Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Moving from Dakka Polls: threads about politics should go in the Off-Topic sub-forum. Thanks ~ Manchu

Personally I support gay marrige and lgbtq in general but I want to see if there is actually a good argument someone can produce as to why many people still discriminate against lgbt peoplLe.

Zero Feths given, you can screw whomever you like, just so long as your not doing it in public

Yay, but I'm uncertain how long this thread will last.

I'm not gay so why does it matter what I think? The people that should decide are the people it affects and no one else. I don't think anyone should have the right to force their ideals on others.

And people CAN say they read it in the bible. People say that because that's their reason. You don't get to invite what some people think is a controversial topic with a 'nuh-uh, your reason is stupid'.

 SharkoutofWata wrote:
I'm not gay so why does it matter what I think? The people that should decide are the people it affects and no one else. I don't think anyone should have the right to force their ideals on others.

And people CAN say they read it in the bible. People say that because that's their reason. You don't get to invite what some people think is a controversial topic with a 'nuh-uh, your reason is stupid'.

I agree I fixed it because that was a narrow minded thing to do

Why do people discriminate LGBT people? Because a), they're donkey-caves, b), they interpret a thousand year old book to their hearts conten, or c), they're donkey-caves.

No reason to not allow gay marriage. Any argument to the contrary always sounds silly. They vaguely say its bad for society in some way, or complain about change in the meaning, like that is substantive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Zero Feths given, you can screw whomever you like, just so long as your not doing it in public

The second party has to consent too...

 SharkoutofWata wrote:
I'm not gay so why does it matter what I think? The people that should decide are the people it affects and no one else. I don't think anyone should have the right to force their ideals on others.

And people CAN say they read it in the bible. People say that because that's their reason. You don't get to invite what some people think is a controversial topic with a 'nuh-uh, your reason is stupid'.

I agree in this context but that is a horrible argument to use to legalize Gay marriage.

So the only people who should have a say in the use of Crack Cocaine are the users of Cocaine....they probably don't want it banned/illegal


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ColonelFazackerley wrote:
No reason to not allow gay marriage. Any argument to the contrary always sounds silly. They vaguely say its bad for society in some way, or complain about change in the meaning, like that is substantive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Zero Feths given, you can screw whomever you like, just so long as your not doing it in public

The second party has to consent too...

usually

 Ghazkuul wrote:

 SharkoutofWata wrote:
I'm not gay so why does it matter what I think? The people that should decide are the people it affects and no one else. I don't think anyone should have the right to force their ideals on others.

And people CAN say they read it in the bible. People say that because that's their reason. You don't get to invite what some people think is a controversial topic with a 'nuh-uh, your reason is stupid'.

I agree in this context but that is a horrible argument to use to legalize Gay marriage.

So the only people who should have a say in the use of Crack Cocaine are the users of Cocaine....they probably don't want it banned/illegal


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ColonelFazackerley wrote:
No reason to not allow gay marriage. Any argument to the contrary always sounds silly. They vaguely say its bad for society in some way, or complain about change in the meaning, like that is substantive.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Ghazkuul wrote:
Zero Feths given, you can screw whomever you like, just so long as your not doing it in public

The second party has to consent too...

usually

...oookay, that's enough Dakka for me today.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, I'd like to know, the two guys who voted nay, what do you have against gay marriage?

who says it was guys. Maybe you have two female gamers.....that dislike gay marriage......yeah im sorry i can't keep a straight face. People are allowed to have their own feelings and don't have to explain them to you. Personally I have zero problems with gay marriage. I don't see why it was banned in the first place.

my biggest problem with gay marriage is that i think the whole marriage thing is stupid.

Those two people are just worried that we throw better wedding parties.
Don't worry, guys, we'll leave you some glitter and confetti. And you'll probably look better than me in a dress.

Jokes aside, I think that being allowed to legally be partnered with someone is very important. If I die, the last thing I want my OH to worry about is whether or not they could care for my estate. In the UK that's not a concern any longer, but I know in many countries it is.
I would want to know they could be counted as next of kin in all situations.

However religion and law are separate entities in my mind, and if someone objects on a religious basis, that is their belief, that's fine.
If someone doesn't wish to allow marriage in their church, or officiate a ceremony that they disagree with, it shouldn't matter if it's gay, straight, or between two poodles, they shouldn't have to do it.
Taking that disagreement any further and actively harming others is where we part ways.

I'm what you'd call equal opportunity loving, or "pansex", which is neither here nor there (ha!), but it does mean that in the past I've had to make serious considerations about the legality of things like property, or the welfare of my animals if something were to happen.
I'm lucky to live in a country where this is no longer so much of an issue.

I don't agree with homosexuality, nor do I think it's natural or normal etc. However, in life, there is lots I disagree with. I don't think watching TV is a quality way to spend spare time, nor do I think spending money on certain things is wise. I could go on for hours with things people do that I disagree with or dislike for whatever reason. But I don't stop people doing these things.

Im sure people think im daft for spending money on fancy plastic, or people who think the fact I have a Honda instead of a Toyota is ridiculous etc. But I have never been given a hard time for anything I do that others disagree with so why give others a hard time? Well I don't.

If people want to get married then that's fine, even if you disprove of homosexuality then I still don't see what's wrong with it happening. I just hope when these people get married they find someone who wants to marry them to do so. Nothing worse than the teacher that forces you to play with the kid who ruins your fun or vice versa etc.

All in all, let them be. I have no real reason at all to not let them.

See, even if we disagree on some things, I can get behind that, so to speak.
What feels natural, and comfort zone is very personal. Me, I can't get my head around flying. I understand how it works, and why people do it, but the concept of willingly flinging yourself through the air at blinding speeds in a small container? It's so incredibly pants-gaking-ly alien to me that, no exaggeration, I make peace with my own death before going near a plane.

Do I stop other people from getting on planes or try and convince them I'm right? No. It's their fething business. And now we've gone full circle.

I don't always agree with a lot of the views people here on Dakka have but, this is one that I can meet at common grounds. I don't agree with homosexuality however I am not going to say you can't marry who you want to. I don't care what another person does in their personal life with someone they care about.

The only problem I have is when they try to force a Christian priest to wed them. I feel as if they are purposely trying to force their ways on people who believe it is wrong to be homosexual. There are plenty of people who can wed you that don't give a crap who or what your sexual preference is. don't add kindle to the fire.

Have there been reported cases of priests (or any other religious official) being forced to marry people they don't want to?
Or gays, for that matter?

Sincerely curious.

I know there's been a couple of small town community centric churches turning down weddings. Which whilst often handled and reported more aggressively than I'd appreciate, is not something I entirely disagree with.

There was a Christian bakery that refused to make a cake for a gay wedding and ended up with them losing their business.

http://aclu-co.org/court-rules-bakery-illegally-discriminated-against-gay-couple/

Edit: This other part has been proved wrong, so no need for it.

Completely for same sex marriage; If two want to commit to each other and have it legally recognized, then good for them.
It isn't hurting anyone

 Bonegrinder wrote:
Completely for same sex marriage; If two want to commit to each other and have it legally recognized, then good for them.
It isn't hurting anyone

Dis guy knows what's up!

Can I just say it does not make sense to say that God hates gays.
He clearly doesn't: anyone who says that is not reading their bible right. The Old Testament is nice if you like a bit of fiction with plenty of sex and violence (add in dragons and it's virtually Game of Thrones), but the New Testament is what Christians really should be looking to, and not merely in a literal way but also thinking about the context in which it was written. The bible condoned slavery but no Christian now (I hope) would say the African slave trade was good.
Firstly, the message of Jesus is love your neighbour, your neighbour being everybody. Secondly, somewhere in the NT, this Roman legionary comes before Jesus and asks him to cure this man whom "he cares about deeply", (depending on the translation this could be a gay couple) and Jesus goes ahead and heals him, blessing them both.
Finally, if your God gets upset because a guy fancies another guy, he's a pretty weak god... The Dark Eldar don't worship the old eldar Gods because they were killed by slaanesh, so obviously weren't worth worshipping. Similarly, if your God is so enraged by such petty matters then does he really deserve to be worshipped?
Personally I'm not gay, but I see no reason why you should be prevented from spending your life with someone because of their sex. It's like saying you can't have interracial marriage because of some petty, arbitrary thing like skin colour.

I've often wondered if folk who don't want gays to get married because of how they or their social group interpret their holy book of choice, would be okay with murderers (or folks who've committed other serious crimes or transgressions) getting married.
I'm pretty sure all holy texts have some hard words on those particulars.

Do we get communities protesting criminal or released prisoner marriages? I mean I've never seen it personally, I'm curious.

Pretty sure having murdered someone is more indicative of a moral character than being in love.

Absolutley not. I don't judge gays at all & in fact most of my friends are either gay or bi but a person is allowed to dissagree witha persons sexuality as part of their religeon. Freedom of belief & all that.

To tell a Christian vicar he has to marry two men is forcing him to do something against his belief. Where are his human rites?

I instead think that civil partners should be given the same rites as married couples.

Personally I don't care what anybodys sexual preferences are so I would never go against gay marriage.

However the one thing I am not a fan of is the "gay pride parades" I feel like it sets what the gay community have accomplished back rather then celebrate what they have achieved.

I kind of agree to the above thing. I don't give a single gak if you're gay or not, but please don't clog up all the streets in Stockholm once a year.

Comments like that are usually made by people who don't realize how often we as a society shove heterosexuality down everyone's throats-- hell, just look at our TV shows and movies, almost all of which are stuffed full of unnecessary, hacked in straight romance plots.

By comparison, pride parades are just one day a year, hardly that intrusive all things considered; just let the LGBT community celebrate and confirm "we exist and we're proud of who we are". I mean FFS we still have politicians who want to outlaw being gay and talking about "the gaystapo"...

 Drakeslayer wrote:
Can I just say it does not make sense to say that God hates gays.
He clearly doesn't: anyone who says that is not reading their bible right. The Old Testament is nice if you like a bit of fiction with plenty of sex and violence (add in dragons and it's virtually Game of Thrones), but the New Testament is what Christians really should be looking to, and not merely in a literal way but also thinking about the context in which it was written. The bible condoned slavery but no Christian now (I hope) would say the African slave trade was good.
Firstly, the message of Jesus is love your neighbour, your neighbour being everybody. Secondly, somewhere in the NT, this Roman legionary comes before Jesus and asks him to cure this man whom "he cares about deeply", (depending on the translation this could be a gay couple) and Jesus goes ahead and heals him, blessing them both.
Finally, if your God gets upset because a guy fancies another guy, he's a pretty weak god... The Dark Eldar don't worship the old eldar Gods because they were killed by slaanesh, so obviously weren't worth worshipping. Similarly, if your God is so enraged by such petty matters then does he really deserve to be worshipped?
Personally I'm not gay, but I see no reason why you should be prevented from spending your life with someone because of their sex. It's like saying you can't have interracial marriage because of some petty, arbitrary thing like skin colour.

Drake you are off a little on your reinterpretation of the Bible. The legionary brought a servant to Jesus and in no way did Jesus ever condone homosexuality. Jesus dealt with and forgave sinners but in all cases he told people to go and sin no more. Love thy neighbor but hate the sin and homosexuality is pure sin. I also find it odd that you compare the bible to 40k fiction.

My stance may not be the most popular here but I am very much against same sex marriage. Yes I am a Christian and the Bible is what steers my moral compass. What is the point on your moral compass? Where do we draw the line on morality? Pedofiles? Beastiality? Hedonism? Did you know there are people that "marry" their pets? Why is it so critical that Gays be allowed to have Marriage?" Have a civil union with all the legal rights but don't call it marriage. In the U.S. It was not a fight for rights but a fight for acknowledgement. It is one more step in forcing people who do not agree with that lifestyle to accept it. Business's in the U.S. Are being sued because their religious beliefs prevent them from acknowledging homosexual unions. If this was about "love and understanding" then why not take your business elsewhere? Why make it a point to sue? Why ask to be married in a church that you know does no acknowledge your lifestyle then sue that church when they say no? That is more about hate, anger, and trying to prove justification. It is not about equality or legal rights....it is about validation. It is simply a group of people living a sinful lifestyle forcing the world to acknowledge them. Don't want to worry about your estate...write a will. Health insurance in most countries is no longer an issue due to government care and in the U.S. You are penalized tax wise to be married. Why is it so critical gays can marry? Why is it so important to call it "marriage? What is the definition of marriage and what do you base that definition on? If you don't see Marriage as a religeous commitment between a couple and God then you missed the point of marriage. God does not condone Homosexuality and in fact openly states in the Bible that it is wrong along with Beastality, etc. as a matter of point Sodem and Ghamora were destroyed due to their sin and sexual deviancy.

With the Legal precedence in the U.S. Allowing gay marriage the groups that believe in beastiality, pedophiles, etc are already using that Supreme Court decision as a spring board to prove validity in their lifestyle. Again I ask you....where do we draw the line? Your opinion may vary based on your moral compass but you asked for opinions and reasoning and it was time for someone that voted nay to speak up.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Buttery Commissar wrote:
I've often wondered if folk who don't want gays to get married because of how they or their social group interpret their holy book of choice, would be okay with murderers (or folks who've committed other serious crimes or transgressions) getting married.
I'm pretty sure all holy texts have some hard words on those particulars.

Do we get communities protesting criminal or released prisoner marriages? I mean I've never seen it personally, I'm curious.

Pretty sure having murdered someone is more indicative of a moral character than being in love.

We all sin but forgiveness comes when we turn away from that sin. In cases where people have killed or committed other sins there are still consequences of sin but you can be forgiven. In cases like Homosexuality forgiveness for the sin again comes when the sinner turns away from sin which they will not do. Instead they grasp that sin tighter and want to force acceptance of that sin as a lifestyle on those that know it as sin. They don't want anyone to tell them it's wrong and feel everyone MUST accept them. Remember that we hate the sin and not the sinner (although some do take that hate too far). Yes you should be punished for murder etc but that in no way ties to marriage. It is the act of gay marriage that is the sin and proud announcement of that sin that is an affront to God.

 TyranidPainter wrote:
To tell a Christian vicar he has to marry two men is forcing him to do something against his belief. Where are his human rites?

As the vicar is acting as an agent of the state, the vicar should have to abide by the laws of the state which include not discriminating against people for little things like their skin colour, religion or sexuality.

You know, like everyone else who offers a public service.

"Officer, that person just knifed my gay partner!"

"Ooohhhh... would love to help you but I'm afraid that it goes against my human rights to do anything to not facillitate homosexuality"

I instead think that civil partners should be given the same rites as married couples.

Ah, the ol' "they can't have our word but they are exactly the same in every other way. But they can't be married, only be civil partners!".

If we're going to get in a theological debate, I'd prefer to start quoting people like Fred Clark, William Lindsey, Neil Steinberg, Kimberly Knight, and Dave Gushee over the words of notoriously corrupt churches that were formed to add support to the bloody altar of slavery and white male supremacy.

 Melissia wrote:
Comments like that are usually made by people who don't realize how often we as a society shove heterosexuality down everyone's throats-- hell, just look at our TV shows and movies, almost all of which are stuffed full of unnecessary, hacked in straight romance plots.

By comparison, pride parades are just one day a year, hardly that intrusive all things considered; just let the LGBT community celebrate and confirm "we exist and we're proud of who we are". I mean FFS we still have politicians who want to outlaw being gay and talking about "the gaystapo"...

That's because for the vast majority of people this is normal and the natural way to do things, so of course man and women relationships are more common than the deviant sexuality who are still portrayed in media (probably more representation than there actually are sexual deviants). I know it is the cool thing for some people these days to try really hard to care about the minorities (or even try hard to be one of them with, despite normally being a sheltered white kid) but you can hardly call them shoe horned in. As much as I hate a romance subplot they are there for an obvious reason.

I am sure if you look, you may find a lot of media has lesbians and gays etc in it, but you cannot expect movies and so on to ignore the majority interests for no reason other than your feels, they are there to make money. It's not shoved down our throats... you are acting like people DON'T like romance plots with the word "shoved down our throats", but then, Titanic flies in the face of that as an example among many.

As it sits I know a fair few gay couples and, well only one of them thinks highly of the pride parade and honestly im not surprised. I suppose it's like walking into a wargames convention only to see some 30 year old dudes screaming in viking hats to the dismay of the crowd. Yes they are loud, getting attention and showing how different they are, but for the majority of us at the convention it's pretty embarrassing to be lumped in with them. Especially when you happen to have someone new to the hobby with you. I got the impression that's how they felt when the topic came up.

Anyway, in short, it isn't rocket science. Unless the majority wants no romance or something it won't change. After all romance between men and women have featured in books dating back for a loooooooooooong time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Melissia wrote:
If we're going to get in a theological debate, I'd prefer to start quoting people like Fred Clark, William Lindsey, Neil Steinberg, Kimberly Knight, and Dave Gushee over the words of notoriously corrupt churches that were formed to add support to the bloody altar of slavery and white male supremacy.

Oh and hahahahahaha... you have been reading too many troll tumblr accounts I think...

Followed by someone who wants what I have even though they claim to be different?!? I don't understand that. Ifyou are proud to be gay and different why do you demand the same "marriage" benefit as heterosexual couples?