same sex marriage?

Oh well, nothing lasts forever!!!

Val

 

There are many layers of useless and stupid hidden in this 'debate'. I put the word debate in quotes because we really haven't had a proper societal debate about this change. You can't really have a debate in an atmosphere in which publicly taking one position is likely to get you fired - witness the recent loss of a Mozilla CEO for expressing a sentiment expressed by president Obama on many occasions. One side has used social shaming tactics rather than arguments and the other side is too splintered and lacking confidence to put up the proper fight - which it could probably win - if a reasoned debate (by some miracle) were to happen.
The only reason there is any societal / governmental interest in who is having sex with who (ie state sponsored marriage) is the possibility of the creation of children through the union. Without this possibility, who is having sex with who is no more important than who is talking to who, or who plays golf with who. While it is true that homosexual couples can adopt and gain children through other means, the homosexual union itself is entirely ancillary to this ie the children do not come about as a result of - indeed have nothing to do with - the union of the couple.
Another layer of daft is the argumentation regarding rights. The legal rights of partners are distinct from the name of the partnership, so why is it so important that the nature of a very old societal institution be modified, if the rights can be given to everyone without this modification? Is it necessary to change marriage in order to give everyone equal legal rights? Nope. So why is it necessary to change marriage? The argument that we should make both types of partnership equal in every respect including their name is fallacious; heterosexual and homosexual partnerships have distinct natures as a matter of biological fact. There is a good reason to have distinct names for distinct entities

 

I think I agree with you!!!

Val

 

Erm ... what is "TV"?

Did I get on my soap box again (I was speaking historically - read, not watched).

 

Two reasons;
1] Marriage was primarily a religious institution and believers are now the minority
and..............
2] Buggery ceased to be a crime in England in 1967 (I think) and in Scotland in the 1980's (?).

I've yet to hear one.

To put my thoughts on this issue into context, I used to be one of the most homophobic pigs around (I did stop short of beating gays up, but verbally I was cruel) until a friend "came out" in 1998 and told us he had met someone. Out of the other ten of us in our group there was just the two of of us who did not blank him. His best friend since primary school never uttered another word to him. We had no idea and I was ashamed of myself. When the others made it clear a week or so later that he had "betrayed" them and was no longer welcome I walked too.

 

Now: stand tall and proud. You really are the "bigger" person!

 

If that's the way they felt then surely their feelings should be respected as well?

Val

 

No, can't agree with this, everyone is entitled to their point of view, some people are comfortable with gays while others aren't, doesn't make you better of worse it is just the way you feel and some people (probably mostly male) are definitely not comfortable with buggery.

Val

 

Maybe. Or perhaps..................

...........the others were just a little less secure about their own sexuality.

I despise discrimination in all its forms.

 

I have no problem with this. Here's a thought (sorry if it's already been covered), what if one of your kids was gay? Sure, if it was one of mine, I wouldn't be enthusiastic about it, but my greatest wish is for my kids to be happy. Happiness is everything, as far as I'm concerned...

 

Completely agree with you Keith.

 

I do agree with that. In this instance though nothing had changed except that honesty had come into the group. He didn't stand up, say I'm gay and become gay at that point. He was gay before he came out. We assumed that his low "strike rate" with girls was down to his shyness when it was down to him being gay.
I'm actually uncomfortable at the sight of two men kissing. Sue was uncomfortable when her lesbian mate kissed her partner at a New Year party once, but I was far from uncomfortable with it. I accept that for heterosexual people it is awkward so I feel comfortable about feeling uncomfortable. But just because they're different to the majority does it mean that they have no rights? If that rule applies then education for the handicapped, the right to worship for the religious, and the right to live as a free person if you're black can all go out of the window.

 

We'll agree to disagree on this, Val

On the one hand, you argue "everyone is entitled to their point of view" - and they are (we're agreed!)

However, homosexuals are also very comfortable with gay talk - and outnumber the heterosexuals who are not comfortable with "gay" talk.

I do think that makes them better people (be they gay or straight) simply because they are open minded: you are straight - society accepts you and your opinions. They are not "straight", they do not condemn you for not being homosexual (our "norm"), they merely ask for acceptance, but they do respect your point of view! Can you respect theirs? To the same degree?

Some may be "comfortable" with one perspective and others may not be so comfortable: how do you judge who is "rightfully" comfortable? Who's "comfort" is most valid/worth/acceptable? The gender difference? The "religious" teachings? Or, perhaps, thanks to scientific research, the scientific evidence that they are born - not conjured from defiance/recalcitrance/churlishness - but, if you are religious, God's own creation: just as us all!

Is it "buggery"? Or, can it be something else? Who is to say that all homosexual encounters comprise of penetrative intercourse? Is it not possible that it takes the form of non-penetrative intercourse?

I think there is quite a difference between "buggery" (which can happen, even in heterosexual relationships, where it may be deemed abhorrent - e.g "not the norm") and between two consenting adults in the privacy of their own quarters!

Is all homosexual sexual behaviour "buggery", or, is it a matter of "degrees"? (I cannot possibly say for certain, because I am neither a fly on the wall, nor homosexual - neither do I "assume").

So: some interesting questions:
If someone is inclined towards "buggery" - does that define them as homosexual? Deviant? Experimental? Depraved? Curious?
Do all homosexuals crave buggery?
Does "buggery" define you as a homosexual, per se?
What of lesbians then? Still not considered heterosexual, so must come under the category of homosexual ... is buggery their sexual aspiration?
Or, is the discussion limited to just male on male behaviour and we won't venture into the realms of female vs female attraction? In which case: what does "buggery" have to do with it?

Just some thoughts to ponder.

 

Personally, I don't care if a man kisses a man or a woman a woman ... living in the 'almost' Med (as Portugal is not classified as Med) it is a daily encounter of a greeting even in a grocery store although here is it 'man hugs' rather than kisses but the kissing for women is with women and men. No one takes a jot of notice as it is a normal greeting. At a gathering it is quite a 'friendly' atmosphere to say the least ...

 

I think to be uncomfortable with a given section of society is fair enough, if there is some logical reason. I would feel uncomfortable in the presence of convicted violent criminals just out of jail, or people who spoke enthusiastically about violence or cruelty etc. There would be a logical reason for me to be uncomfortable in the presence of such groups because these are people that hurt people.

If there is no logical reason to negatively judge a particular section of society, and yet I still did, then the problem would be with me rather than them. It would be me making my own assumptions and judgements without basis.

I have a mate who is short and ginger. This combination made him a target at school (ginger people are often mocked for some reason, and being smaller than average made him appear to be the perfect target - that is until his bullies released he could actually fight). Why do some people judge ginger people negatively? Do gingers as a whole collectively harm everyone else? Surely everyone here will be thinking what a ridiculous notion. Yet gay people, are in the same situation and are still judged even well into adulthood when bullies have grown out of all their other stereotypes and many people just accept this.

Anecdote alert: In one of my regular drinking holes, the downstairs bar, which was a 'proper boys (and girls) bar, mostly frequented by old school bikers. It was licensed til 1AM on saturday night. Upstairs was licensed til 2AM, but here's the twist. The upstairs bar was the gay bar. After the downstairs bar closed, if I and my wife and our friends fancied another pint, we'd just go upstairs into the gay bar. It was all the stereotypes. Cheesy 70s disco tunes, some of the men wearing feather bowers and some dancing on the bar, but mostly people behaving in such a way that you'd never pick them out as in any way different. My group would often be the first from the 'straight' bar to go up, as we didn't see the point in drinking in a bar with no music and the heating switched off when there was music and warmth upstairs, but usually within about half an hour, quite often the old bikers would start to wander in, often with their wives. There was no buggery going on up there, and nobody came onto me or anyone in our group, it was just people having harmless fun in the public bar as you'd find in any decent pub across the land.

Me too. But, I'm also not that comfortable seeing a straight couple getting too passionate. Maybe I'm a prude, but I think passion should be kept private regardless of sexual orientation. That said, I did once see two young ladies getting a bit carried away with each other in the middle of a nightclub dance floor. I watched that for a while I even texted somebody to tell them 'get down here quick, there are two ladies lezzing up on the dance floor'. None of my mates miraculously appeared. The next day I rang round to see who'd got my text. Nobody had. The only other people in my phone book at that time were my mam and my boss. Nothing was ever said.