Posts: 14932
Threads: 684
Joined: August 25, 2008
Reputation:
143
RE: Two excellent reasons to OPPOSE gay marriage in the UK
May 20, 2013 at 6:26 pm
(May 20, 2013 at 5:14 pm)ideologue08 Wrote: Well, the main reason I'm against gay marriage is the potential effect it might have on religious freedom, as I outlined in the first post. It is not acceptable for a gay couple to marry in mosques or to force an Imam or other religious figures to conduct such a ceremony. People can argue all they want how that isn't going to happen, but I see that happening, it's a very real possibility. The government have so far rejected all attempts by Muslim activists to apply the Church of England's exemption laws to Mosques. You realize the only reason the government can make exemption laws for the Church of England is because the Church of England is controlled partly by government, as in, the head of the Church is the head of state, right?
Besides, I'm not sure you quite understand the law being proposed. When passed, no religious organisations are required to host gay marriages. In fact, any religious organisation must choose to "opt-in" before being allowed to do so. So, mosques are exempt by default.
Posts: 23
Threads: 2
Joined: May 20, 2013
Reputation:
0
RE: Two excellent reasons to OPPOSE gay marriage in the UK
May 20, 2013 at 6:52 pm
Guys guys! A gay couple will infringe on your rights! Well first, you could be with your family eating dinner with your son and wife (or husband) and a mysterious truck will pull up. You will wonder what it is, and all these gays get out. Then they break into your house and start having sex with each other plain view of the children. IT WILL HAPPEN. MARK MY WORDS!!
Posts: 29570
Threads: 116
Joined: February 22, 2011
Reputation:
159
RE: Two excellent reasons to OPPOSE gay marriage in the UK
May 20, 2013 at 7:00 pm
(May 20, 2013 at 3:13 pm)ideologue08 Wrote: (May 20, 2013 at 3:04 pm)apophenia Wrote: Actually, if you read the article carefully, it only states that Stonewall,"said it would be a 'terrible pity' if the legislation got 'bogged down' and urged MPs from all parties not to 'play politics' with it." While it may be true that Stonewall is against civil partnerships for heterosexuals, nothing in the article actually indicates this. In English, when you say to someone not to get "bogged down" with something, it means that you don't want them to make progress with it. This is from the Collins English Thesaurus: If you get bogged down in something, it prevents you from making progress or getting something done.. So, in plain English, it means Stonewall do not want progress on the heterosexual civil partnership cause. It's the exact same phrase used by our defence secretary when he justified his reasoning for opposing the gay marriage cause sighting other more worthy causes, they shouldn't be "bogged down" on gay marriage.
I'm going to be charitable here and presume that English is not your first language. Nor your second. Or even your third. Matter of fact, I'm guessing your education in the English language came in some place after "how not to accidentally burn toast so that it might inadvertently be interpreted as an attempt to create an image of the prophet (praise be upon hizzass)."
You have things exactly ass backwards.
Posts: 7085
Threads: 69
Joined: September 11, 2012
Reputation:
84
RE: Two excellent reasons to OPPOSE gay marriage in the UK
May 20, 2013 at 7:19 pm
... and you've still failed to address me. You're a coward and an ass. You win. I give up. I no longer care.
Posts: 30973
Threads: 204
Joined: July 19, 2011
Reputation:
141
RE: Two excellent reasons to OPPOSE gay marriage in the UK
May 20, 2013 at 8:16 pm
(May 20, 2013 at 5:11 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: Ideologue, why aren't you answering my question?
He's probably got you on ignore.
Posts: 25314
Threads: 239
Joined: August 26, 2010
Reputation:
156
RE: Two excellent reasons to OPPOSE gay marriage in the UK
May 21, 2013 at 12:37 am
On the other hand, he's already responded directly to people who have quoted rebecca's question in their replies, so there's really no excuse. He's either being evasive for whatever reason, or just plain rude.
At the age of five, Skagra decided emphatically that God did not exist. This revelation tends to make most people in the universe who have it react in one of two ways - with relief or with despair. Only Skagra responded to it by thinking, 'Wait a second. That means there's a situation vacant.'
Posts: 5598
Threads: 112
Joined: July 16, 2012
Reputation:
74
RE: Two excellent reasons to OPPOSE gay marriage in the UK
May 21, 2013 at 1:34 am
Isn't he a Muslim? Maybe he doesn't like to respond to people his religion considers to be breeding animals.
Posts: 935
Threads: 16
Joined: July 3, 2011
Reputation:
5
RE: Two excellent reasons to OPPOSE gay marriage in the UK
May 21, 2013 at 1:59 am
(This post was last modified: May 21, 2013 at 2:08 am by ideologue08.)
(May 20, 2013 at 6:15 pm)NoraBrimstone Wrote: Who do you think you're distracting?
It'll be noticed by everyone that you haven't denied what I said, you know, on account of it being pretty accurate. The thing is, we aren't homophobes, so we're not going to think badly of you if you just admit it, you'd be likely to get support from this place. Your sexuality isn't just going to go away if you hide it, really. Do we have another fallacy on the cards from Mrs. Fallacy? Yes we do.
(May 20, 2013 at 6:26 pm)Tiberius Wrote: (May 20, 2013 at 5:14 pm)ideologue08 Wrote: Well, the main reason I'm against gay marriage is the potential effect it might have on religious freedom, as I outlined in the first post. It is not acceptable for a gay couple to marry in mosques or to force an Imam or other religious figures to conduct such a ceremony. People can argue all they want how that isn't going to happen, but I see that happening, it's a very real possibility. The government have so far rejected all attempts by Muslim activists to apply the Church of England's exemption laws to Mosques. You realize the only reason the government can make exemption laws for the Church of England is because the Church of England is controlled partly by government, as in, the head of the Church is the head of state, right?
Besides, I'm not sure you quite understand the law being proposed. When passed, no religious organisations are required to host gay marriages. In fact, any religious organisation must choose to "opt-in" before being allowed to do so. So, mosques are exempt by default. I know but that's because they've amended an equality act, to make it, well...less equal. I wonder how long that stands up for. We need a binding legislation, similar to the Church of England.
(May 20, 2013 at 7:00 pm)apophenia Wrote: I'm going to be charitable here and presume that English is not your first language. Nor your second. Or even your third. Matter of fact, I'm guessing your education in the English language came in some place Yes, yes my friend. Throw insults because you know it makes you feel better after losing the argument You could have spent that time reading the Collins English dictionary that I cited as well hock: And did you just start a sentence with "matter of fact"? Oh the irony. Didn't know people actually went to hillbilly schools.
Posts: 29570
Threads: 116
Joined: February 22, 2011
Reputation:
159
RE: Two excellent reasons to OPPOSE gay marriage in the UK
May 21, 2013 at 2:34 am
(This post was last modified: May 21, 2013 at 2:55 am by Angrboda.)
(May 21, 2013 at 1:59 am)ideologue08 Wrote: Yes, yes my friend. Throw insults because you know it makes you feel better after losing the argument You could have spent that time reading the Collins English dictionary that I cited as well hock: And did you just start a sentence with "matter of fact"? Oh the irony. Didn't know people actually went to hillbilly schools.
I'll take this slowly for your benefit, "friend." Collins is quite correct. Your interpretation of the idiom and your application of Collins is what is incorrect. As Collins quite rightly states, "If you get bogged down in something, it prevents you from making progress or getting something done." Substituting the relevant particulars, if Stonewall did not want the legislation to get "bogged down," then they did not want anything "[to prevent] [the legislators] from making progress or getting something done"; ergo, Stonewall did not want anything to prevent the legislators and their legislation from making progress. (Quoting: "it would be a 'terrible pity' if the legislation got 'bogged down'" or in other words, it would be a pity if something prevented the legislation from making progress or being completed.)
Since I notice that you didn't challenge my contention that you are not a native speaker, I will ask you directly: are you in fact not a native speaker of the English language?
Posts: 935
Threads: 16
Joined: July 3, 2011
Reputation:
5
RE: Two excellent reasons to OPPOSE gay marriage in the UK
May 21, 2013 at 2:43 am
(This post was last modified: May 21, 2013 at 2:45 am by ideologue08.)
(May 21, 2013 at 2:34 am)apophenia Wrote: (May 21, 2013 at 1:59 am)ideologue08 Wrote: Yes, yes my friend. Throw insults because you know it makes you feel better after losing the argument You could have spent that time reading the Collins English dictionary that I cited as well hock: And did you just start a sentence with "matter of fact"? Oh the irony. Didn't know people actually went to hillbilly schools.
I'll take this slowly for your benefit, "friend." Collins is quite correct. Your interpretation of the idiom and your application of Collins is what is incorrect. As Collins quite rightly states, "If you get bogged down in something, it prevents you from making progress or getting something done." Substituting the relevant particulars, if Stonewall did not want the legislation to get "bogged down," then they did not want anything "[to prevent] [the legislators] from making progress or getting something done"; ergo, Stonewall did not want anything to prevent the legislators and their legislation from making progress. (Quoting: "it would be a 'terrible pity' if the legislation got 'bogged down'" or in other words, it would be a pity if something prevented the legislation from making progress or being completed.)
I'm also going to assume that since you didn't challenge my contention that you are not a native speaker that you are in fact not a native speaker.
No; what's quite clear is Stonewall didn't want politicians to get "bogged down" on civil partnerships for homosexuals, it views it as a nuisance, whereas it views its own special interests as God-given rights. Here; let me translate into something you might actually understand haha: 深陷意味着阻碍了技术进步。
|