@T-J

Quote:

Marriage isn't being 'destroyed' by allowing churches to deliver their sacraments to whichever couples they choose to deliver them to

Actually I'd say the inability for churches to deliver their sacraments as they see fit are destroying churches. Take a look at the mainstream denominations and you'll find in nearly every single one of them a serious riff of between believers in each side of the gay issue. Presbyterians and Episcopal are two easy example to review the goings on in the last decade and see the internal riff between the interpretation of Christianity's morals over gays.

@BigD

Quote:

BigD wrote: @BillE Quote: That is a bit much considering Christians (especially fundamentalist nutcases) are the most intolerant bunch of people on the planet ! Your apathy towards one segment of society is how fanatical tyrannies like the Nazi Party get started.

I don't get the apathy bit. Having a go at the bunch of hypocritical nutters that unfortunately have made half of our senseless laws in the UK is hardly apathetic. IMHO Christians are the equivalent of the Nazi party! The Nazi party believed in a lot of crazy ideas too.

In the 21st century, Christian Superstition should not have the grip it still does on a gullible society. Why you want people to live their lives by a third rate fantasy novel is beyond comprehension. Superstition should be kept firmly out of law making and the running of nations.

Even though totally impossible I wish this rapture thing could occur and fundamentalist Christians *would* all disappear and leave the world in peace. The world would then be a much better place.

@BigD

I found your brother in Wisconsin - Sentor's new bill make Single Parent illegal as Child Abuse

@BrianK

Quote:

Presbyterians and Episcopal are two easy example to review the goings on in the last decade and see the internal riff between the interpretation of Christianity's morals over gays.

There is no disagreement between Bible believing Christians, the rift you see s between those churches that have rejected Biblical teaching and those that hold to it.

This issue is far bigger than just religion; marriage has served this country well for hundreds of years and for a minority of self-centred activists to attempt to consign it to the rubbish dump and water it down to the point of non-importance is an abomination. "All in the name of equality", you chant as Britain's last pretence at being a decent and tolerant society lies burning in the rubble of what's left of any moral compass we once had!

Intolerance will increase if a redefinition takes place. It will occur against anyone who stands against this undervaluing of the family unit. Anyone who values the current legal definition of marriage which is;

"The voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others".

.... will face opposition from the police and the law courts as pointed out by the European Court of Human Rights. Churches cannot be legally protected contrary to the ramblings of Lynne Featherstone. Anyone who dares to refuse to teach this Homosexual Agenda formulated mockery of marriage will be struck off. Any child who has a married mum and dad will be looked on as weird in a sea of unmarried "partners" and cohabiting couples due to "marriage culture" being undermined and deemed pointless if directly comparable to every other relationship as it inevitably will be.

Stop this rubbish, accept the law as it stands and stop touting your pseudo-equality and you lies that the very basic premise of marriage will not be affected by this!!!!

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@BillE

Quote:

Superstition should be kept firmly out of law making and the running of nations.

Evolution, worshiping the cult of individualism and thinking atheistic cultures are not fallible to dangerous dictatorships are all faith positions and far more unhealthy than a faith in Christ.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@BigD

Quote:

Sexual preference for same sex relations/orientation in my experience and from the research I've done it seems primarily to do with whether you had a strong father figure or not

You do not half talk a load of bull and are offensive to boot.

I never knew my father but am certainly NOT gay. You make blind assumptions without any reason. I have done very well thank you despite not having a father figure, my mother worked hard and kept me on the straight and narrow - and without resorting to any superstitious nonsense.

In fact after contacting my half brother it seems I got the lucky break as my father was an awkward bastard and not nice to my brother at all. I was better off without one.

So the "strong father figure" is a load of cobblers.

I guess you probably think that my marriage is not real because I married my wife (a woman) in a registry office. It is a perfectly legal marriage just without any superstitious c**p involved which neither of us believe in. The church should stay out of marriage, it has no place nor purpose in the modern world.

For those that want it a church marriage is just a bit of extra icing on the cake, it does not make it any more valid. In fact a church service without signing the register would be illegal, the church is totally superflous, an institution hanging along far past its sell by date.

@BigD

Quote:

There is no disagreement between Bible believing Christians, the rift you see s between those churches that have rejected Biblical teaching and those that hold to it.

[Most of] The Bible is nothing more than a fantasy novel and not even a very good one.
[Some is historical but very biased even so]

It has NOTHING to say about reality, science or all the things we now *know* about how the universe works. It is basically bile with an extra B.

Pick any book out of a library and it would make just as much moral guidance senseas your Bible. Probably far more moralistic because there will befar less stonings, far less killing your kids until this God guy intervenes and all the other horrendous things that happen in the name of God. Most of the Old Testament is pure evil. It is really amazing that you who read the Bible and take it for granted as the word of the mubo-man cannot see this.


Bill.


Against Stupidty - The Gods Themselves - Contend in Vain. - Isaac Azimov.

A *much* better book than the bible !

@BillE

Quote:

I never knew my father but am certainly NOT gay.

It doesn't happen every time to everyone as there are other environmental factors. Also, young men seem to react in one of two ways to the absence of a father figure; they either try to over compensate by being more blokey and doing more dares/pranks etc to prove their manliness or they become more effeminate get bullied and are attracted to the gay lifestyle to find acceptance. I'm glad you're secure in you heterosexuality and are happily married, I'd have thought that you'd try and protect an institution you claim to value.

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@BillE

Quote:

Most of the Old Testament is pure evil. It is really amazing that you who read the Bible and take it for granted as the word of the mubo-man cannot see this.

Presumably you've read it to have such a strong opinion? The 'faith without seeing' aspect is what make it FAITH IN GOD. Doubting Thomas saw Jesus in person following the crucifixion and believed in JESUS' resurrection but we are more blessed to believe without seeing. There is far too much historical proof for the resurrection to dismiss it in such an out of hand and uninformed way!

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@BigD

Quote:

There is no disagreement between Bible believing Christians, the rift you see s between those churches that have rejected Biblical teaching and those that hold to it.

The History of Christianity is rife with these rifts. If you want to argue various Christian sects are not true Christians go for it. It wouldn't be surprising to see Christians fighting Christians... Northern Ireland anyone?!

The rest is just more of your fear mongering.

Too True!

Last edited by BrianK on 09-Jul-2012 at 11:56 PM.

@BigD

Quote:

Marriage is marriage and can not be copied or emulated by two blokes or two girls who are not even biologically compatible!!!

We've been over this before, about 21 pages and several months ago. We came to the conclusion that marriage was about two individuals making a life committment to each other, not about breeding.

So, shall we again discount this overly biological cheapening of marriage from the religious lobby and go with marriage being about love?

And, since we're into equality for all, not just for you and yours, we'll say that love is love and commitment is commitment.

Quote:

Sexual preference for same sex relations/orientation in my experience and from the research I've done it seems primarily to do with whether you had a strong father figure or not and even then it is ultimately a life choice that shouldn't be taught and encouraged in schools. The main point is there will be many more confused and damaged children caused by the forced teaching of these deeply questionable practices as "NORMAL" and part of "HEALTHY EXPERIMENTATION"!

Well then I am afraid your experience and your research stands pretty much alone in the world. The psychologists tell us otherwise, the biologists tell us otherwise and the chemists tell us otherwise.

It is not a life choice, it is simply a fact of life. Homosexuality cannot be 'promoted' any more than being tall can. Believe me, the straight kids aren't going to suddenly turn gay just because their school hasn't hidden the fact of homosexuality from them.

And no, BigD, the main point is that if you get your way and restigmatise, maybe even recriminalise and remedicalise sexuality other than that which you approve of, your lobby will have increased manifold the amount of confusion, self-recrimination and damage done to those people whose only fault is differing from you. I ask again, what happened to 'do unto others'? Why should we have a care for your persecution fantasies, when you so obviously want to interfere in the lives and choices of others?

Quote:

Liberals activists and people pushing the homosexual agenda should be less selfish and weight up the net effect on society and that is a downward trajectory if marriage is redefined.

Firstly, Liberal activists have weighed up the net effect on society, and found that the limitations on the rights, options and life choices of a minority were not justified, given that removing those limitations will have not the slightest effect on those demanding them. Not a difficult piece of ethical calculus, especially when we remember that you still haven't given us a decent reason why you think you have the right to interfere in the lives of others while decrying assorted imaginary attempts to interfere in yours.

Secondly, there is no 'homosexual agenda'. No secret society plotting the gayification of society. No shadowy cabal plotting how best to turn BigD to the Dark Side. Just normal people wanting to have the freedom to declare their commitment to eachother in the manner they see fit.

And there's that downward trajectory hyperbole again - there is no such thing. Society is, as I said, simply coming to terms with the facts of its own sexuality.

Quote:

There is no disagreement between Bible believing Christians, the rift you see s between those churches that have rejected Biblical teaching and those that hold to it.

No, I don't think we can work with that. You see, the problem is that the self-identifying Christians who oppose you say they are the Bible-believing Christians, too. They say that the Deuteronomies and Leviticuses were superseded by Christ's message of universal love and tolerance, which is why they can eat shellfish, wear mixed fabrics and have supportive relations with people of all sexualities. They say that your lot have got so absorbed in the letter of the law that you've lost all sense of its spirit, a charge that upon reading through this thread, certainly rings true.

I think that, rather than declaring one of your sides to be Absolute Truth, I'll just come down on the side of defending your respective rights to believe what you want to in the privacy of your own minds, homes and churches. That includes allowing the congregations of liberal conscience to extend whatever rites they see fit to whatever groups they like.

@T-J

Speaking of being born gay. Robert Spitzer recently Apologized for the poor science in the report that is seen as the primary research into conversion therapy. A related good read. http://prospect.org/article/my-so-called-ex-gay-life

@T-J

Quote:

Secondly, there is no 'homosexual agenda'. No secret society plotting the gayification of society. No shadowy cabal plotting how best to turn BigD to the Dark Side. Just normal people wanting to have the freedom to declare their commitment to eachother in the manner they see fit.

There is a Gay Agenda and they even wrote it down in 1971! it's called the 1971 Gay Liberation Front Manifesto and you can read it here;

Gay Liberation Front Manifesto 1971

This part is particularly interesting;

Quote:

The oppression of gay people starts in the most basic unit of society, the family, consisting of the man in charge, a slave as his wife, and their children on whom they force themselves as the ideal models. The very form of the family works against homosexuality.

... an all out attack on the family unit!

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@BigD

Oh, you forgot this bit;

Quote:

At some point nearly all gay people have found it difficult to cope with having the restricting images of man or woman pushed on them by their parents. It may have been from very early on, when the pressures to play with the 'right' toys, and thus prove boyishness or girlishness, drove against the child's inclinations. But for all of us this is certainly a problem by the time of adolescence, when we are expected to prove ourselves socially to our parents as members of the right sex (to bring home a boy/girl friend) and to start being a 'real' (oppressive) young man or a 'real' (oppressed) young woman. The tensions can be very destructive. The fact that gay people notice they are different from other men and women in the family situation, causes them to feel ashamed, guilty and failures. How many of us have really dared by honest with our parents? How many of us have been thrown out of home? How many of us have been pressured into marriage, sent to psychiatrists, frightened into sexual inertia, ostracised, banned, emotionally destroyed-all by our parents?

... it is also interesting!

Quote:

Quote: The oppression of gay people starts in the most basic unit of society, the family, consisting of the man in charge, a slave as his wife, and their children on whom they force themselves as the ideal models. The very form of the family works against homosexuality. ... an all out attack on the family unit!

That doesn't sound like a very nice unit, though.

@BigD

Quote:

There is a Gay Agenda

Your logic escapes many on this thread. You make the claim that Homosexuality is a choice, when it is not. Now you claim there's a Homosexual Agenda. Which was made by a group in the 70s, didn't include every homosexual then, and is certainly a choice for anyone (including non-homosexuals) to believe or use. Alas your argument is one of stereotyping or profiling a characteristic you conceive all gays have. You judge them as less worthy so wish to front the idea that seperate means equal.

We've tried that society - Stereotyping in such a way has resulted in deaths of children, minorities, women, and gays throughout the modern era. It's time to step up and recognize people's contribution to society are based on their actions. Their ability to work hard and create a better place. Not on who they choose to do behind closed doors.

@BigD

Quote:

Evolution, worshiping the cult of individualism and thinking atheistic cultures are not fallible to dangerous dictatorships are all faith positions and far more unhealthy than a faith in Christ.

Sorry, did you just say that Evolution is a "faith position"? Are you serious?

I have to hold my hand up because I've resurrected this thread more than once, which I think I'm beginning to regret.

As entertaining as it is to read your hilarious diatribes, I am getting slightly concerned about the way this thread has started to move away from the original topic, which was:

Is legislating for gay marriage a good use of taxpayers money?

Within the first few pages of this thread, the general consensus was that, yes, it was a perfectly reasonable use of taxpayers money. In fact, the OP ceased to contribute to this thread fairly early on, perhaps to distance themselves from the direction the debate subsequently took.

We have since been able to establish that you have a particularly skewed view of the world, which is at odds with the majority of posters here on this thread (and indeed in general). Some of your posts have been very concerning indeed - particularly those in which you reveal yourself to be a bigoted, hateful, ignorant, hypocritical, odious and disturbed individual, with altogether unwarranted concern about a "gay agenda" you believe exists to destablise the family unit and rain destruction on society as we know it.

The "gay agenda" of which you speak is simply a movement to address and eliminate discrimination against gay people in terms of fair treatment at work, fair access to goods and services, and to educate and inform subsequent generations in the ideals of equality.

You would seek to trample on the rights of others whose beliefs, values and ideals didn't resonate with your own, even if your own views were not representative of the majority (which we already know they aren't). You would firecely lobby the government to put your values over all others, despite your values being under no threat whatsoever.

You would seek to build a society where children are left uneducated and ignorant of the realities around them. You would fill their heads with fantasies and take no responsibility for the impact this would have.

You epitomise all that is wrong with society and I look forward to the day your kind have little or no influence on the way others live their life.

And, I pity you a great deal.

AndyC

@BigD

Look, the publication of a list of grievances in the 1970s by what was even then a radical fringe group, just as decriminalisation had made it possible for people to even be openly gay in society without imprisonment or worse, does not constitute a grand conspiracy to undermine your family. Nor does it even constitute a remotely representative sample of what gay people think now, or even thought then.

If this is where you're getting your 'gay people don't want to get married' line from, no wonder you're confused.

But whatever, lets take a look anyway. They have made an attack not just on the family, but on a particular type of family unit. A family where Dad has all the power, Mum is in the kitchen barefoot and pregnant and 2.4 kids are seen and not heard, conforming to Dad's prejudices for fear of the belt.

Frankly, if this is your idea of domestic bliss, I'm with the GLF. Your behaviour in this thread acts to confirm every fear and prejudice the GLF ever held about what they saw, presumably still see, as an oppressive patriarchal society.

In particular, they attack the patriarchal small nuclear family, which indeed has many problems explored more rationally, scientifically and dispassionately by later psychologists.

Of course the politics of the GLF are so far off to the left that even I have to squint to make them out, and social changes since 1971 have proven them wrong about a lot of what they were saying about the impossibility of reforming the existing society. But the core complaint is valid, and its combative tone is understandable considering that it was composed at a time when the writers certainly had been physically abused for no reason other than their sexual preference.

Time to put some of that famous Christian love and compassion to work? Or is it back to Leviticus for another dose of fire and brimstone?

@BigD

Quote:

There is far too much historical proof for the resurrection to dismiss it in such an out of hand and uninformed way!

There is one book, and only one book that documents this particular fantasy. And the stories that are written in that book were imposed on the worlds population by means of murder and torture for a period of over a thousand years. There are no contemporary records of the events described in your book, despite the simple facts that:
1. The Jewish state under Herod had an effective and efficient bureaucracy, that kept records of what was going on.
2. The Jewish state was a protectorate of the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire also had an effective and efficient bureaucracy, that kept records of current events.
3. A Romanised Jew by the name of Josephus was an avid diarist, in the same manner as Pepys, and recorded the ordinary everyday details of life in the years leading up to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD70.
There is, in fact more independent evidence for the existence of Phidippides from running around in Greece in 490BC, than there is for the events that you claim to be the source of your authority to oppress and terrorise anybody who will not quietly conform to your fantasy.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

I doubt anyone here would reasonably conclude BigD holds even the basics of Christian values, so his attempts to represent himself as a spokesman of that faith as as absurd as his claims in this thread.

While I generally don't like to either feed a troll, or highlight publicly a person going through a mental breakdown as he clearly is, there is a certain element of satisfaction, however guilty that may be, in letting him speak/type.

Only by letting him speak do we realise how absurd and out of touch with reality his arguments are. Let that be a lesson world. Do not try to silence religious extremists, let them talk. Only by doing so do we dissuade others for following their misguided path.

BigD. You have far surpassed anything Billsey ever managed to do, you have out crazied even him. For reaching this achievement, I would like to congratulate you on being the most insane person on the internet.

A round of applause everyone!

All hail the king of crazy!

Hip, hip, Hooray!

Now, if everyone would like to take a step back and let him bask (preferably in silence) in his glory. I feel that would be the best way to proceed.

_________________
"Anyone with a modicum of reasonableness may realize that it is like comparing the ride in the world to descend the stairs to catch the milk in the house."

Google Translate

@SpaceDruid

Quote:

Only by letting him speak do we realise how absurd and out of touch with reality his arguments are. Let that be a lesson world. Do not try to silence religious extremists, let them talk. Only by doing so do we dissuade others for following their misguided path.

Freedom of Speech has this important trait. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Even if it's as misguided as BigD's may be. And everyone also is entitled to their opinion about the professed opinion.

While I disagree whole-heartedly with what BigD says I certainly defend his right to say it.