to cheer him up I says to him "Keith, I know we have only just sat down next to each other, but will you marry me?" & He says: "You surely realize that I am opposed to Gay Marriage." So I say: " That's Ok mate, I'm not Gay"**

*This bit is true
** This might not be.

There's a loud shouty minority making lots of noise.

Who's that then, the bigots in the Tory party?

But, but all homosexuality is an abomination. It must be - it says so in Leviticus just before where he says that when a woman has her period she should be cast out for 7 days then must sacrifice a lamb or a dove.

That seems to be the justification for anti homosexuality - a nutter wrote it 2ooo years ago. I would like to think we have moved on a bit since then.

MP's - just do it and stop faffing about.

must not go on the telegraph talkback pages anyomore, im just giving that hate rag some advertising revenue and there are lots really very nasty homophobic comments floating about there

I think the whole homophobia thing is on its way out anyway. Once the current crop of vocal bigots have died off, it'll go the way of racism: frowned upon by the vast majority of society, at least publicly, and those that still harbour ill-feelings towards "the gays" will at least keep it to themselves.

Can't happen soon enough.

Whilst I'd love to agree with you, have you read the Telegraph or Daily Express recently?

It's fairly obvious their readership is pretty convinced that as soon as you allow gay marriage they'll be forcing pensioners into workcamps for mandatory bum sex with illegal immigrants and our ONLY salvation is to round them all up (gays and immigrants) and intern them all on the Isle of White whilst voting UKIP and quitting 'gay' Europe.

Equality and matters of principle are of great importance to governmwnts imo. Cant believe people think its a waste of time.

The fact it's in parliament isn't a waste of time. The fact it's just not been put to vote, where it will pass, saving all the swivel-eyed-loons they chance to spout their vitriol, [i]is[/i] a waste of time. HTH.

Grr!

I'm an aggressive homosexual.

If I see you wearing beige, I shoot on sight! 😆

If I see you wearing beige, [b]I shoot on sight![/b]

[img] [/img]

I’d love to know what’s next on the ‘Aggressive Homosexual Agenda’ after they get marriage rights. They might push to change the national anthem to ‘Defying Gravity’ from Wicked! Actually, that’d be ace...

I, for one, welcome our new gay overlords!

Next they'll be wanting to marry, then kill and eat our swans. It will be mandatory under gay sharia law.

Can anyone name one "aggressive homosexual" in the public eye? They don't seem to be taking over the world, or have I not noticed

Alan Carr,Julian Clary,Grahame Norton for 3 who seem to be taking over the world of tv, and well done to them.

The thing is 10 years ago being gay was usually hidden from all but a few trusted freinds, now it seems to be compulsory for most men and women to have a GBF gay best freind, and long may they last as freinds.

@wrecker:

I didn't mean it [i][b]that[/b][/i] way! Now I've gone all embarrassed and stuff! 😳

I’d love to know what’s next on the ‘Aggressive Homosexual Agenda’ after they get marriage rights

I imagine they'll be wanting to ram it down our throats...

IGMC.

I’d love to know what’s next on the ‘Aggressive Homosexual Agenda’

Well, at least this episode has shown that however much they spout off about reforming, the Tories will never shake off the 'Nasty Party' tag.

Good.

I, for one, welcome our new gay overlords!

I heard a rumour they were going to give us men dress sense, personal hygiene and pride in our appearance

i think the guardian are having too much fun at the expense of some bigoted old codgers .....

[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/may/21/tebbit-gay-marriage-lesbian-queen ]Gay marriage bill may lead to 'lesbian queen and artificially inseminated heir'
Former Tory chairman Lord Tebbit also warns that legislation could allow him to marry his son to escape inheritance tax[/url]

just seen this phrase on facebook ...

Swiveleyesation under threat - made me chuckle

I'm prepared to fight for my right as a man to dress badly, smell and look awful.

what an awful horrible man... [tebbit]

Tebbit also said he had challenged a minister about legalising gay marriage at the same time as ending male primogeniture in the royal succession

"It's like one of my colleagues said: we've got to make these same sex marriages available to all. It would lift my worries about inheritance tax because maybe I'd be allowed to marry my son. Why not? Why shouldn't a mother marry her daughter? Why shouldn't two elderly sisters living together marry each other?"

My god Tebbit hangs out with some pretty sick mofos doesn't he... Tories are weird... 😯

Nutty comments there by Norman, but some of the people commenting seem to be missing the fact that he's right, it will be legal to marry his son (or for two sisters to marry, etc.) as incest laws are gender specific.

Wow so some [s]Tories[/s] people are willing to commit incest just to dodge taxes?

Normans argument seems well thought through, calm, and rational.

God only knows how Dave has arrived at the conclusion that some on the right of his party are 'mad, swivel-eyed loons'. Where on earth is the evidence for that?

incest laws are gender specific.

If only there was some way parliament could amend them...

Do you think they're going to, unklehomered?

Wow so some Tories people are willing to commit incest just to dodge taxes?

Ah, but the thing is you don't have to - you just have to get married.

Do you think they're going to, unklehomered?

shirley

I'm a bit surprised it isn't part of the same bill tbh. the bill is just a collection of amendments to previous bits of legislation.

Ah, but the thing is you don't have to - you just have to get married.

I think you might struggle to find a vicar or registrar willing to perform that ceremony.

I do actually support some of what Norm says in that if you are doing the legal stuff you should do it properly and make sure it makes sense. If you allow loop holes you'll end up with google having a gay marriage to amazon to avoid tax.

Still that is just a case of good paperwork. The principle that it should be allowed remains the same and we should work to close the loopholes to make it possible.

I didn't mean it that way! Now I've gone all embarrassed and stuff!

And there was me typing "beige" into the asos search engine. What a waste of time that was! 😀

Actually what's wrong with extending civil partnerships to siblings? Sex and marriage have been fairly seperate things for a long time anyway. Take the case of two elderly sisters living together for company and support. Why shouldn't they enjoy the same legal status as two elderly unrelated people doing the same thing.

Incest can remain illegal for good biological reasons. At it's legalistic heart marriage / civil partnership is just a contract.

artificially inseminated heir

That scene in There's Something About Mary?

what's wrong with extending civil partnerships to siblings?

lucien - Member
Not really sure I want to open up a debate about the for's and against arguments for the above; what I'm more interested in is a wider question about "do you really care about the topic" as there seems to be a great deal of debate in parliament / Govt / Clergy etc, but most ordinary people I speak with don't give two hoots about the whole thing, either way.

Getting back to the OP's comments, it seems to me that the debate over "for's and against" has become completely irrelevant: all three main parties support it so it has been inevitable that it will happen for a while.

But what is interesting to me is how Cameron's attempting to handle it, (and Clegg and Milliband too.)
I'm not 100% sure how much he actually cares about the subject, but I am sure he had the foresight to see it as an inevitability and hoped to gain some political capital from being the leader that introduced it. He hoped it would increase his personal appeal to younger voters, and at a party level, maybe take some of the edge off the "Nasty Party" image and up their percent support.
In reality, what's happened is that the nasty side of his party have been very vocal, and probably increased the perception of the tories as "swivel eyed loons" and lessened the chance of younger voters actually supporting him/them. And on a personal level, he'll get no individual credit out of this as the bill's become a Con-Dem-Lab coalition effort with all three party "leaders" involved, but demonstrating equally wet levels of non-leadership. They've set up the next election to look like a choice between three flavours of wet lettuce. And it's now there for the taking for the first party to come up with a genuine leader.
IMO, Tory central command recognise this. The story is now not about gay marriage. That's 100% happening.
It's about the Tory party kicking Cameron in the balls, whilst trying their utmost to keep the buffoon with a soundbite for every occasion gagged 'till the shit blows over.

Stole this from DannyB's post earlier:

[img] [/img]
Replace the initial question with "Boris comes to power" and see how safe you feel about the pie-chart now 😉

insest laws ain't gemder specific see the sexual offences act

"64Sex with an adult relative: penetration.

(1)A person aged 16 or over (A) [F1(subject to subsection (3A))] commits an offence if— .
(a)he intentionally penetrates another person’s vagina or anus with a part of his body or anything else, or penetrates another person’s mouth with his penis, .
(b)the penetration is sexual, .
(c)the other person (B) is aged 18 or over, .
(d)A is related to B in a way mentioned in subsection (2), and .
(e)A knows or could reasonably be expected to know that he is related to B in that way. .
(2)The ways that A may be related to B are as parent, grandparent, child, grandchild, brother, sister, half-brother, half-sister, uncle, aunt, nephew or niece. .
(3)In subsection (2)— .
[F2(za)“parent” includes an adoptive parent; .
(zb)“child” includes an adopted person within the meaning of Chapter 4 of Part 1 of the Adoption and Children Act 2002;] .

(a)“uncle” means the brother of a person’s parent, and “aunt” has a corresponding meaning; .
(b)“nephew” means the child of a person’s brother or sister, and “niece” has a corresponding meaning."

On topic i am very much in favour of mariage for all consenting non insestuous adults .