Gay Marriage
- Thread starter 1X83Z
- 2,302 comments
- 83,277 views
hogger129
(Banned)
- 691
- United States
So it's okay for another member of the site to harass me? I reported it as harassment, as I should...
What was sent to me in a message from Villain was harassment. There is a whole world of difference between sharing your opinion and harassing people because they don't agree with your views.
I guess there is a double-standard for gay people. It's not okay to express your disagreement with their lifestyle, but they may openly harass others.
- 4,687
- Golden State
- xViLLaiNx12
Come on man, stay on topic.
Oh, and for anyone who wants to know, this is "harassment" in his eyes:
Sorry your sensitive eyes had to see that offensive material twice, Hogger.
Oh, and for anyone who wants to know, this is "harassment" in his eyes:
Abomination!
Sorry your sensitive eyes had to see that offensive material twice, Hogger.
hogger129
(Banned)
- 691
- United States
Come on man, stay on topic.
Oh, and for anyone who wants to know, this is "harassment" in his eyes:
Sorry your sensitive eyes had to see that offensive material twice, Hogger.
Well the point is that you could have kept it to yourself and just disagreed with my apparently "bigoted" views.
But nope, you sent me a PM and shoved it in my face. That is harassment.
- 1,274
- Denver,Miami,Vegas
- terryparker15
What people do to make themselves happy is their on business. I have my own issues and life to deal with and worry about. I have several friends that are same sex couples and they are just regular people that want the same things put of life that most other people want. I think if you don't understand something you should ask questions before you pass judgment.
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,471
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
It was not a PM it was a public Visitor Message and while it may qualify as ill-judged humour its certainly not harassment.
Its also the staff's job to decide what is and is not harassment, your report was sent to the entire staff (who fall on both sides of this argument), none of whom it would appear have seen it as harassment.
Its also perfectly fine to express your "your disagreement with their lifestyle", but as this is a discussion forum then expect a reply, some will be good and some will not (and this would fall into that group - but its certainly not harassment - I can show you plenty of harassment and death threats I get simply for belonging to an Atheist group).
Those you disagree with you can ignore (and that will stop you seeing posts from that member) or if they are VMs you can delete them. What you can't stop is people replying to you, they are as entitled to disagree with your opinion as you are to make it.
What I am most annoyed at with Villain in regard to this incident is that its served as a handy distraction and allowed you to avoid answering some rather direct questions that have been raised.
I'd be interested in drawing a line under this picture incident and getting some answers to those.
- 24,553
- Frankfort, KY
- GTP_FoolKiller
- FoolKiller1979
Everyone can all go to the same school, but we need separate water fountains.
Everyone can ride the same bus but they have to sit in the back.
Respect equal rights, yes. Respect their marriage on a personal level no.
It's like I think the KKK is a horrible organization that I wish would begin practicing self-immolation as a form of protest. I do not respect them or their views. I do respect that they have the same right to free speech as I do.
I've said it in this thread before, and I will say it again.
The government should not be involved in marriage at all.
But so long as government must be involved it must give 100% equal treatment.
And this has to do with marriage, how?
dylansan
Premium
- 4,987
- Massachusetts
- GTP_dylansan
- MINICOOPER120
Why not just let the word marriage be for everyone, and if you want to preserve the specialness of you particular definition of marriage, call it "Christian Marriage" or something. The only difference would be that a Christan Marriage must be done by the church, or whatever standard you want to apply, but otherwise the rights granted by the government are the same for everyone, instead of favoring Christian Marriage" over non-religious marriage.
Personally this is pretty meaningless anyway, as what matters it what particular rights people have. As long as gays get the same benefits from the government, I don't care what they call it.
Personally this is pretty meaningless anyway, as what matters it what particular rights people have. As long as gays get the same benefits from the government, I don't care what they call it.
- 24,553
- Frankfort, KY
- GTP_FoolKiller
- FoolKiller1979
And that's kind of the issue isn't it? By having two legal definitions there is always an open door to grant rights to or remove rights from one group and not the other. Keeping things equal means every related law must quote and reference the changes in both definitions.
Of course, part of me believes the more fundamental religious groups want different definitions for this reason, because as we have already seen in this thread, there are further questions regarding adoption and raising children.
- 31,585
- Buckwheat City
- Dennisch
Australian lawmakers overwhelmingly rejected a bill Wednesday that would have legalized gay marriage, and similar legislation looked unlikely to pass despite public support for same-sex marriage.
The House of Representatives voted 98-42 against the legislation, the first of four bills introduced to Parliament that aim to lift the country's ban on same-sex marriage. A separate bill was also being debated in the Senate on Wednesday.
Polls show that most Australians support gay marriage, but the Liberal Party-led conservative opposition coalition and many in the ruling centre-left Labor Party are against it.
"I think at some future time our Parliament will catch up with community opinion, just as it has on other issues," senior government minister Anthony Albanese told reporters after the vote. "When marriage equality occurs, people will wonder what the fuss was about."
Australian law defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. The Labor Party lifted its long-standing opposition to gay marriage last year, but Prime Minister Julia Gillard remains opposed to it.
Gillard allowed Labor members to make a rare "conscience vote" on the bill Wednesday, which lets lawmakers vote by their personal beliefs without risking expulsion if they defy the party line. Opposition leader Tony Abbott did not give Liberal members that option.
Gillard's government holds a razor-thin majority in Parliament and several Labor members personally oppose gay marriage. The chance of any pro-gay marriage bill passing is, therefore, remote.
Finance Minister Penny Wong, who is gay, acknowledged in recent days that the legislation was unlikely to pass, but still argued passionately for its approval during the debate.
"If you subscribe to the principal of equality, as I'm sure most in the chamber would, then substitute 'same sex' for 'race' in this debate and see if it changes your view," Wong, who has a Chinese-Malaysian father and Australian mother of European descent, told lawmakers. "Just imagine if we told Australians today that they could not marry the person they love because of the colour of their skin."
The debate prompted one Liberal senator to step down as Abbott's parliamentary secretary after the senator made comments suggesting that permitting gay marriage could lead to calls for the legalization of bestiality and polygamy.
Abbott called Cory Bernardi's comments "ill-disciplined."
"They're views that I don't share," Abbott told reporters after Bernardi's resignation. "They're views that I think many people will find repugnant."
Gillard cancelled a scheduled address to a Christian lobby group this month over what she called "heartless" comments made by the group's managing director that suggested being gay was a bigger health hazard than smoking.
The Senate is expected to vote on its bill later this week.
CBC.ca
And..
Tony Abbott's parliamentary secretary, South Australian Senator Cory Bernardi, has been forced to resign after making comments in the Senate that if same sex marriage was allowed it could lead to people wanting to marry animals.l
ABC.net
The House of Representatives voted 98-42 against the legislation, the first of four bills introduced to Parliament that aim to lift the country's ban on same-sex marriage. A separate bill was also being debated in the Senate on Wednesday.
Polls show that most Australians support gay marriage, but the Liberal Party-led conservative opposition coalition and many in the ruling centre-left Labor Party are against it.
"I think at some future time our Parliament will catch up with community opinion, just as it has on other issues," senior government minister Anthony Albanese told reporters after the vote. "When marriage equality occurs, people will wonder what the fuss was about."
Australian law defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. The Labor Party lifted its long-standing opposition to gay marriage last year, but Prime Minister Julia Gillard remains opposed to it.
Gillard allowed Labor members to make a rare "conscience vote" on the bill Wednesday, which lets lawmakers vote by their personal beliefs without risking expulsion if they defy the party line. Opposition leader Tony Abbott did not give Liberal members that option.
Gillard's government holds a razor-thin majority in Parliament and several Labor members personally oppose gay marriage. The chance of any pro-gay marriage bill passing is, therefore, remote.
Finance Minister Penny Wong, who is gay, acknowledged in recent days that the legislation was unlikely to pass, but still argued passionately for its approval during the debate.
"If you subscribe to the principal of equality, as I'm sure most in the chamber would, then substitute 'same sex' for 'race' in this debate and see if it changes your view," Wong, who has a Chinese-Malaysian father and Australian mother of European descent, told lawmakers. "Just imagine if we told Australians today that they could not marry the person they love because of the colour of their skin."
The debate prompted one Liberal senator to step down as Abbott's parliamentary secretary after the senator made comments suggesting that permitting gay marriage could lead to calls for the legalization of bestiality and polygamy.
Abbott called Cory Bernardi's comments "ill-disciplined."
"They're views that I don't share," Abbott told reporters after Bernardi's resignation. "They're views that I think many people will find repugnant."
Gillard cancelled a scheduled address to a Christian lobby group this month over what she called "heartless" comments made by the group's managing director that suggested being gay was a bigger health hazard than smoking.
The Senate is expected to vote on its bill later this week.
CBC.ca
And..
Tony Abbott's parliamentary secretary, South Australian Senator Cory Bernardi, has been forced to resign after making comments in the Senate that if same sex marriage was allowed it could lead to people wanting to marry animals.l
ABC.net
fitftw
(Banned)
- 1,642
- Rave2Grave
Here's the video: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2013/jan/14/gay-marriage-protest-paris-video
It sickens me how people could be so cruel and selfish.
President François Hollande wants the changes to be in place by June and says the protest will not deter him from implementing the plans.
So at least it's just a butt-hurt protest and they're going to have to deal with gay marriage being legal in Paris around June.
It sickens me how people could be so cruel and selfish.
President François Hollande wants the changes to be in place by June and says the protest will not deter him from implementing the plans.
So at least it's just a butt-hurt protest and they're going to have to deal with gay marriage being legal in Paris around June.
Scaff
Moderator
- 29,471
- He/Him
- ScaffUK
65.8 million people live in France, so its less than 0.5% of the population.
Back in '68 the student protests managed to get 800,000 people on the streets (49.8 million population at the time), which was 1.6% of the population.
It's big don't get me wrong, but if a load of students can manage to rally over three times the number, then its not quite as big as it first seems.
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
Wow, that's a big protest. Not many causes draw that many people in any country. If 300k show up you can bet there are millions more behind them that feel the same way...and if they are all that passionate about it, this could get ugly
And don't kid yourself about this being a done deal. If Mr. Socialist President thinks it might cost him the next election by doing this, he'll gladly flush his beliefs and the votes of a million or two gay people down the drain to keep his paycheque and political power intact.
Similar threads
