@T-J

Quote:

as well as introducing full equality of civil marriage. A stance backed by a clear majority of the country, according to polling.

Keep peddling your lies if you want but it simply isn't true. The majority support marriage the way it is, should be and forever will be in the minds of the majority of the UK population. The Scottish Consultation showed that 2/3 of respondents want marriage to be protected and kept as its current definition. That's 50,000 people in Scotland that the Scottish Parliament would do right to respect with an unilateral backing down on this redefinition plan.

Also in a poll of more than 1,000 people in Scotland, conducted by ComRes

Quote:

A majority (55 per cent) agree that “marriage should continue to be defined as a life-long exclusive commitment between a man and a woman”. Only 38 per cent disagree.

In the UK as a whole;

Poll suggests 70pc oppose gay marriage

Stop your lies and accept that politicians would be acting in a dangerous and undemocratic manner if they allow this dangerous and unpopular redefinition to go any further.

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

@BigD

Quote:

A majority (55 per cent) agree that “marriage should continue to be defined as a life-long exclusive commitment between a man and a woman”. Only 38 per cent disagree.

Please let me explain this to you in terms that even the village idiot might be able to understand.
The leaders of the hate campaign have hired a bunch of pollsters to "prove" that they are winning the day. It is called propoganda. There are only 590,175 signatures on this petition, one of which was BrianK in USA signing as Mr Wasdghes from Cardiff and also Buck house of SW1A 1AA.
As I have already explained, 590,173 people does not form a majority of the UK population, and the Government is fully entitled to ignore the demands of a loudmouthed hate group when it backs up its calls for discrimination with lies (BrianK already posted this link, I just thought you may have missed it)
Quote:

In the UK as a whole; Poll suggests 70pc oppose gay marriage

The DT poll that you refer to was carried over six months ago, and you linked to it in March. Did nobody ever tell you that repeating the same tired old lie over and over does not miraculously convert it to the truth? Of course not, that is the whole principle of how religion works.

Quote:

Stop your lies and accept that politicians would be acting in a dangerous and undemocratic manner if they allow this dangerous and unpopular redefinition to go any further.

Also for the benefit of your education, since the introduction of legalised divorce, Marriage is no longer necessarily for life, which probably explains why although length of marriage has not increased over what it was in the 12th century, life expectancy is much longer. You will note from the article who the main opponents of womens rights were and the nature of the argument against legalising divorce, although full marks to the CofE for their stance in the 60's.
I am willing to accept that the proposed change in the law will not be popular with 590,173 religious fundamentalists, but the majority of the population are either relaxed about, or supportive of the change. If this wasn't the case, then more than 50% of the population would have signed your grubby little piece of hate mail, You have certainly been pushing it hard enough, but the threat of "You will go to hell if you do not comply" no longer frightens the poor huddled masses as it once did.

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

@Nimrod

Wikipedia UK Same-Sex Public Opinion Provides a good collection of polls, and links to the polls, to see where the majority of UK Support Gay Marriage has happened.

@BigD

@Nimrod

Quote:

I am willing to accept that the proposed change in the law will not be popular with 590,173 religious fundamentalists, but the majority of the population are either relaxed about, or supportive of the change. If this wasn't the case, then more than 50% of the population would have signed your grubby little piece of hate mail,

Correction, if your legions of liberals/homosexual activists cared then the C4EM petition would rival that of the Coalition4Marriage. It doesn't get anywhere close with barely over 62,000 compared to over 590,000 for the Coalition4Marriage. That is roughly 9.5 times as many signatures so yours is very much the minority view and however much you protest that is the situation you find yourself in.

As I've already pointed out to you, your insistence that petitions are signed by 50% of the population of the UK before our politicians should take them seriously is absurd. More people answered the Scottish consultation on Redefining Marriage than did the consultation on independence so this is something people really do care about and in the majority of cases (by a 2:1 ratio) DON'T WANT!

Your incessant attempts to paint the Coalition4Marriage as a religious organisation is again uninformed and completely false! Please check your facts before plastering them all over this forum!

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

@BigD

Quote:

Your incessant attempts to paint the Coalition4Marriage as a religious organisation is again uninformed and completely false! Please check your facts before plastering them all over this forum!

From about section of page "The Coalition is backed by politicians, lawyers, academics and religious leaders. " Smells like religious organisation for me....

Specially when half of staff seems to be from Evangelical alliance...

Last edited by Rose on 13-Aug-2012 at 07:03 PM.

@BigD

Quote:

Your incessant attempts to paint the Coalition4Marriage as a religious organisation is again uninformed and completely false

One of the problems I see is it appears C4M doesn't list their Board or Founding members on their website. Which means it's not quite straight forward to dig into this. (Check out Caring Bridge as an example of a less hidden leadership and founding)

Something we do know is the Campaign Director, Coling Hart, held a previous job as the Director of The Christin Institute. Also I think it's telling that at his side during launch of the campain isthe former Archbishop of Canterbury

For a 'non-christian' organization it seems more then a bit odd that the Higher Ups we can find are ones whose past is filled with leadership roles in Christian organizations. AKA you're overselling by claim in 'not christian'.

Last edited by BrianK on 13-Aug-2012 at 07:24 PM.
Last edited by BrianK on 13-Aug-2012 at 07:23 PM.
Last edited by BrianK on 13-Aug-2012 at 07:20 PM.

@BrianK

Linky to their info. Click any of directors for more...

@Rose

Thanks Rose. Too bad C4M conveniently hides this stuff by not making open disclosure on their website. Checking out the background of the leadership reveals a past checkered with Directorships in Christian Organizations. While I suspect C4M welcome's anybody's money, the idea that the Board had no Christian thoughts whatsoever in the founding, as BigD would have us believe, is unsound.

@BigD

Quote:

Correction, if your legions of liberals/homosexual activists cared then the C4EM petition would rival that of the Coalition4Marriage.

You are making two basic errors of judgement in this statement. The first error is that I personally couldn't give a flying f*** about how other people live their lives, because they are other peoples lives, not mine. Up until the moment you and TPod started making an issue of this matter I wasn't even aware that there was a problem, but as soon as I gave it serious consideration I realised that the problem was you and your hate filled cronies. Your second mistake is believing that this issue boils down to a race for votes between your campaign of lies and some other petition. The simple fact is that approximately 5% of the population of this country are the victims of discrimination. How would you like it if your particular minority was the victim? You keep crying that religious groups are being victimised but when did a christian last get a dishonourable discharge from the military on the grounds of his religion, or get jailed for indecency, or get beaten up on a Saturday night.

Quote:

As I've already pointed out to you, your insistence that petitions are signed by 50% of the population of the UK before our politicians should take them seriously is absurd.

At what point in this debate did I claim that a petition was invalid if it wasnt signed by over 50% of the population. Once again you are deliberately and dishonestly misrepresenting my comment. What I pointed out to you in very basic terms, was that despite over a years worth of pressure, dishonesty, and downright libellous hate campaigning by an unholy alliance of religious extremists of many religious pressure groups, your friends of the C4M have attracted votes from less than 1% of the population, and it has been shown that this could very easily be an inflated figure due to lack of any prevention of multiple voting or non existent voters voting, or unqualified voting from overseas.

Quote:

Please check your facts before plastering them all over this forum!

Might I suggest that you do likewise, and go back over your previous posts and delete all of the allegations that you have made that are shown to be nothing more than a tissue of lies.

Incidentally, are you certain that none of the names on your pet petition are divorced, and if they are, why are they signing a document that will be used as the thin end of the wedge to return us to the conditions of 154 years ago, where a woman is nothing more than an item of property owned by first her father, and then her husband.

I will reiterate one simple fact that all of your lies cannot evade. Letting others marry is no threat to the integrity and stability of my own marriage. The only threat to my marriage comes from people like you.

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

@BigD

All that your petition does is confirm that there are at least 590,000 signatures on a petition from a loathsome group of highly motivated bigots intimating a preference against equal marriage.

I have to ask, after 36 pages of reasoned, balanced, rational, evidence based arguments against your position, why do you continue making yourself look like a complete nitwit?

It's clear you can never win the argument you are putting across. It's also clear that the members of this forum overwhelmingly dispute your position (those of us that care enough to challenge your fantastical nonsense). You must also realise that your kind of evangelism is totally ineffective.

You've proven yourself to be a delusional, ignorant, hypocritical, uneducated (I mean, what's the point of acquiring an education if you're just going to disregard it?), boorish, arrogant, deceitful, and cowardly individual.

You have made no attempt to answer any of the reasonable questions I've put to you - the reason being that, by doing so, you would only confirm your hypocrisy and thereby torpedo the entire basis for your argument.

So, if you insist on keeping the thread going, then I would urge you to refer to my previous posts and answer the questions.

Thanks.

AndyC

@AndyC

Amen to that.

_________________
"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

@BigC

Catholic Church publishes porn ... Cuz Christian morals are so superior?

@BigD

You've got your one poll showing 70% against, I've got mine from Ipsos and Yougov showing 65% in favour. Yet you accuse me of lying.

And then there's the 500,000 signatures on that piece of paper you're so fond of. A question - how many of them are actually from people who support it? I understand that members of this forum have signed under obviously false pseudonyms. How do I know that these 500,000 signatures aren't just 50,000 zealots singing 10 times each? Or just one sad act with nothing else to do with his time signing them all?

Its also interesting what additional documents are added to your list of infallible literature - you seem to take every word of the bible as literal fact, which for a fundie Christian is not surprising. What is odd is that you have added whatever C4M publish and the Gay Liberation Front Manifesto (1973) to the established canon as a kind of Newer Testament which cannot be questioned by such as us. Very odd. Perhaps we could also add the Daily Mail as a kind of Living Testament, keeping us updated with all the latest abominations as they're declared.

And finally, on the popularity of your opinions I would like to present an observation. We are discussing this matter on an Amiga forum - a place for diehards to talk about a computer platform that commercially failed almost twenty years ago. This sample is therefore, I would argue, drawn from people who are really rather resistant to change. And yet, only two members hold your views. Food for thought.

@BigD

I don't believe in rEvolution!

Last edited by BrianK on 14-Aug-2012 at 06:10 PM.

@BigD

Quote:

BigD wrote: Your incessant attempts to paint the Coalition4Marriage as a religious organisation is again uninformed and completely false! Please check your facts before plastering them all over this forum!

You have been yelling about gay agenda here but seems like you are only one with agenda here. Tell us, why do you lie?

@T-J

Quote:

How do I know that these 500,000 signatures aren't just 50,000 zealots singing 10 times each? Or just one sad act with nothing else to do with his time signing them all?

There is full access to the petition names on the C4M website (unlike C4EM), if you can find duplicate names, fictitious names or names from people abroad then make a complaint but you instead choose to fabricate a scenario that doesn't exist! What makes you think the C4EM petition is anything other than Elton John and David Furnish signing it 30,000 times (unsubstantiated accusation in case you were wondering )? Your accusations are absurd!!! Wake up and smell the death of democracy! This is a valid petition representing the silent majority of this country that don't want marriage destroyed to help the consciences of the small proportion of people that want to justify their homosexual lifestyle!

Politicians should listen to the majority and keep marriage the way it has been for thousands of years in every culture we know of and the small minority of practising homosexuals who want monogamy should have a Civil Partnership; problem solved!

Last edited by BigD on 15-Aug-2012 at 05:51 PM.
Last edited by BigD on 15-Aug-2012 at 05:50 PM.

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

@BigD

Quote:

This is a valid petition representing the silent majority of this country that don't want marriage destroyed to help the consciences of the small proportion of people that want to justify their homosexual lifestyle!

As valid as your lies about how it's not religious organisation?

@BigD

The death of democracy? Oh for Christ's sake.

You don't represent a silent majority. You are part of a motivated vociferous minority that has enjoyed disproportionate influence for far too long.

As a result, you are experiencing what you call "persecution", and are lashing out through this debate because it's something tangible you can cling to.

You base your argument on what you see as a threat to the biblical definition of marriage, which we have already explained is varied and manifold.

Despite this, you can't demonstrate a single way in which your marriage (if indeed you even are, which I doubt) is threatened or otherwise impacted by the introduction of equal marriage rights for homosexuals?

As an aside, I've been watching the excellent Aaron Sorkin drama "The Newsroom" and it's covered gay marriage a few times. Some relevant excerpts for you below:

Will McAvoy: “I'm a registered Republican, I only seem liberal because I believe that hurricanes are caused by high barometric pressure and not gay marriage.”

And this video from last night's episode (here in the UK) from 3m 40s:

The Newsroom - "Bullies" - Will McAvoy

And, BigD, I would suggest you watch this because, believe it or not, it does a good job of explaining why a gay, black American would work with someone like Rick Santorum. But, as always, McAvoy gets the last word in...

AndyC

@BigD

Why do you believe that homosexuality is a lifestyle choice and not simply how a person is programmed.