@1Mouse

Quote:

After 13 years together my partner and I have just decided to get married.

Since marriage is between one man and one woman I think we can deduce by your statement that you mean to have a Civil Partnership. Since you refer to that as to 'get married' anyway, it again raises the question why the gay rights agenda sees the need to push for the redefinition of marriage?!

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

@Thread

Let us focus on the latest issue raised, i.e. the use of unsuitable literature in schools;

If the legal definition of marriage changes, there will be huge political pressure to make sure the new definition is taught within schools. Already, gay pressure groups have drawn up lists of recommended books for schools to use with pupils. Stonewall has its own list of recommended titles which are highly unsuitable.

Not only will there be political pressure, there will also be a legal requirement to teach about same-sex marriage. Section 403(1A)(a) of the Education Act 1996 imposes a duty on the Secretary of State to "issue guidance" to ensure that pupils "learn the nature of marriage and its importance for family life and the bringing up of children" as part of sex education.

If the legal definition of marriage changes, the law will require that children learn about gay marriage as part of sex education. Sex education is mandatory in secondary schools. Many primary schools also choose to teach sex education in some form. Whenever the subject is taught, the law requiring teaching about the importance of marriage applies.

Worryingly, when the Home Office launched the consultation on redefining marriage they were not aware of the implications of this law. Even after the consultation ended, an Education Minister confirmed that the department was still not sure how the Government's proposals would affect schools.

The overturning of parental values that is being advocated is staggering. One teacher training DVD recommended by Stonewall suggests that pupils must become "resilient" to the values of their parents and grandparents who may have objections to issues such as gay marriage.

Another teaching training guide recommended by Stonewall suggests primary school children should perform some of the storybooks as plays. In 2009, Muslim and Christian parents in Waltham Forest, East London, were threatened with prosecution for withdrawing their children from primary school lessons that used the gay marriage story book, King and King. The council said the withdrawals were "unauthorised" absences and that action would be taken against the parents.

The redefinition of marriage is a policy proposal with society-wide implications. Its impact would be widespread, because marriage itself is widespread. Marriage is woven into our laws, culture and language of our everyday lives. This includes what is taught to our children by teachers in our schools.

Here's some more unsuitable literature recommended by Stonewall;


Spacegirl Pukes by Katy Watson and Vanda Carter



The author and illustrator of the Spacegirl Pukes are members of Out for Our Children, a group of London Lesbian parents making books and materials for children.

Quote:

Then Mummy Neenee said 'Oh no!' Bleurg! She was sick in the bucket. Then Mummy Loula was sick as well. Bleurg! Poor mummies! Poor Spacegirl!

Dad David, Baba Chris and Me



Quote:

But I'm not just ordinary, becasue I have three dads: Dad David and Baba Chris and my birth dad, Alex.

Emma and Meesha My Boy a Two Mum Story



Quote:

This is Emma. She lives with her two moms and a chubby housecat. Just so you know who's who let me tell you that one of the moms is Mama and the other is Mommy. That makes two.

Last edited by BigD on 02-Feb-2013 at 12:30 PM.

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

@BigD



























Is this your kind of literature?


btw I've just checked and the definition of mankind is the human species I'm sure that includes women

_________________
1 AmigaOne G4XE (OS4 Pre-Release Update4)
Minimig
Sam440ep + OS4.1FE
Sam460cr + OS4.1FE

@1Mouse

Quote:

this your kind of literature?

Not the best start to your attempt as a reasoned debate

I think the solution would be leave marriage alone, let the few thousand practising homosexuals keep their new Civil Partnership institution. By doing this the Civil Partners keep their Tony Blair given legal equivalency with marriage but we would prevent the persecution of pro-marriage supporters in the public sector. This would also prevent the perversion of our vulnerable school children who especially don't need to know at the age of 5 and 6 what a tiny minority of men and women do with their private parts to the detriment of their health and life expectancy!

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

@BigD

Quote:

@1Mouse Quote: After 13 years together my partner and I have just decided to get married. Since marriage is between one man and one woman I think we can deduce by your statement that you mean to have a Civil Partnership.

Sorry to speak on your behalf 1Mouse, please correct me if I'm wrong.

BiggotD, he said married. Not civil partnership. Since this thread is about the government wanting to bring in same sex marriages within the lifetime of this parliament, why did you automatically assume that they desired the current limited system when soon they will have the same rights to a full marriage as any other couple?

Is this still part of your insistence that because not all gay people plan on getting married, no such right should be granted for those that do?

_________________
"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

Quote:

BigD wrote: @1Mouse Quote: this your kind of literature? Not the best start to your attempt as a reasoned debate

"reasoned debate" You having the audacity to use these words... Now that's


All he did was quote the words from the book you claim to be the word of God. If you have a problem with the words, why do you follow the book?

Last edited by SpaceDruid on 02-Feb-2013 at 02:14 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

@SpaceDruid

Quote:

Since this thread is about the government wanting to bring in same sex marriages within the lifetime of this parliament, why did you automatically assume that they desired the current limited system when soon they will have the same rights to a full marriage as any other couple?

Again your arrogance at counting your liberally reared chickens before they're hatched is staggering. There is no reason to assume David Cameron will be able to redefine this valued institution as he sees his leadership and party integrity crumble around him. If you think a promised referendum on Europe will steady his support base you are very wrong.

1Mouse didn't correct me so I assume that a Civil Partnership was what was being implied.

Last edited by BigD on 02-Feb-2013 at 02:17 PM.
Last edited by BigD on 02-Feb-2013 at 02:17 PM.

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

@BigD

You never answered my question.

Is this still part of your insistence that because not all gay people plan on getting married, no such right should be granted for those that do?

_________________
"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

THERE IS NO HUMAN RIGHT THAT REQUIRES THE UK TO BUTCHER MARRIAGE IN ORDER THAT PRACTISING HOMOSEXUAL COUPLES CAN PUT THE WORD MARRIAGE ON THEIR ORDER OF SERVICE!

In regards to your questions about the Bible; I point out to you that you don't even attempt to show any respect for the Bible, Jesus or my faith so I have no intention of engaging with you on that subject. Stick to the issue in hand and accept that the majority of the UK whatever their belief structure or world-view believe marriage should be preserved as it is for the good of the country.

Your favoured redefinition would lead to nothing but innocent people facing the sack or litigation and more vulnerable children being left without a mum or dad or confused by unsuitable school literature and ill advised encouragement to experiment with their sexuality from an ever earlier age!

Last edited by BigD on 02-Feb-2013 at 02:36 PM.
Last edited by BigD on 02-Feb-2013 at 02:35 PM.

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

@BigD

Quote:

Quote: If you want to talk about bad books in UK schools. Try this one. So you think they're fine do you?

Quite obviously not since the one I quoted mentions the Loch Ness Monster as proof evolution is false. But lets go with your latest diversion.

Oh and before we do, I'd just like to point out for the record that this isn't about the subject of the thread and when your argument crashes and burns like every other argument you've tried thus far and you go into a hissy fit, you can't do your usual thing of telling us to shut up because it's off topic. You are the one that brought this up.

Quote:

What about this one? Daddy's Room Mate - Definitely Not Suitable for Primary Schools

What about it? It's a book about a kids parents splitting up, them having joint custody of the child and when he stays with his dad, he does normal things that normal parents do with their kids.

If you look at the full book [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daddy's_Roommate](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daddy's_Roommate)[/url] you'll see him going out on a pond in a boat, going to the cinema, eating out. The kid looks really happy.

I don't understand your issue. This is a situation that exists in the real word. Parents divorce. I suppose you'd be perfectly fine if the book was exactly the same, but the dad was living with a woman?

Or is your problem divorce itself?

Your use of the words "protect children from perverted stuff like this!" is confusing. What is perverse? That the kid has loving parents? That his parents are not in misery being forced together living a lie?

If either of these are the case, it goes a long way to explain why you are so bitter. Is that the environment you were raised in? Is that your life now? Are the the father being forced to lie that you are heterosexual in order to maintain some deception for the sake of outward appearances?

Quote:

Promoting this rubbish does not protect children but opens them up to abuse from predatory adults.

Who in this book is a predatory adult?

_________________
"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:

Who in this book is a predatory adult?

Teaching 5 or 6 year old kids that two men or two woman having sex with each other is normal and that broken homes are normal opens them up to abuse from their perverted uncle/auntie, perverse school worker, or warped step-dad/step-mum who wants to take advantage of them.

Teaching them that sex is something a married man and woman do in a committed and loving relationship is far safer. They should be told that if a man or a woman or another child touches them inappropriately they should inform their parents or a teacher. This is a far healthier strategy.

Last edited by BigD on 02-Feb-2013 at 02:55 PM.

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

@BigD

Quote:

THERE IS NO HUMAN RIGHT THAT REQUIRES THE UK TO BUTCHER MARRIAGE IN ORDER THAT PRACTISING HOMOSEXUAL COUPLES CAN PUT THE WORD MARRIAGE ON THEIR ORDER OF SERVICE!

Shouting might work for Ian Paisley, but it doesn't work here.

"Butcher marriage"

You have made this claim more time than I can remember, yet have not provided one single scrap of evidence that stands up to scrutiny that support this claim and you attempts to do so have brought up evidence from others that shows the opposite is true.

Repeating them (even loudly) doesn't affect the evidence. You are wrong in this claim and it can be proven that you are wrong. Since we've already done this sooo many times already, I'll refer you back to my earlier answers.

Quote:

In regards to your questions about the Bible; I point out to you that you don't even attempt to show any respect for the Bible, Jesus or my faith so I have no intention of engaging with you on that subject.

You don't want to engage on the subject you are claiming is the sole claimant on human morality and sanctity of marriage? Then why did you bring it up?

And you've yet to show any respect to the book or religion yourself. And most of all, you've failed to show any respect to Jesus as you have chosen it upon yourself to overrule him all the way through this thread.

Quote:

Stick to the issue in hand

We going to keep doing this?

The issue at hand is wither 3.7 million UK pounds is a good use of public money.

It is not your latest resurrected claim that you've regurgitated after the last time it was proven to be wrong in some strange belief of yours that repeating the same thing over and over with result in it being eventually correct.

And this time, your change of subject is....

Quote:

... and accept that the majority of the UK whatever their belief structure or world-view believe marriage should be preserved as it is for the good of the country.

Which is as wrong now as when you last stated it and we proved it to be a false claim.

What's your hope? Is it that if you can drag this out long enough, the opinion of the masses will change in your favour? Well there haven't been any new polls since we sighed through this monotony the last time so the majority of people polled in the majority of polls, show the majority support the legalisation of same sex marriage.

Quote:

Your favoured redefinition would lead to nothing but innocent people facing the sack or litigation

Sigh, again I'll point out it is not my redefinition as I'm neither a politician or gay and it does not affect me in the slightest, nor does it you. And nobody who faces the sack for failing to do their jobs are innocent. Every court that can rule, has ruled.

Quote:

and more vulnerable children being left without a mum or dad

Erm, what?

How does gay people getting married leave children without parents exactly?

Quote:

or confused by unsuitable school literature

What, like the story of Noah? When somehow all the fresh water fish in the world survived all the worlds water being contaminated by salt and no mention of Noah being able to provide enough food and drinking water for the (estimated) 8.7 million different animal and insect species he crammed onto his boat? (You know that if creationists accepted evolution, it would help you out here a bit don't you?)

Or what about the books about murdering kids being fine (with instructions on how to do it and what level of happiness you should achieve while doing it), but the 6 mentions about eating shellfish being a deadly sin.

Quote:

and ill advised encouragement to experiment with their sexuality from an ever earlier age!

Where in the literature being proposed (for example "Daddy's Roommate") does it teach anything about sex? The book is about love.

Perhaps this too explains quite a lot about you. You seem to think gay people affect abortion and birth rates, perhaps you should move up a couple of years in your reading literature to something a bit more grown up. You might find this one useful

_________________
"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

Quote:

Teaching 5 or 6 year old kids that two men or two woman having sex with each other is normal and that broken homes are normal opens them up to abuse from their perverted uncle/auntie, perverse school worker, or warped step-dad/step-mum who wants to take advantage of them.

Not true.

The threat exists in the paedophile, not in the child. The wrongdoing is on the part of the rapist, not the victim, and it is disgusting that this even has to be pointed out to you. This remains the case regardless of the child's awareness of same-sex relationships.

Teaching children about same-sex relationships reduces incidences of homophobic bullying. It does not expose them to any abuse, it reduces the amount of abuse going on.

In fact it makes clear to children what constitutes sexual behaviour, and in so doing it protects them from having their ignorance exploited by said paedophiles. It makes everyone safer.

Oppose it if you like, but since your attitudes would lead to an increase in abuse, assault and marginalisation I think its fairly uncontroversial to say you aren't doing it from any sort of moral high ground.

@BigD

Quote:

Teaching 5 or 6 year old kids that two men or two woman having sex with each other is normal

Sex? Where does it describe sex? The only words used are love. It's not a sex manual.

Quote:

and that broken homes are normal

Well sadly broken homes ARE normal. This is not new. And it's not a problem with gay society, it's a problem with all society. The important thing about a broken home is how it is handled afterwards. In this book, both parents appear to be providing a loving environment and isn't that something positive to be promoting?

Quote:

opens them up to abuse from their perverted uncle/auntie, perverse school worker, or warped step-dad/step-mum who wants to take advantage of them.

That's some leap!

Child abuse is bad, I wont make light of it. But what has that got to do with parents divorcing? Getting divorced doesn't suddenly turn you into a child molester. And marrying a partner who was previously married doesn't either.

The way you bring this up suggests you may have some personal insight into this, so I won't dig any further.

Quote:

Teaching them that sex is something a married man and woman do in a committed and loving relationship is far safer.

We already do that. The problem is that for the many children out there that don't come from the "perfect family", they are left feeling very isolated. These books aren't about trying to make the kids grow up to be gay, they are about telling these very vulnerable and insecure kids that they aren't freaks to be shunned. The books tell the kids that it's OK to come from the home that they do. It tells the other kids in the class that it's OK too. The kids grow up feeling part of society which in turn makes them more successful adults.


Quote:

They should be told that if a man or a woman or another child touches them inappropriately they should inform their parents or a teacher. This is a far healthier strategy.

Again, this is very dark and not related to the subject matter.

_________________
"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

@Thread

BBC news - France's Parliament approves gay marriage

Proof that, despite arguably more intense pressure from the religious right, the French parliament do what's right to pave the way for a redefinition of marriage in France.

And to think that some people care more about the impact of gay marriage than the impact of swingeing cuts to welfare and benefits on future generations of underprivileged children - because apparently, the future of Cameron's government is hinging on this (and the Euro question of course).

BigD is the worst example of the kind of idiotic, deranged and bigoted nitwits that would do anything to stop the march of progress.

I used to pity him, but now I have nothing but contempt for him.

AndyC

@SpaceDruid

Quote:

Again, this is very dark and not related to the subject matter.

Correct, the destruction of marriage would lead to some very 'dark' eventualities.

Quote:

The books tell the kids that it's OK to come from the home that they do. It tells the other kids in the class that it's OK too. The kids grow up feeling part of society which in turn makes them more successful adults.

Children should be striving to set up more stable and loving homes than the ones they came from. We need to teach them the ideal and try and repair the damage of the broken homes they come from. All you want to do is increase that damage to children.

Quote:

Child abuse is bad, I wont make light of it. But what has that got to do with parents divorcing?

Divorce greatly increased the likelihood of child abuse. Step-parents are more likely to abuse the children than are biological parents.

@T-J

Quote:

Teaching children about same-sex relationships reduces incidences of homophobic bullying. It does not expose them to any abuse, it reduces the amount of abuse going on.

How dare you argue that instances of homophobic bullying are more common than child abuse by paedophiles! Children are far less likely to question unhealthy and perverse touching by adults and other children if you tell them that sexual experimentation is just part of growing up! Common sense, your liberal 'progressive' agenda is a sham and would lead to more broken homes and more confused and damaged children.

Last edited by BigD on 02-Feb-2013 at 03:59 PM.

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

@BigD

Quote:

All you want to do is increase that damage to children.

Riiiiight. Because telling kids they are the spawn of Satan because they don't share your world view on relationships is going to work out so well for them.

All I want to do is stop nasty bullies like you tormenting helpless children for events done outside of their control. I know your god likes murdering helpless children in the millions, with disease, still birth, flooding the world, allowing his servants to massacre them so they get rewarded, etc. It's not hard to understand why you care so little for them.

I on the other hand would like a child to grow up unmolested by child abusers LIKE YOU. So that they get the best possible start in life. So that they don't end up weak willed and insecure like you obviously are. So that they can make the best possible decisions for themselves and not submit themselves to the control of others.

I want them to grow up in a world were they are free to form loving partnerships of their own, with whomever they choose. I want them to be able to have the same rights and privileges I have. I don't care if the person they fall in love with is the same sex. I don't judge.

By believing this, I am far closer to Jesus than you can ever be. And I don't even think he has any divinity whatsoever.

Stop hiding behind religion. It's very clear you are not a Christian. You are a hateful, spiteful coward that is too afraid of the world to stand up on your own and can only take your spite out on helpless children or anonymous people on the Internet.

You would rather a child suffer alone, than be accepted as an equal. And all because of one single and solitary mention in a book written by men that didn't know even where the sun was in relation to them. That didn't know slavery was wrong. That didn't think to add one single sentence anywhere in the bible that condemned pedophilia, but chose to write six that condemned shell fish.

You talk as if you are moral authority over us. You have NO moral authority over anyone.

I stopped calling you "big" D a long time ago because you are the smallest person I know.

_________________
"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

Quote:

How dare you argue that instances of homophobic bullying are more common than child abuse by paedophiles!

Because its true.

Quote:

Children are far less likely to question unhealthy and perverse touching by adults and other children if you tell them that sexual experimentation is just part of growing up!

No, children are more likely to question being raped by an adult if they know what sex is and aren't vulnerable to the usual scenario where the rapist convinces them that they're the one who has behaved wrongly.

Ignorance allows abuse of all kinds and scales to flourish, be it childish bullying or rape by adults. Knowledge and understanding is how we defeat the bullying. Awareness and open communication is how we can prevent the rape, or at least bring the perpetrator to justice.

@1Mouse

Quote:

After 13 years together my partner and I have just decided to get married.

Congratulations
Quote:

btw I am an athiest and he is a pagan, who would have thought?

You do know that BigD doesn't believe in mixed faith marriages

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

@BigD

Quote:

I think the solution would be leave marriage alone,

Of course you do, because then we will never move away from the stone age theofascist state that your hero Cromwell introduced, shortly before banning all forms of merriment, and massacring thousands of catholics.
Quote:

By doing this the Civil Partners keep their Tony Blair given legal equivalency with marriage but we would prevent the persecution of pro-marriage supporters in the public sector.

The civil partnership is not equal in law to marriage. You keep ignoring the simple fact that there are differences, just as there were once differences is the legal status of women, racial minorities etc. Also the people in the public sector that you are referring to will not be persecuted. Being required to carry out the assigned duties that you are paid to carry out is not persecution.
Quote:

This would also prevent the perversion of our vulnerable school children

The best way to prevent the perversion of our schoolchildren will be to withdraw all state funding for religious indoctrination centres (aka faith schools and churches) We could also evict the unelected and unaccountable voting block in the upper house holding a position of authority and power based on superstition.

Quote:

In regards to your questions about the Bible; I point out to you that you don't even attempt to show any respect for the Bible, Jesus or my faith so I have no intention of engaging with you on that subject.

The only person here who shows absolutely no understanding of the meaning of the word "respect" is the one calling himself BigD. You routinely ignore any evidence that the stories that you are touting are false, wait for a while and then repeat the story knowing it to be a blatant lie. You routinely make baseless and unfounded accusations of sexual perversion against anybody who does not mindlessly follow your gospel of hate and prejudice, and you consider it to be your God given right to discriminate and abuse.

If, as you claim, you have no hate for homosexuals, why do you describe them in such hateful terms?

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