300,000 oppose gay marriage in biggest petition since election

reply to post by mythos


Amen people seem to like to pick whichever part of the bible they need to support their argument yet forget about the rest of the book that they hold so sacred.

Originally posted by ollncasino

More than 300,000 people have joined a campaign against UK PM David Cameron’s plan to legalise same-sex marriage

The Coalition 4 Marriage set up a petition against the plan, which has so far attracted more than 300,200 signatures. The group is calling on the Government to retain the current definition of marriage as the voluntary union between one man and one woman for life.

Colin Hart, the campaign director, said the surge in support since the Government began its consultation was further evidence of the unpopularity of the proposal.

“There has been a staggering response to the petition, launched last month, which shows just how many ordinary men and women care about this issue,” he said.

His rival campaign, which is backed by the British Humanist Association, the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement, and other groups, is running its own petition in support of homosexual marriage, which has attracted 33,400 signatures so far.

The Telegraph

It is interesting that the anti-gay marriage petition has 10 times as many signatures as the pro-gay marriage petition.

Why is a civil union between homosexuals not enough?

Because it declares that two adults of sound mind and some how lesser than others. Why are these people so interested in what other people do if it harms no one and has no effect on their lives?

OP Why do you even care one way or the other - why is it even any of your business??

Originally posted by Astralwatcherz
reply to post by ollncasino

 

First of all using the why can't a dog be called a cat analogy is stupid they are a different species, where as gays are humans just like you.

But why did you use the word gay?

Why not the word hetrosexual to describe people of the same sex that have sex with each other?

People of the same sex that have sex with each other are human afer all, hence following your logic, the word gay is redundant.

Is that the next push from the pro-gay pressure groups?

Originally posted by CodyOutlaw
Why can't 300,200 people mind their own damn business about what goes on between consenting adults?

The gay community are demanding that the hetrosexual majority give them public moral and legal support by agreeing to extend the meaning of the word marriage to include homosexual civil unions.

Hence, to suggest that 302,581 people (it appears to have gone up by a couple of thousand in the last few hours) should "mind their own damn business" missrepresents the nature of support that the gay lobby are demanding from non gays.

Originally posted by Cosmic911
2 hours later...chirp chirp...yep, still 3 stars and 4 flags...chirp chirp...real mind bender here.

5 stars and 4 flags.

I checked out your profile and I see that you have started 91 threads with a flag count of 270 meaning you have an average flag count of... 2.96

This is true, but in my experiences, most believers in the Christian God will (shockingly) pick and choose what they want to believe from the OT. The subject of homosexuality being "evil" seems to, for the most part, be accepted by such people. I only bring up Christians because it was brought up earlier in the thread and in past discussions like this one. I figure there are other religions that allow it and that's great, but do they have as much influence as the Christian church as far as throwing a temper tantrum to get their way? This is one thing they will fight to the death.

The majority of the population probably wouldn't care, but homosexuals can be joined by a civil union. Is a civil union somehow less spiritual than a marriage? Isn't it the meaning of the event that matters and not the word used to describe it? You speak like a civil union is this lesser form of marriage. They both have the same meaning, don't they? Are the words really that much bigger than the spiritual connection shared between the two people?

reply to post by ollncasino


You realize almost that many did not want women to vote or African Americans to have freedom? Since when does the personal opinion of people who already enjoy civil rights have to do with withholding human rights from another group anyway?

Originally posted by newcovenant
Since when does the personal opinion of people who already enjoy civil rights have to do with withholding human rights from another group anyway?

Civil partnerships already provide all the legal benefits of marriage so there's no need to redefine marriage. It's not discriminatory to support traditional marriage. Same-sex couples may choose to have a civil partnership but no one has the right to redefine marriage for the rest of us.

c4m.org.uk...

By the way,

The European Court of Human Rights recently ruled that gay marriage is not a human right.

Gay marriage is not a human right, according to European ruling

The Telegraph

I am still having a very hard time understanding why people oppose gay marriage. Gay people live together, gay people have committed loving relationships, a gay relationship is in no way criminal, a gay relationship hurts no one, both parties are willing participants..... WTF is the problem? I am uncomfortable watching two men kiss... I am uncomfortable with a lot of things. That doesn't mean it should be illegal. Two people that love each other and want that love to be accepted by the state should have their demands met.

If you quote scripture let me ask this... Should people who worship a different faith be allowed to marry? If an atheist man, and an atheist woman marry, is it any worse than a gay man and his partner marrying? Even if it is, how DARE you think that you are worthy of judging for your God?

Just what the planet needs, more ignorant breeders to preach hatred, and completely overcrowd the already polluted, glutted planet. More self-righteous, entitled vermin. Vulgar and disgusting.

Heterosexuality is a cancer upon the earth.

Beam me up.

reply to post by ollncasino

5 stars and 4 flags. I checked out your profile and I see that you have started 91 threads with a flag count of 270 meaning you have an average flag count of... 2.96

Ugh people actually care about those stupid numbers and not the message. Each post is different. Next you'll be cherry picking posts. Bad form.

Originally posted by Domo1
I am still having a very hard time understanding why people oppose gay marriage. Gay people live together, gay people have committed loving relationships, a gay relationship is in no way criminal, a gay relationship hurts no one, both parties are willing participants..... WTF is the problem?

Gays already have a civil partnership in the UK which grants them all of the rights of a marriage.

The issue here is whether the word marriage should be used, as a legal imperative, to describe a gay civil union.

In its first official statement on same-sex marriage, the Church of England committed itself to “the traditional understanding of the institution of marriage as being between one man and one woman”.

“Opening marriage to same sex couples would confer few if any new legal rights on the part of those already in a civil partnership, yet would require multiple changes to law, with the definition of marriage having to change for everyone,”it said.

The Telegraph

Originally posted by Domo1
Ugh people actually care about those stupid numbers and not the message. Each post is different. Next you'll be cherry picking posts. Bad form.

Perhaps you are right.

The fact that 300,000 have signed a petition opposing gay marriage (not gay civil unions) is however a number and a message that we should care about.

How the (Canadian) gay-marriage campaign has unleashed a bureaucratic assault on people's identities

Anyone who thinks the introduction of gay marriage will give rise to a new era of liberty and choice should look at the Canadian experience.

There, the passing of the 2005 Civil Marriage Act, which allows same-sex unions, unleashed a phenomenal amount of state meddling in families and relationships.

Most notably, the state utterly overhauled the traditional language of the family, airbrushing from official documents terms such as "husband" and "wife" and even "mother" and "father".

The Telegraph

The Orwellian obliteration of such longstanding identities, which mean a great deal to many people, demonstrates that modern politicians are more than happy to ride roughshod over the majority in their desperate pursuit of some PC political points.

Following the passing of the Civil Marriage Act, all official documentation and legislation was amended, erasing "husbands" and "wives".

And because same-sex couples primarily use reproductive technology to procreate, some Canadian legislation has been amended to replace the term "natural parent" with "legal parent".

As one report describes it: "In short, the adoption exception – that who is a child's parent is established by legal fiat, not biological connection – becomes the norm for all children."

Most strikingly, on birth certificates some Canadian provinces have replaced the term "father" and "mother" with "Parent 1" and "Parent 2".

The Telegraph

No longer 'mother' and 'father' on birth certificates.

Rather "Parent 1" and "Parent 2".

Is that what gay marriage means?

It is if the Canadian experience of gay marriage is a representative example.

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by sealing
Obviously 300,000 ignorant witch hunters have been reincarnated.

Why would anyone want to burn a witch because they oppose gay marriage?

You are making no sense.

Because they dont float.......DUH

reply to post by ollncasino


Why is not strong enough? Because religious nutters are persistent and don't lack the numbers. They will never stop hating gay people. They will never stop doing everything they can to stop gay people from living what is considered today to be a normal life. They will forever try to suppress gay people to the best of their abilities. The Westboro Baptist church is a prime example of this.

I don't want to get caught up in a thread like this because it usually turns into a mud slinging fest between religious nut jobs and homosexual members. I will say that I LOVE women (Lord knows just how much :lol and sometimes find myself slightly homophobic due mainly to the way I was raised.

But I would be a huge hypocrite if I sat here and said "legally marriage is between a man and a woman" because not too long ago a lot of people thought it was absurd to have black and white people use the same water fountain or sit in the area on the bus. It took years, bloodshed, tears, you name it just so a certain part of the population could live a somewhat normal life.

In my opinion this is no different. I choose not to interact with a lot of homosexual people mainly because they can be flamboyant and try to shove it down a heterosexual persons throat. But I WILL NOT support anybody willing to segregate a group of people further basically because they live a different life than you.

I only support people being happy, and if that means letting them use the term and legally binding authority that "marriage" encompasses, then fine. A happy person is a less violent and evil person.

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by newcovenant
Since when does the personal opinion of people who already enjoy civil rights have to do with withholding human rights from another group anyway?

Civil partnerships already provide all the legal benefits of marriage so there's no need to redefine marriage. It's not discriminatory to support traditional marriage. Same-sex couples may choose to have a civil partnership but no one has the right to redefine marriage for the rest of us.

c4m.org.uk...

By the way,

The European Court of Human Rights recently ruled that gay marriage is not a human right.

Gay marriage is not a human right, according to European ruling

The Telegraph

edit on 24-3-2012 by ollncasino because: Add extra info

Nobody is redefining marriage. The courts already have a definition. What you want is an addendum, after the fact to clarify marriage is between a man and a woman.

But they can't. It is gender discrimination. The Church can refuse to marry people but they must be granted a civil service. Maybe that's what you are calling a union? And yeah I agree but most places they are illegal too. Civil services can't refuse to marry consenting adults. They have to. Once superstition drops away from the law - the law becomes more just.

The European Court

No offense but ...big deal. They're wrong.

Originally posted by Swills
reply to post by ollncasino

 

Why is not strong enough? Because religious nutters are persistent and don't lack the numbers. They will never stop hating gay people.

Yet the majority of Britons do not support gay civil unions being called marriage.

Majority of Britons oppose gay marriage

Majority of Britons oppose gay marriage

A government report has revealed that more than half of Britons are against gay marriage, and two thirds are against gay couples adopting children

• Findings by ONS show that only 45 per cent of British people believe that gay marriages should be legal throughout Europe.

• The opposition towards gay couples adopting children is even higher, with only 33 per cent in support.

www.divamag.co.uk...