Homosexuality and marriage (again)

[frg001]

Ok.
I am speaking as a straight guy. But one who beliieves that all humans are born equal, no matter their colour, gender or sexual orientatiuon.

...and also a strong atheist.

Ok. here's where I stand...
I dont believe same sex couple should be married under any faith where their texts forbid it... If you want to be a christian/muslim etc and get married then you do need to be straight...as far as I can see... And for me that's a good thing as it just highlights how irrelevant those religions are in todays world...

However I believe all couples should have equal right to 'marriage' under state, non-religious law.

The current law in the UK annoys the hell out of me. As a non-religious non-homosexual person I would welcome the current ability for union that homosexuals have been (rightfully) given... But I'm not allowed it...

What do you think?

 

[sandandfoam]

Gays and lesbians getting married is only right, inheritance laws, custody laws etc. etc.

 

[frg001]

Gays and lesbians getting married is only right, inheritance laws, custody laws etc. etc.

I agree, under state, non-religious curcumstances. 2 people who love each other should all be given the same rights under LAW. NOT RELIGION,

 

[Sunstone]

I'm all for homosexuals getting married. I think it's not only in the interests of the people themselves, but in the interests of society and government to extend marriage to homosexuals.

 

[madhatter85]

wow you jsut opene up a thread that will spiral into oblivion in 10
.
9
.
8
.
7
.
6
.
5
.
4
.
3
.
2
.
1
.........*sigh*

 

[madhatter85]

I'm all for homosexuals getting married. I think it's not only in the interests of the people themselves, but in the interests of society and government to extend marriage to homosexuals.

but we do extend marriage to homosexuals, i have nothing wrong with marriage being extended to a homosexual.



.
..
...
....
.....
......
.......

as long as they marry a member of the opposite sex.

 

[cardero]

Ok.
I am speaking as a straight guy. But one who beliieves that all humans are born equal, no matter their colour, gender or sexual orientatiuon.

...and also a strong atheist.


However I believe all couples should have equal right to 'marriage' under state, non-religious law.

Then you are denying homosexuals that most important right to equality. The freedom to believe. And that freedom may extend to the belief that their God has no objection to a human's sexual preferrence.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

What do you think?

I think that humanism should come before religious textual interpretation, and therefore Christian and Muslims or anyone else who is gay and wants to be married should do it.

I am shocked to see that an atheist would want gay Christians and Muslims be denied such a basic right due to their religion. Why not encourage people to change their religion to make it more humane?

 

[Sunstone]

but we do extend marriage to homosexuals, i have nothing wrong with marriage being extended to a homosexual.



.
..
...
....
.....
......
.......

as long as they marry a member of the opposite sex.

Perhaps you'd be willing to marry a lesbian to show everyone that it's not so bad to marry someone you're not sexually compatible with?

 

[Mercy Not Sacrifice]

Interesting to see this thread here and not in General Debates. Although at its core, this is probably a better place for it, because this is a true schism between religion and science (conservative Christianity is not the only religion that opposes homosexuality, remember)

 

[frg001]

I think that humanism should come before religious textual interpretation, and therefore Christian and Muslims or anyone else who is gay and wants to be married should do it.

I am shocked to see that an atheist would want gay Christians and Muslims be denied such a basic right due to their religion. Why not encourage people to change their religion to make it more humane?

Don't be shocked. I believe homosexuality is just another state of humanity.
But it is quite clearly condemned by religious texts... And that just lessens the importance of the texts, not the people... That is why I would prefer that people realize this and find a different 'truth'.

Again I absolutely believe in equality. But I also believe that if I create a religion, and have a place of worship, marriage or whatever, then I should be able to reject whoever I want to, based on my religion, from taking those 'religious' ceremonies.

(Not because I care for religion, but I care for people, and that people's eyes are opened to what I believe to be the inherrent bigotry in religion, and that maybe they will think again)

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Again I absolutely believe in equality. But I also believe that if I create a religion, and have a place of worship, marriage or whatever, then I should be able to reject whoever I want to, based on my religion, from taking those 'religious' ceremonies.

Curious that you do not see a liberating religion, even if you were hypothetically creating it.

 

[frg001]

Curious that you do not see a liberating religion, even if you were hypothetically creating it.

You are misunderstanding me (possibly on purpose?)

My ideal world would have NO religion.

However if I created one, and created a marriage ceremony for its followers, I would not expect to be forced to allow non-believers/adherers to go through the ceremony.
And if I had a religious 'textbook' that defined my religion, then I would hope that people would not change it to suit themselves, and thus 'try to fit in'

 

[Moey]

I don't see what the big deal is. Two people love eachother and want to spend the rest of their life together. They don't need a peice of paper to do that. As for decision making and that sort of thing just get a power of attorney for them.

I don't believe that the government or religion should say who I can and can't be with.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

You are misunderstanding me (possibly on purpose?)

Now that's a rather weak insult to my intelligence. Perhaps you misunderstood yourself or you meant something else when you clearly said:

I also believe that if I create a religion, and have a place of worship, marriage or whatever, then I should be able to reject whoever I want to, based on my religion, from taking those 'religious' ceremonies.

That is a hypothetical religion of exclusion and not of liberation. Would you like to try something else? It's clear that you cannot imagine a religion that is liberating, at least from this example (however pathetic and thoughtless it may be, should you choose to revise it).

 

[frg001]

Now that's a rather weak insult to my intelligence. Perhaps you misunderstood yourself or you meant something else when you clearly said:



That is a hypothetical religion of exclusion and not of liberation. Would you like to try something else? It's clear that you cannot imagine a religion that is liberating, at least from this example (however pathetic and thoughtless it may be, should you choose to revise it).

Ok - perhaps you are still MISUNDERSTANDING my point. I believe in the freedom of equality.
However I believe I should be allowed to CHOOSE who I let enter my house...

See my previous post..

 

[frg001]

I don't see what the big deal is. Two people love eachother and want to spend the rest of their life together. They don't need a peice of paper to do that. As for decision making and that sort of thing just get a power of attorney for them.

I don't believe that the government or religion should say who I can and can't be with.

This isn't the point.. I agree.

For me if 2 people (or in fact as far as I am concerned 2 or more) want to commit to each other in law, then they should have EQUAL rights.
My issue is only with religious ceremonies.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Ok - perhaps you are still MISUNDERSTANDING my point.

Perhaps your "point" is hopelessly inconsistent.

 

[frg001]

Perhaps your "point" is hopelessly inconsistent.

No. If you check it is entirely consistant thanks.

 

[standing_alone]

Ah, another same-sex marriage debate that will never get anywhere. Let straight people who really don't have a clue or working grasp of the issue attempt to argue "in favor" of marriage equality, thinking it makes them all keen and tolerant, while giving a chance for the bigoted and moronic to make their ridiculous assertions.

Oh joy.