Marriage Equality and Other MOGAI/Queer Rights

[brairtrainer]

I'm aware of those types as well, and if that helps them cope (with of course thearputic help) and they are honest with their partners then it should be all good. Though I do know sevreal who would take offence to some people claiming all were like that.

[Tinks.Mess]

My opinion is thus....

 

If you don't believe in gay marriage then don't marry someone of your own sex.

If you don't want to have to marry someone of your own sex then don't tell me that I can't.

 

I believe that what was spoken about going on in the UK with the church haveing the right to decide if it will or will not preform marriage rights is a perfect solution. However if you want me to acknowledge that your marriage by a judge is just as legal and binding as mine is by a religeous figure then don't question my rights either.

 

I realize that this is written as if I am gay /lesbian /purple with pink polka-dots however I am not and I am not trying to act as if I am. I am a happily married once divorced hetrosexual woman who cannot stand when people think that they are better than another based solely on their beliefs.

[Dimar]

If you don't believe in gay marriage then don't marry someone of your own sex.

If you don't want to have to marry someone of your own sex then don't tell me that I can't.

THIS all the way.

 

I'm not going to start going on about my in-depth opinions here, because I'll rant.

 

But I hate discrimination, of anyone. But especially gays- I'm close friends with many people of alternate sexualities. I'm the first person in my family for at least 3 generations to accept them. All my other relatives insist that they're going to hell.

 

My bf is bisexual, and some people are really rude and mean to him for his gay side. It makes me angry that some people will treat others like like.

[Vhale]

I had to share this because it nearly made me fall out of my chair

Scroll down to the flashy gif

http://queerphc.wordpress.com/2013/01/23/a...hod-and-timing/

[Baynton]

Definitely for gay marriage. I know a few gay people, they're all wonderful. If a couple is happy, let them be. Plus, as for gay rights, every sexuality should be treated equally. A person's sexuality does not effect anybody, people are just attracted to different genders than others. There is no reason to be harsh towards anyone different than yourself, and I get quite irritated towards discriminative people... :/

[demonicvampiregirl]

My opinion is thus....

 

If you don't believe in gay marriage then don't marry someone of your own sex.

If you don't want to have to marry someone of your own sex then don't tell me that I can't.

 

I believe that what was spoken about going on in the UK with the church haveing the right to decide if it will or will not preform marriage rights is a perfect solution. However if you want me to acknowledge that your marriage by a judge is just as legal and binding as mine is by a religeous figure then don't question my rights either.

 

I realize that this is written as if I am gay /lesbian /purple with pink polka-dots however I am not and I am not trying to act as if I am. I am a happily married once divorced hetrosexual woman who cannot stand when people think that they are better than another based solely on their beliefs.

I can't agree with this enough.

 

What gives us the right to say that they can't ever get married just because some religion says it's a "sin"?

[cfmtfm]

As usual, I am late to a discussion party...

 

My opinion is that it doesn't matter about your sexuality - everyone should be treated equally. I see absolutely no reason why gay marriage is not reasonable (apart from religious and possibly personal reasons).

 

In the UK, I'm happy to say that MPs have voted for gay marriage - by 400 votes to 175! :3

[Zaxian]

In the UK, I'm happy to say that MPs have voted for gay marriage - by 400 votes to 175! :3

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21346220 Woo! Progress!

 

Unfortunately, it's still got to go through the House of Lords. And I suspect it's going to be markedly less popular there

[Fuzzbucket]

YES - I came to post that it had passed. Though in fact many of those in the Lords are more civilised and open-minded than people think - they certainly behave better than those in the Commons. Then again - the gay marriage debate was actually amazingly civilised. I was surprised (I watched some of it...)

 

I still hold out much hope !

[cfmtfm]

There's always hope, I guess. Looking at the current vote numbers, however, it does still seem possible for the Lords to approve as well.

 

*lurks around in thread, stalking the House of Lords*

[TikindiDragon]

There's always hope, I guess. Looking at the current vote numbers, however, it does still seem possible for the Lords to approve as well.

 

*lurks around in thread, stalking the House of Lords*

With that kind of majority support in the Commons I would imagine it'll be forced through if the Lords reject it too many times.

[brairtrainer]

With that kind of majority support in the Commons I would imagine it'll be forced through if the Lords reject it too many times.

Just a quick question, I've just finished up a unit on England in my comparitive polotics class and the prof didn't explain the house of lords very well and said they were mostly ceremonial. Can they actually block legeslation?

[Zaxian]

Just a quick question, I've just finished up a unit on England in my comparitive polotics class and the prof didn't explain the house of lords very well and said they were mostly ceremonial. Can they actually block legeslation?

Bills (to become Acts of Parliament) must first be read (and passed) three times in one of either of the Houses of Parliament. Thereafter:

The bill is sent to the other House (to the Lords, if it originated in the Commons; to the Commons, if it is a Lords bill), which may amend it. The Commons may reject a bill from the Lords outright; the Lords may amend a bill from the Commons but, if they reject it, the Commons may force it through without the Lords' consent in the following Session of Parliament.

The Parliament Acts: Under the Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 [...] if the Lords reject a bill originated in the House of Commons, then the Commons may pass that bill again in the next session. The bill is then submitted for Royal Assent even though the Lords did not pass it.

The wikipedia article is pretty comprehensive if you want any more detail!

 

So basically, they can't block it forever but they could delay it for up to a year.

Edited February 6, 2013 by Zaxian

[brairtrainer]

Thank you Zaxian

 

and thinks for the more indepth version tikinidragon

Edited February 6, 2013 by brairtrainer

[TikindiDragon]

Just a quick question, I've just finished up a unit on England in my comparitive polotics class and the prof didn't explain the house of lords very well and said they were mostly ceremonial. Can they actually block legeslation?

Yes, they can. In order to be passed into law a Bill has to be passed by both the Lords and the Commons (within limitations - which I'll go into in a bit). Both Houses can propose Bills (meaning the Lords can suggest legislation), which must then be presented for debate in the other House. The Commons can reject Bills form the Lords outright, whereas the Lords (if rejecting) must send the Bill back to the Commons with proposed amendments (where it would then be debated again, and sent back to the Lords). The Lords cannot propse Bills that deal soley with taxation, nor can they delay such a Bill for more than a month - should they debate for longer than that the Bill would be passed to the Queen for Royal Assent regardless.

 

Their power is somewhat limited by the Parliment Acts - which as well as restricting them from Bills that apply soley to taxation means that if the Commons approves a Bill 3 times, only for the Lords to reject it, it can be passed for Royal Assent anyway assuming certain conditions are met. In realtity the Parliement Acts have only been invoked 7 times to force through legislation (3 times using the 1911 Act, and 4 times using the amended 1949 Act). The Lords also cannot use their veto on a Bill to extend the term of Parliment, nor can they force the resignation of a Prime Minister. By convention they also do not oppose Bills that legislate on something that was in the governing party's Manifesto.

 

Members of the House of Lords can, and do, serve as Members of the Cabinet - although there hasn't been a Prime Minister from the Lords since 1902. There are currently two members of the House of Lords sitting in Cabinet.

 

So, uh, the House of Lords in *not* mostly ceremonial, although I can understand how it could be seen that way. The Lords provide the same sort of checks and balances against the Commons that your Senate provides against Congress.

 

Edit: aaaand the Ninjaing shows why I shouldn't go and eat dinner when I'm in the middle of typing up a post.

Edited February 6, 2013 by TikindiDragon

[Alpha Gryph]

Then again - the gay marriage debate was actually amazingly civilised. I was surprised (I watched some of it...)

 

I still hold out much hope !

A civilized debate on gay marriage? I've never even heard of such a thing.

 

Those are reasons to hold out hope. Then maybe the UK could become another role model for the US, lol.

 

Well, that is, as long as your family values aren't destroyed and your crops don't start burning once it's legalized.

 

[vexxum]

Here's my opinion on this whole matter.

 

I don't care who you are, where you live, and what status you hold, gay marriage is wrong. On another note, abortion is too. But that's beside the point. Gay marriage is a horrible practice, something that has boggled my mind as to why people even argue for it. If a bill passes, and becomes law, enabling gay marriage, then I shall continue to stand up against it and everything it entails. Marriage should be the way it was supposed to be, with a man and a woman, and not defiled by attractions to people of the same gender.

[brairtrainer]

Here's my opinion on this whole matter.

 

I don't care who you are, where you live, and what status you hold, gay marriage is wrong. On another note, abortion is too. But that's beside the point. Gay marriage is a horrible practice, something that has boggled my mind as to why people even argue for it. If a bill passes, and becomes law, enabling gay marriage, then I shall continue to stand up against it and everything it entails. Marriage should be the way it was supposed to be, with a man and a woman, and not defiled by attractions to people of the same gender.

So its fine for me to go out and marry my boyfriend, but its not okay for one of my other friends to marry a woman if she so chooses (friend is bi)? Can you explain why? I've been trying to figure out how exactly that works. Why is it horrible?

[MaggieXawesomeness]

Here's my opinion on this whole matter.

 

I don't care who you are, where you live, and what status you hold, gay marriage is wrong. On another note, abortion is too. But that's beside the point. Gay marriage is a horrible practice, something that has boggled my mind as to why people even argue for it. If a bill passes, and becomes law, enabling gay marriage, then I shall continue to stand up against it and everything it entails. Marriage should be the way it was supposed to be, with a man and a woman, and not defiled by attractions to people of the same gender.

The thing is though, that's still your opinion. Why should an opinion take away people's rights?

[WereJace]

Here's my opinion on this whole matter.

 

I don't care who you are, where you live, and what status you hold, gay marriage is wrong. On another note, abortion is too. But that's beside the point. Gay marriage is a horrible practice, something that has boggled my mind as to why people even argue for it. If a bill passes, and becomes law, enabling gay marriage, then I shall continue to stand up against it and everything it entails. Marriage should be the way it was supposed to be, with a man and a woman, and not defiled by attractions to people of the same gender.

That's fantastic, I am going to convince my girlfriend to integrate 'defiling opposite-sex marriage' somewhere on our wedding invitations.

[vexxum]

@briartrainer: I guess I can't argue this without bringing in Religion. Yup, I'm a Christian. =.= The Bible clearly defines marriage between a man and a woman as the right thing, and forbides sexual immorality (a.k.a. gay marriage or sex outside of marriage). So yea. I've kinda made things a bit awkward here, and blown them up a bit. I would not like to get on a debate on the whole "why do you believe in the Bible" sort of thing, please.

 

@Maggie: My opinion will not take away their rights. Everyone has freedom of speech, and are entitled to their own opinions. To share an opinion is sharing what you think, and not what will really happen. This whole thread is to talk about this subject, and not to make our opinions law.

 

@WereJace: Thank you...I think.

Edited February 8, 2013 by vexxum

[Snowytoshi]

 

I don't care who you are, where you live, and what status you hold, gay marriage is wrong.

 

Why?

 

On another note, abortion is too. But that's beside the point.

It is besides the point, so why even mention it?

 

Gay marriage is a horrible practice, something that has boggled my mind as to why people even argue for it.

Maybe because they want to have the same rights as anyone else? And of course it boggles my mind why people would even argue against it, since it's a constitutional right.

 

If a bill passes, and becomes law, enabling gay marriage, then I shall continue to stand up against it and everything it entails.

Hmm, so your values should dictate other's life choices that effect you in no way, shape, or form?

 

Marriage should be the way it was supposed to be, with a man and a woman, and not defiled by attractions to people of the same gender.

I fail to see how marriage is being 'defiled' by giving everyone the right to marry whom they choose. And who said that it was supposed to be a certain way?

Edited February 8, 2013 by Snowytoshi

[sparkle10184]

My opinion will not take away their rights. Everyone has freedom of speech, and are entitled to their own opinions. To share an opinion is sharing what you think, and not what will really happen. This whole thread is to talk about this subject, and not to make our opinions law.

 

But you did say before that if the law passed allowing gay marriage you would stand up and protest.

 

You say everyone has freedom of speech, so why not freedom of marriage and life choices?

[WereJace]

I am also a lady, so I'll give you a second to reconsider that thanks.

 

But we won't be doing any god-bothering when we do get hitched. Your jesus will be safely ensconced in another building, so at least he won't be defiled, though the backdraft from the hellfire might blow out the doors on the church behind the movie theater.

[vexxum]

But you did say before that if the law passed allowing gay marriage you would stand up and protest.

 

You say everyone has freedom of speech, so why not freedom of marriage and life choices?

I would stand up and protest. I would protest because it's wrong, even if I was vastly outnumbered. That's what happens at protests, and the people still do it.

 

Everyone does has freedom of marriage and life choices. And it's up to them how they will make those choices. If they choose to get married to someone of the same sex, then they can do so. But that doesn't mean it's right.