If a gay couple marry.........

[dabees]

Does it affect me? The answer is NO, so why the objections?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17249099

[ummmm]

Who decided that marriage was for heterosexuals?

[jackthehat]

Quite how will it << interfere in the lives of those who consider Marriage is for heterosexuals >>?

Will you suddenly find yourself any *less* married, AOG?

[tamborine]

Dictionary meaning :

http://dictionary.ref...e.com/browse/marriage

[anotheoldgit]

jackthehat

/// Will you suddenly find yourself any *less* married, AOG? ///

Please try and keep up jack.

"No opinion either way myself, just making for a balanced argument".

"No opinion either way myself, just making for a balanced argument".

"No opinion either way myself, just making for a balanced argument".

[ummmm]

It's not a very good balanced argument though.

[jackthehat]

I had seen your comments.

I was actually asking you a question, AOG.

Would you consider yourself any less married just because I gained the freedom to marry?

[andy-hughes]

I would suggest that the concept of a marriage for a gay couple is the same as for anyone else - they wish to be joined in matrimony before the eyes of God.

I know that the Catholic church is unable to align the concept of being a Christian and a homosexual, but fortunately, it's only the church's perception, and contrary to what they think, they do not actually rule the world on this.

If I was a gay man and a Christian and wished for my union to be recognised in a church, I would ne pretty miffed if anyone was trying to deny me my marriage based on my sexuality. Heaven knows (pardon the pun!) gay people still suffer enough discrimination, covert as well as overt - why should they be denied their right to the religious union accorded to heterosexual people.

[anotheoldgit]

tamborine

Why let a simple Dictionary definition stand in the way, many of yesterday's word definitions have been altered.

GAY, had an entirely different meaning years go, and then there is .............. to name but a few.

[jake-the-peg]

I think I see where this is coming from.

There have always been pairings - couples living together from way before the time of the Christian church.

But over the last couple of millenia the Church has gained the right to control these pairings.

They introduced rules who could and who could not be sanctioned to join themselves in this way.

If your spouse was still alive - only in certain rare cases (as Henry VIII found out)

If you were above a certain age

If you were willing
And very definately only if you were different genders.

Over time the church's influence has waned - in marriage rules as well as in other things
Divorce and remarriage is common place, 19 year olds no longer have to elope to Gretna Green, registras now celebrate marriages - even of the heir to the throne!

This is from the church's perspective one more nail in the coffin of their authority and influence.

I don't even think it's homophobia - it's just their loss of control

[naomi24]

AOG, //...which leads us back to the question of why the Gay Lobby deem it their right to interfere in the lives of those who consider Marriage is for heterosexuals and dictate the way the Church should change it's rulings.//

So are you suggesting that society continues to concede to the wishes of those who consider marriage to be the exclusive preserve of heterosexuals? Why? I can’t see how someone else’s marriage would interfere with their lives or, indeed, affect them in any way whatsoever on a personal level. Can you?

[ludwig]

// Maybe we should do away with ‘marriage’ altogether and level the playing field to civil partnerships for all. Just a thought. //

Good point. It's got very little to do with religion these days anyway. It's a legal contract. It seems like alot of fuss over a word.

[FredPuli43]

Surely, it's the Roman Catholic Church that 'dictates' what its adherents should do and think in such matters. The 'gay lobby' dictates to nobody, but is as entitled as any heterosexual individual to criticize the Church.

Does anyone have an examples of a gay lobby dictating policy on anything in Britain? Or is that just that the claim of anyone who objects when the policy is supported by the majority of the rest of us?

[FredPuli43]

In France, only the civil ceremony of marriage is recognized in law. So far as the state is concerned, a couple can have a ceremony of marriage in the grandest cathedral, but they aren't legally married by it.
That's a commendably secular approach.
Mind, in France a person can get legally married when their partner has died without marrying them ! That power was exercised when a woman had been cohabiting with a police motor-cyclist who was killed on duty. The ceremony was conducted with an empty chair where the bridegroom would have been seated.(There was no proof that he would have married but France is France) Perhaps we needn't go that far!

[grffindoor2011]

I have several gay friends, but whether some like it or not, homosexuality was illegal in this country until 1967, as it still is in many other countries. The change of law hasn't changed my opinion. If alcohol were made illegal in the the uk, I wouldn't be anti alcohol and pro establishment just because the 'law' changed.

I have a few friends who until a few years ago used to make Irish and black jokes down the pub. Now though they follow the lead as spinless gutless individuals unable to stand up to the pc nazi brigade and who go with the government flow.

[NOX]

'I have a few friends who until a few years ago used to make Irish and black jokes down the pub. Now though they follow the lead as spinless gutless individuals unable to stand up to the pc nazi brigade and who go with the government flow.'

Why is it 'spineless' and 'gutless' not to be offensive and racially prejeudiced? Words totally fail me...

[RATTER15]

>>'I have a few friends who until a few years ago used to make Irish and black jokes down the pub. Now though they follow the lead as spinless gutless individuals unable to stand up to the pc nazi brigade and who go with the government flow.' <<

What a ridiculous statement!!!

[sp1814]

grffindoor2011

Not sure what you're trying to put across.

Are you saying that whatever the law states, your opinion on certain matters won't change?

I think that's pretty much a given in certain circumstances...however, what'll happen over time people get used to the 'hot bath' I referred to earlier.

For instance, the idea of smoking on the underground would be appalling to most people, but if you asked 100 people in 1954 what they thought, the response would be entirely different.

Same with equal pay for women, access to higher education, school leaving age etc...

[Davethedog]

Two people wish to live toghether, they wish to make sure that in law that they have legal privilages that a marriage brings and also should they have children they are protected in law.

Thats it, so why does it matter on the gender of the couple, indeed why is it actualy a matter of law.

This is archaic thinking reinforced by an ever decreasing church.

People are gay - straight, people want to marry. Why does anyone want (or need) to interfere?