Gay Marriage, MPs vote next week Options

[On the edge]

I don't have children, and have never wanted to have children. I wholly reject the notion that marriage is centrally about procreation. For me it is a public declaration and celebration of my love and committment to my wife, and that's a state that I think is recognised and understood across all peoples of the world.

That's fine, but why do the state need to be involved? There is no reason why that can't be done contractually and 'weddings' simply recorded as a list of personal contracts. You can then have whatever ceremony you want.

[motormad]

I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why can't we all be treated normal and equally? In other words share everything equally and fairly. What is important is that people are in a loving marriage and are happy. Most heterosexuals haven't managed to show us what marriage should be all about. We might just learn something from gay marriages.

Because people are old fashioned.
You know, woman does the cooking, washing and cleaning.
Man earns the money.

Because we all know that's how reality works, and nothing to do with most gay "partnerships/marriages" being more successful than those of hetereosexuals.

Some people are just too stuck in the olden times (at least they don't seem biggoted).

[newres]

Because we all know that's how reality works, and nothing to do with most gay "partnerships/marriages" being more successful than those of hetereosexuals.

Is there any evidence that that is true?

I heard this joke the other day. I can't say I am sorry if anyone is offended.



When Elton John's baby was born, Elton and David were ushered into a ward where a dozen babies were lying in their cots, eleven of them crying and screaming.

In the corner, one baby was lying serenely. A nurse came over to both of them and indicated that the happy child was theirs.

"Isn't it wonderful?" Elton asked David. "All these crying babies...and yet our baby is so content. This just proves the superiority of gay love!

"The nurse said, "Oh sure, he's happy now, but just watch what happens when I pull the dummy out of his ar$e...."

[Rusty Bullet]

Seems to me our M.P's are going about this all wrong. If they are that concerned about gays, the easiest way to stop them having sex is actually to allow them to get married.

[desres123]

seems to me that the mps have to much time on their hands to find a day debate this when there is far more important things to do like the economy.

[Turin Machine]

Seems to me our M.P's are going about this all wrong. If they are that concerned about gays, the easiest way to stop them having sex is actually to allow them to get married.

Oh, you've met the wife then.

[Squelchy]

It is like the old adage of which came first the chicken or the egg ?

You're obviously not a Paleobiologist. They get driven to exasperation answering that one. To them, it's an evolution thing which is self evident.
It's creationists who have a problem with the answer.

[Spider]

Gay marriage, more women and black people in important positions is important for a mature society. We have a habit of clinging to past foibles and superstitious mumbo jumbo. When will society learn that we are all equal and only can go forward equal.

[Simon Kirby]

Gay marriage, more women and black people in important positions is important for a mature society. We have a habit of clinging to past foibles and superstitious mumbo jumbo. When will society learn that we are all equal and only can go forward equal.

But we're not all equal, and to assert as much is to miss the central point that actually we're all rather different. It doesn't much matter to me whether the people doing "important" jobs are black or female, or for that matter sagittarian, left-handed, bearded, bespectacled, Polish, born-again hasidic, or albino. What I do believe to be important is equality of opportunity - because it's the inequality of opportunity that is the corrosive injustice.

[Spider]

But we're not all equal, and to assert as much is to miss the central point that actually we're all rather different. It doesn't much matter to me whether the people doing "important" jobs are black or female, or for that matter sagittarian, left-handed, bearded, bespectacled, Polish, born-again hasidic, or albino. What I do believe to be important is equality of opportunity - because it's the inequality of opportunity that is the corrosive injustice.

We are all equal or should be equal, but that doesn't mean we are not different. Of course we are. That is what makes us as people great. We've got a long way to go before we are a cultured, fair and equal society. But Rome wasn't built in a day. We will get their though.

[Simon Kirby]

We are all equal or should be equal, but that doesn't mean we are not different. Of course we are. That is what makes us as people great. We've got a long way to go before we are a cultured, fair and equal society. But Rome wasn't built in a day. We will get their though.

I fundamentally disagree. I'm not talking about cultural differences where you can argue that all cultures are equally valid, I'm saying that, in the world of work that you referenced, we are not all equally competent or qualified and that it would be an injustice to positively discriminate in favour of a less capable candidate. If black people and women (or any other clade you care) are under-represented in the jobs that you mentioned then that might well be evidence of inequitable discrimination, but how does it right that injustice to replace one discrimination with another?

[Simon Kirby]

We are all equal or should be equal, but that doesn't mean we are not different. Of course we are. That is what makes us as people great. We've got a long way to go before we are a cultured, fair and equal society. But Rome wasn't built in a day. We will get their though.

It's also worth saying that Rome was a remarkably egalitarian society. There were seriously big class divides, but if a slave was freed then they became full Roman citizens, and that was unusual. And despite the empire that Rome conquered, they were also remarkably tolerant of indigenous culture, much more so that the British were with their empire. With religion for example, before Christianity became the state religion Rome tended to adopt and include the indigenous religions it found, and British society at the time of the Roman conquest was at least in part matriarchal - remember Boudicca? There's a good argument to be made that society has become progressively less tolerant since the decline of the Roman empire - and our brief flirtation with multiculturalism might well end with the decline of the Treaty of Rome and a new UKIP dark-ages.

[motormad]

Gay marriage, more women and black people in important positions is important for a mature society. We have a habit of clinging to past foibles and superstitious mumbo jumbo. When will society learn that we are all equal and only can go forward equal.

Well, I agree aside from the "equal" part. There is a habit of clinging to the past unfortunately this is mostly in the form of racism or religion. We are not all equal and you should stop kidding yourself if you think we are; but the point is that opportunity should be there for all for those who both WANT to achieve it and have the DRIVE to get to their goals.

I hear a lot of things like "oh how come that black man didn't get the job" - oh it's racism I know!!

No, maybe it's just that the black person wasn't the best candidate (just saying, for example).

But we're not all equal, and to assert as much is to miss the central point that actually we're all rather different. It doesn't much matter to me whether the people doing "important" jobs are black or female, or for that matter sagittarian, left-handed, bearded, bespectacled, Polish, born-again hasidic, or albino. What I do believe to be important is equality of opportunity - because it's the inequality of opportunity that is the corrosive injustice.

That is exactly right and I agree with a lot of the other stuff you've said above.

We are not the same, some are smarter, some are poorer, some are richer, more or less educated, and so it goes on. A mix between inherited "ability" and things which you LEARN. Everyone can learn, some faster or better than others; this is just life.

You can't expect to heal the remote towns of Africa for example because unfortunately that's just "how" life is. There HAS to be a scale, first world, third world (where is the second has anyone noticed?) and economically speaking the world would just turn to mass-war in all likely hood if everywhere became as "developed" as us Westerners..

Everything in the world is about evolving, changing over billions and billions of years. And with too much interference on our behalf helping those who, a lot of the time, don't want to help themselves, will ultimately cause the downfall of the human race (not just foreign countries but that can apply to our own uneducated, unemployed population here at time)


*insert dramatic trumpet music*