@BrianK

And we already established that £3.7m divided up between all the UK taxpayers amounted to hee haw in the grand scheme of things.

Cost was always a red herring in this thread - the true motivation has since become very clear.

AndyC

@AndyC

Population of England is around 50Million. So if the cost is 3.7Million that works out to be just under 8 pence per person, on a 1 time expenditure. That's nothing. If that's the real issue I'll pay BigD's 8pence and let him bring a few friends. I just need his address to mail him $2US. He can convert it at one of the local exchanges. Then it's no skin of his, or his friend's, back.

@BrianK

The financial outlay is significant in this economy when each and every Government agency is calling out for more funding in an age of cutbacks!

The bigger cost will be the damage caused to the social fabric of the UK which cannot be measured in Pounds Sterling! Unless marriage is set apart from other relationships it will cease to be seen as special and be diminished to the point of irrelevance! Most homosexuals do not want to copy what they see as heterosexual lifestyles i.e. monogamous, faithful relationships for life!

Wake up and realise that no one but you and your gang of liberal wannabe social engineers actually want marriage redefined! A tiny minority with Dave 'I want to be be Tony Blair' Cameron in your court is still a tiny minority!

Last edited by BigD on 22-Aug-2012 at 08:52 PM.

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

@BigD

Quote:

Most homosexuals do not want to copy what they see as heterosexual lifestyles i.e. monogamous, faithful relationships for life!

This statement is a lie. You have frequently had this fact pointed out to you, and the evidence that your statement is a lie has been placed in front of you by more than one poster on more than one occasion yet you continue to post this blatant lie as though it were the truth. This, more than anything else, demonstrates the basic dishonesty of your position.

Over the past ten pages there have been contributions from thirteen different people, including yourself, and you are in a minority of one. The voices inside your head, or your invisible friend do not count, and do not qualify as a built in majority. They used to, but not any more.

Quote:

Wake up and realise that no one but you and your gang of liberal wannabe social engineers actually want marriage redefined!

This statement is also a lie, and it has also been pointed out to you on more than one occasion that reposting the one single DT poll that supported your claim does not mean that there is more than one poll that supports your stance. The majority of the population of this country have no interest in maintaining the current prejudices. Wake up and realise that the rest of us are not going to be bullied in to giving you your own way in all things any more.

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

@BigD

Quote:

The financial outlay is significant in this economy when each and every Gover nment agency is calling out for more funding in an age of cutbacks

BigD 50 pence per family for a 1 time cost is not significant. Be creative do something like spread the 3.7M over 6 years. Then charge a small increase in the marriage license tax to cover expenses. That would add about 1pound extra per marriage license. Completely do able.

Quote:

Unless marriage is set apart from other relationships

Marriage moving from about 50% of the population to about 52% of the population keeps it's 'special' nature in tact. Nothing to worry about there.

Quote:

Most homosexuals do not want to copy what they see as heterosexual lifestyles

No one's forcing gays to get married. It simply enables that option.

Quote:

Wake up and realise that no one but you and your gang of liberal wannabe social engineers actually want marriage redefined!

We heard this all before. The Majority of Slave Owners didn't want slavery removed from our societys. The Majority of males didn't want to put femals on an equal footing from them. It's bigotted and unfair. PERIOD.

Quote:

A tiny minority

The worth of a society is measured by the treatment of it's citizens. Inequity, no matter how small, is inequities. Putting marriage for all humans on an equal plane of self determinination of who to get married to is a good and correct answer. The worst sins of Democracy is when it becomes a hammer for the majority to force their opinions on the minority. We've seen where the behavior you desire has lead nations. It's resulted in the 'cleansing' of those minorities.

And in the end shouldn't gays have the same right to be miserable as the straights.

Last edited by BrianK on 22-Aug-2012 at 09:22 PM.

@BigD

Quote:

The financial outlay is significant in this economy when each and every Government agency is calling out for more funding in an age of cutbacks!

It and many other things can be easily financed by revoking tax free status of the Church.

@Rose

Oh I see that your 'equality agenda' has a special twist of liberal bias there! Your true agenda rears its head.

You preach the death of the promotion of charities and institutions that actually benefit society and instead the encourage the promotion of your own dangerous individualistic and discriminatory liberal ideals and social destruction!

Fist you promote the destruction of marriage! You've got legal abortion in the UK running at around 190,000 unwarranted and despicable deaths a year, next maybe infanticide? What next the outlawing of churches perhaps?! What a free and tolerant society you present to the world!

Last edited by BigD on 22-Aug-2012 at 10:04 PM.
Last edited by BigD on 22-Aug-2012 at 10:01 PM.

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

@BigD

Please! Stop! Using! Exclamation! Marks!

It just further reinforces your reputation here as a complete loon.

Also, that last post was complete and utter bollocks.

AndyC

@BigD

Quote:

You preach the death of the promotion of charities and institutions that actually benefit society

In the USA about 2% of all money collected by churches goes back to charities. Should the churches be taxed they'd provide $71Billion that could go to charity work - such as social and welfare programs. A much larger amount.

And I think we can see fairly how Christian Charity works by looking at the wealth from around the world, from around the eons that's been centralized in Rome due to Catholism. Christian Charity with greasing the palms of the leadership isn't Charity, it's theft.

Jesus said it's easier for a poor man to enter the kingdom of God than a rich man. If this is true the flock that's been fleeced by Christianity is getting in. The leadership of the church is taking the southern route.

@BigotD


So what you are saying is Gays are to blame for abortions as well? Or was that just general ignorance in support of U.S. Rep. Todd Akin?

Perhaps gays wouldn't get HIV if their bodies really didn't want to get it?

Death only happens to people who don't allow Jesus to enter their bodies?

Wait? Wut?

So you are saying Jesus is gay now?


What? Oh I'm twisting your words am I? Well you've just done that to Rose and your post was no less nonsensical than mine. At least mine had some kind of connection running through it, your was just random hysterics...

_________________
"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

@BigD

@BrianK

Marriage by very definition is;

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

Therefore, the neutral position is to support it and the extreme position is to subvert and undermine it by redefining it. Let's remember that very few homosexuals actually want this change and that they already have Civil Partnerships; a legal equivalent. This isn't about 'equality' but a campaign to make marriage irrelevant. You are trying to force your liberal views on the rest of us by using intolerant language towards people who are quite reasonably supporting the current law. Your views are counter-cultural not mine.

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

@BigotD

"Marriage by it's current definition that has always been subject to change as society has evolved is;"

There, fixed it for you.


Is this what happens in your head? You just keep chanting the same thing over and over to drown out the noise others are making?

You've already made this claim, it has been disproved time and time again, but you keep making the claim regardless.

If you ever wonder why I keep saying you've lost your grasp on reality, this is the reason.

Last edited by SpaceDruid on 23-Aug-2012 at 01:21 PM.

_________________
"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

@BigD

This is how you, and the people you support, define marriage. It is not the only definition, and (as has been pointed out numerous times already in this thread) is not the only biblical definition of marriage.

Supporting gay marriage is not subversive, it is inclusive, but being a bigot you don't understand or appreciate this concept.

You've yet to describe how your marriage (not that I believe for a second that you are) would be adversely affected by Robert and David from down the road's marriage. Furthermore you've not been able to demonstrate how the introduction of such legislation will in any way lead to the deterioration of society, the death of morality and the end of civilisation as we know it, which you've eluded to somewhat hysterically throughout this thread.

For what it's worth, I sincerely hope that you come to grips with your own homosexuality sooner rather than later

AndyC

Last edited by AndyC on 23-Aug-2012 at 01:36 PM.

@BigD

Quote:

BigD wrote: @BrianK Marriage by very definition is;

Marriage is irrelevant and always has been, why you need a bit of paper to prove your commitment to someone is beyond me. Only those whom need that bit of paper to prove to themselves that their commitment is real think marriage is relevant...

These days marriage is nothing more than a tax dodge (as you yourself have gone on here enough times about the tax benefits given to married people proves)...

Also if marriage was so great (I mean having a wee bit of paper to make it seem relevant) then why are there so many divorces where said little bit of paper only seems relevant to the divorce court lawyers who make money out of it...

So why all this never ending hoo ha by yourself in regard to marriage, if it's important and relevant to you that's fine but at the end of the day any proposed changes in the law will have no effect on you personally or the wee bit of paper you already have...

I reckon you just like moaning about things and strangely enough you choose a site about computers (old ones at that) to moan about marriage, gays, the Nazis and everything else that has nothing to do with computers...

Is this because the marriage, gay and Nazi sites you visit don't want to talk about those subjects either, or are you just taking the piss here...

_________________

@BigD

Quote:

Marriage by very definition is; "the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others."

Nice soundbite but clearly not the definition. For example

Quote:

This isn't about 'equality' but a campaign to make marriage irrelevant.

Every benefit of marriage is, and will be, still in place. Nothing about this makes marriage irrelevant. Actually it makes it more relevant as it'll be an option for 100% of the population instead of around 95%.

Quote:

You are trying to force your liberal views on the rest of us by using intolerant language towards people who are quite reasonably supporting the current law.

Clearly I'm intolerant of laws which they themselves are intolerant. This law denies minorities the same rights and labels as the majority. While Democracy is the best form of government it can be used for bad. When you, and others, use Democracy to enforce Majority Only rights and deny those to minorities you're using Democracy in a bad way. A Tyranny of the Majority is still tyranny. This sort of seperate but equal treatment for gays is in fact inequity.

@AndyC

Quote:

You've yet to describe how your marriage (not that I believe for a second that you are) would be adversely affected by Robert and David from down the road's marriage. Furthermore you've not been able to demonstrate how the introduction of such legislation will in any way lead to the deterioration of society, the death of morality and the end of civilisation as we know it, which you've eluded to somewhat hysterically throughout this thread.

If anything the opposite appears to be in the evidence. I posted a while ago the links to the divorce rates in States in the USA with gay marriage. They have some of the lowest divorce rates in the nation. The States that score highest on % of population who are Christian have the highest rates of divorce. It'd appear that not allowing an equal approach to marriage is more deteriorating.

@BigD

Quote:

Most homosexuals do not want to copy what they see as heterosexual lifestyles i.e. monogamous, faithful relationships for life!

I provided a chunk of statistical evidence against your 'homosexuals are promiscuous' claim, proving it to be nothing more than ill-informed prejudice. It would be better if you now dropped this untrue claim.

Quote:

Wake up and realise that no one but you and your gang of liberal wannabe social engineers actually want marriage redefined!

But we've got two polls, Yougov and Ipsos, plus the weight of polling for the past twenty years showing that 65% of the population are in favour of equalising access to marriage. Which is actually a majority.

Exodus International no longer believes in praying away the gay - interesting video on a religious organization that no longer sees homosexuality as something that's 'cureable'. In short - because it's not a choice -

@BigD

Quote:

Marriage by very definition is; "the voluntary union for life of one man and one woman to the exclusion of all others."

Breaking news for you Divorce has been legalised. This means that the "for life"part of your quote has been superseded, and to make it worse for you, even the DM thinks it was a good thing.
Shortly the "one man and one woman" will change to "two people". This will not destroy the institution of marriage, because nothing is compulsory. I point this fact out simply because you seem to think that the new law will require you to leave your wife and marry some big hairy refugee from the Village People.
Quote:

You are trying to force your liberal views on the rest of us

No we aren't, we are simply no longer accepting your 2000 year old record of forcing your own bigoted, hate filled, hypocritical attitude toward others. I take it that you have conveniently "forgotten" this from T-J

Nobody is trying to force their opinions on to you, we are just not letting you force your opinions on to the majority. There is a huge difference.

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