Jump to content
aberdeen-music
Sign in to follow this  
Stroopy121

Equal Marriage

Recommended Posts

I think we're getting sidelined by a minor point here. The churches aren't just saying that they don't want to be forced to marry gay people in a church. They're against them getting married at all. Anywhere. That's a pretty big distinction to make.

Pretty sure I made this point a couple of times only to be ignored...

Regarding polygamy, I once read - in The Economic Naturalist, I think- that widespread polygamy would be harmful to men aside from the most successful, rich and handsome guys who would hoover up all the women. Thus according to this theory explaining why it's illegal in democracies despite most of the politicians and lawmakers being men.

Can't see incest being too popular even if legal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Surely it would be balanced out by beautiful women hoovering up all the men? That is, of course, if you consider polygamy to be a two-way street. Can't have it benefitting just the men and not the women! Besides, isn't it already the case that many rich and successful men have mistresses? In some cultures it's been standard behaviour for years. Why not make it official?

Would you like to see it legalised?

I don't have much of an opinion on polygamy either way, but if one looks at the way it's operated in such cultures as accept it, I doubt it'd be "a two-way street". At least in our current society one hopefully can't get away from hiding a whole harem from one's wife. So I'd probably make an argument against it based on fairness and egalitarianism from both the male and female perspective.

I was kind of hoping not to discuss incest any further but... http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7334649.stm Depends if incest does cause birth defects and such (when this story first came out, I remember a science doctorate holder on UGS explaining to pitchfork wielding forumites that it's not likely to unless it's over successive generations). If it does, then yeah prevent it; if not, then I wouldn't throw people in jail for doing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My point is that everyone seems to be placing the blame for any opposition solely at the door of the Christian denominations in this country, when in fact the issue is rather more complex and attracts a wider range of critics than a glance at this thread (or the BBC article that has been mentioned) would have you believe.

For the record, I'm a member of the Church of Scotland (considers homophobia a sin) and the Scottish Conservative Party (led by a homosexual). I have no issue with homosexuals getting married. I'd rather the people celebrating the fact that it will be legalised weren't so quick to blame right-wing Christians for opposing it, though.

I'm afraid that as long as a majority of high ranking Christians wish to uphold the belief that the UK is a predominantly Christian country, and that changes such as this are detrimental to Christian values, they will receive the most flak for this sort of thing.

It's not like all non-theists are innocent either, however they just get labelled as knuckle-heads because they think two men holding hands is yucky. The rule shouldn't be any different for theists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's pretty gross that you're pursuing the incest angle Dave. There's a high likelihood of an abuse of trust/power in such a relationship, and legalising it or making it acceptable would leave a lot of unfortunate young people unprotected. It's parallel to whether a teacher should be able to have sex with a pupil. Not if two consenting people of the same sex should be able to get hitched (albeit if the organization carrying out the ceremony approves).

I would imagine that Christians would have the least problem with it anyway seeing as they reckon the whole of mankind came from a man and a clone made from one of his fucking ribs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Christianity is the most popular religion in Scotland and the UK as a whole. "High ranking Christians" (whoever they may be) and whatever they may claim won't change this fact. The fact is, though, in this matter, Christians are seen as an easy target by those who don't have the balls to take other denominations, such as large sections of the muslim religious community, to task for much more extreme views on such subjects.

That's my point though. They're the biggest group of people to attack on the matter, and history shows that they will change their official line over time if enough pressure is put on them. The Muslim organizations are not a good target as they are very much a minority in this country. Anyway, I reckon that it's pretty wide of you to suggest that they get treated well by the media: The majority of the UK public probably think that the guy with a hook for a hand is the Muslim analogue of the Archbishop of fucking Canterbury. As for my remark on 'high ranking Christians', I was more referring to mouthpieces like the guy spouting tripe about gay marriage logically leading to incest and people with heaps of wives. I'm fairly certain that there's maybe even more ranks than that in the church though (correct me if I'm wrong).

Wow. I remember the exact same argument being made by pro-Section 28 campaigners. Won't somebody pleeeeeease think of the children, etc.

No it isn't, we're talking about consenting adults here. Unless it's your contention that there are circumstances in which people over the age of 16, and in some cases over the age of 18, are incapable of giving consent to sexual relations with another adult? In other words, you feel there is a role for the state in the bedroom? Can you really claim to be any different from those who decry gay marriage when you're using the same arguments as they are to restrict the personal freedom of others who just want to express their love for one another?

I feel my points were clear enough on this matter that I don't have to repeat it, and I don't think it requires the devil's advocate treatment. Incest and gay marriage are not logically comparable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My point is that everyone seems to be placing the blame for any opposition solely at the door of the Christian denominations in this country, when in fact the issue is rather more complex and attracts a wider range of critics than a glance at this thread (or the BBC article that has been mentioned) would have you believe.

For the record, I'm a member of the Church of Scotland (considers homophobia a sin) and the Scottish Conservative Party (led by a homosexual). I have no issue with homosexuals getting married. I'd rather the people celebrating the fact that it will be legalised weren't so quick to blame right-wing Christians for opposing it, though.

The reason that Christian's are being blamed for opposing it is because, well, they opposed it. Very, very publicly. They were the organisers of the campaign against the legislation and made various high profile public statements about the doom that would befall the country if it went ahead with this. They continued to do so yesterday once the announcement was made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every comment I've read on news websites opposing it has mentioned God and the bible at least once or twice. I'm sure plenty of non-Christians oppose it too, but they are being nowhere near as vocal about it, from the fractions of opinions I have scanned over.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we were discussing the laws about homosexuality in the UAE then we would be discussing the Muslim stance vs. the Pro-Equality stance and Christian beliefs would be left out of the argument.

If there were even a single Muslim involved in our current discussion (and if any of you are Muslim, I apologise for discounting you, I was unaware) then the stance of the Muslim doctrines could be dragged into the debate, too. For all it's worth, though, the Qur'an condemns homosexuality in more or less exactly the same way as the Bible does. The two, for the sake of this discussion, are completely interchangable.

"When a man mounts another man, the throne of God shakes."

"Kill the one that is doing it and also kill the one that it is being done to."

xx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you think that people who commit incestuous acts do so because they are genetically pre-disposed to, or do they do it entirely of their own volition?

Honestly, I've never given it that much thought Dave. I don't think either of those options would affect my previous reasoning for it staying illegal though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's nonsense. The Catholic church (along with the muslims and a few other religious groups and minor Christian denominations) oppose it and campaigned against . The Church of Scotland (Scotland's largest Christian denomination) certainly doesn't. It's only concern is the timing and the ructions it will cause within the church if an element of coercion is included in the legislation. Which we've been assured it won't be.

It's not nonsense at all!

In response to the Scottish Government’s statement' date=' the Church of Scotland has re-iterated its opposition to same-sex marriage[/quote']

Beside that you're wrong and the CoS DOES oppose gay marriage, your question was about why are the Christian denominations being blamed for the opposition. You didn't refer just to the CoS. The opposition campaign was very high profile and publicly organised by Christian churches. That's why they're being blamed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That's nonsense. The Catholic church (along with the muslims and a few other religious groups and minor Christian denominations) oppose it and campaigned against . The Church of Scotland (Scotland's largest Christian denomination) certainly doesn't. It's only concern is the timing and the ructions it will cause within the church if an element of coercion is included in the legislation. Which we've been assured it won't be.

The Church oppose gay marriage. It's as simple as that. I have no idea which of the factions is the biggest and which shouts the loudest, all I know is that I have encountered next to zero opposition to gay marriage at all, in my lifetime, from an atheist/anti-theist standpoint, other than a small minority of knuckle-draggers who also think that Polish people shouldn't be allowed to work in this country. Since the knuckle-draggers don't have any real argument to make, I don't see the point in entering into a debate or discussion with them. Plus, thankfully, I do a pretty good job of keeping those kinds of cretin out of my life.

Anyone else find Alex Salmond's sudden adoption of gay marriage as a political vote-winner a little...cynical? After all, the UK government's been preparing legislation on it for months and will introduce its own bill very soon. David Cameron's been open about his desire to introduce gay marriage since 2005. Could it be that Salmond realises that his best chance of clinging on to power and winning the referendum is headline-grabbing stunts like this?

I do, to be honest. I actually pretty much agree with most of what you've said here, but I'm just a bit cynical generally. That having been said, I don't really care if it's just a headline grabbing stunt as it's the right thing to do.

We're not talking about eschatology though. There are various denominations and factions within the Christian and muslim faiths who all have their own interpretations of the canon. The fact is that in Scotland the largest and most mainstream faction of Christianity (the Church of Scotland) do not oppose it, and neither do most Christians in this country. The opposite is true of the muslims in this country, however.

We are not, we are talking about the legalisation of gay marriage in the UK. Ergo, our two groups under scrutiny are For and Against. Against being (as detailed above, in my experience) predominantly either Christian, belligerently retarded or both.

Do you think that people who commit incestuous acts do so because they are genetically pre-disposed to, or do they do it entirely of their own volition?

I don't know - but a semi-educated guess is that it is a result of an abusive and misinformed sexual education. Incest isn't a sexual preference and IMHO (obviously I can't back this up as there have been few studies of this nature, but if you could point me at any I'd be very interested to read them) it's a nurture over nature scenario. In much the same way, I believe that the (small percentage of) priests who fiddle with altar boys may have been adversely affected by their (IMHO very unnatural) celebate lifestyle which (I believe) may have caused them to seek sexual release in other ways (young boys). It's about abusing power for sexual release with no fear of consequence.

xx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I still can't understand why anyone would want their marriage / relationship / whatever ......blessed / recognised / sanctioned / whatever by an organisation which thinks that their lifestyle / sexual preference / whatever is morally wrong and wants nothing to do with them ???

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I still can't understand why anyone would want their marriage / relationship / whatever ......blessed / recognised / sanctioned / whatever by an organisation which thinks that their lifestyle / sexual preference / whatever is morally wrong and wants nothing to do with them ???

Can you understand that that's not actually the point being discussed? The opposition wasn't to gay people getting married in church it was to gay people getting married at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I still can't understand why anyone would want their marriage / relationship / whatever ......blessed / recognised / sanctioned / whatever by an organisation which thinks that their lifestyle / sexual preference / whatever is morally wrong and wants nothing to do with them ???

You're missing the point that there are celebrants across the board of religions and denominations who ARE accepting of homosexual couples getting married. And it's very much possible to follow a religion and be homosexual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it's very much possible to follow a religion and be homosexual.

I think you will find most religious people would disagree with you on this point

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think you will find most religious people would disagree with you on this point

Doesnt matter if they disagree, it still happens, gay people can be religious, i dont see how you can question that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...