ChatterBank3 mins ago
Gay Marriage …. Again
With the gay marriage debate taking place tonight in parliament, despite the numerous threads on the subject, I’ve yet to see one valid reason for opposition. Does anyone have one? Please, if you see no problem in it, don’t answer. I just want a valid reason for opposing it – and simply not liking the idea does not qualify as a valid reason.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by naomi24. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Marriage? Fox-hunting? Vermin ? I think my ex-wives would see a connection :)
Incidentally, I don't see foxes as vermin. Rabbits, yes, foxes no, and the latter control the former. That some people are incapable of protecting their chickens properly doesn't alter that opinion. But, if I made a living raising grouse chicks to grow up to be shot for large sums of money, I probably would think so, so it is a tenable argument. The valid arguments against gay marriage, as it is proposed, are non-existent
Incidentally, I don't see foxes as vermin. Rabbits, yes, foxes no, and the latter control the former. That some people are incapable of protecting their chickens properly doesn't alter that opinion. But, if I made a living raising grouse chicks to grow up to be shot for large sums of money, I probably would think so, so it is a tenable argument. The valid arguments against gay marriage, as it is proposed, are non-existent
Meanwhile, back to the ECHR aspect.
“Secretary Maria Miller has made the following statement under section 19(1)(a) of the Human Rights Act 1998:
In my view the provisions of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill are compatible with the Convention rights."
I assume that the Maria Miller mentioned is the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, Minister for Women and Equality and MP for Basingstoke. If so it is unlikely that she, with her education in economics from the LSE and her career in marketing and advertising, is best placed to interpret the very vague Articles of the ECHR. That is the privilege of judges from various solid beacons of Human Rights across Europe such as Russia, Azerbaijan and Albania.
As I said in a question I posed earlier this year:
http://
the new law which will provide for religious organisations to opt out of performing same sex marriages is very likely to be challenged (especially if the organisation concerned is the established Church of England) and a challenge, in my view, is very likely to succeed. (I have probably as much or as little qualification to make such a statement as Ms Miller, but I base my prediction on what has happened in the past and not merely on wishful thinking).
On a more nebulous note, surely, ummm, the function of Parliament is to facilitate the provision of things that the electorate does like and legislate against things that they don’t. People should not be forced to produce arguments for their likes and dislikes. After all, nobody asks them to provide evidence as to why they support Labour or UKIP or anybody else. They just do.
“Secretary Maria Miller has made the following statement under section 19(1)(a) of the Human Rights Act 1998:
In my view the provisions of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill are compatible with the Convention rights."
I assume that the Maria Miller mentioned is the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, Minister for Women and Equality and MP for Basingstoke. If so it is unlikely that she, with her education in economics from the LSE and her career in marketing and advertising, is best placed to interpret the very vague Articles of the ECHR. That is the privilege of judges from various solid beacons of Human Rights across Europe such as Russia, Azerbaijan and Albania.
As I said in a question I posed earlier this year:
http://
the new law which will provide for religious organisations to opt out of performing same sex marriages is very likely to be challenged (especially if the organisation concerned is the established Church of England) and a challenge, in my view, is very likely to succeed. (I have probably as much or as little qualification to make such a statement as Ms Miller, but I base my prediction on what has happened in the past and not merely on wishful thinking).
On a more nebulous note, surely, ummm, the function of Parliament is to facilitate the provision of things that the electorate does like and legislate against things that they don’t. People should not be forced to produce arguments for their likes and dislikes. After all, nobody asks them to provide evidence as to why they support Labour or UKIP or anybody else. They just do.
-- answer removed --
naomi I haven't answered because you have set out conditions as to what
you consider is an acceptable reason. You then modified your approach.
//OK. Let's drop the valid. How about reasons other than 'I just don't like the idea'? //
If I say "'I just don't like the idea'? That is a reason arrived at during your life. It's not something picked out of the air. It may be at an emotional level that is felt deeply. How will it affect normal marriages ? Will they feel they are diminished. ? Well I have already heard that said , so for some people their normal marriage has lost something.
You ask for something more tangible. OK! At the moment in the gay community its all ME, ME, ME , WE ,WE , WE want, want want !
No one is mentioning the children. I have seen the effects on children being brought up in households that are different from the norm. , single parents, disabled parents etc . Children make up stories to hide the fact their home life is not normal. Unfortunately having two same sex parents is something difficult to hide.
Marriage is not the narrow world of two people it involves the whole of society which ,strange as it seems to some, includes the Children.
You may argue it is society which wrong and has been for thousands of years. Well time will tell.
you consider is an acceptable reason. You then modified your approach.
//OK. Let's drop the valid. How about reasons other than 'I just don't like the idea'? //
If I say "'I just don't like the idea'? That is a reason arrived at during your life. It's not something picked out of the air. It may be at an emotional level that is felt deeply. How will it affect normal marriages ? Will they feel they are diminished. ? Well I have already heard that said , so for some people their normal marriage has lost something.
You ask for something more tangible. OK! At the moment in the gay community its all ME, ME, ME , WE ,WE , WE want, want want !
No one is mentioning the children. I have seen the effects on children being brought up in households that are different from the norm. , single parents, disabled parents etc . Children make up stories to hide the fact their home life is not normal. Unfortunately having two same sex parents is something difficult to hide.
Marriage is not the narrow world of two people it involves the whole of society which ,strange as it seems to some, includes the Children.
You may argue it is society which wrong and has been for thousands of years. Well time will tell.
society hasn't been wrong for thousands of years, society changes to suit the needs of the time. If society didn't change, women would still be chattels, children would be sent to work at age 6 or less, Wealthy landowners could control the actions of their tenants without let or hindrance, dogs would have their tails and ears cut off at the whim of their owners, bulls and bears would be baited, cock fighting and dog fighting would still be legal, food could be adulterated with arsenic.....I could go on and on but I won't.
And frankly I see the NO! NO! NO! of some groups as being as reprehensible as your ME! ME! ME! allegation.
And frankly I see the NO! NO! NO! of some groups as being as reprehensible as your ME! ME! ME! allegation.
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles8 mins ago
News12 mins ago
News13 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles18 mins ago
