Gay Marriage - The Vote

[Biscuit]

You obviously feel strongly about this subject to feel the need to show who voted NO. Its simply I voted no. Its a football forum were on not Prime ministers question time so don't feel I need to explain why.

Well that's up to you and I understand it.

FYI by clicking on the numbers in the poll you will see who voted 'no'. I didn't intend to do this to 'name' anybody individually but rather engage a group of people in debate.

My intention was to find a single argument from the 'no' camp that stacked up. I'll carry on looking.

 

[Biscuit]

I love it when you get indignant and pretend you're not with a smiley.

I think we're all aware of what a discussion board is and how to join in with the debate if we choose. It came across to me as a bit Charlie Big Potatoes listing everyone who you disagreed with and asking them to justify themselves (made worse by the fact that you just clearly steamed in without reading the thread as a lot of the people who you had listed had already stated their positions).

No, I am being indignant. Smiley or not!

 

[Southern Toon]

[MENTION=22214]banjo[/MENTION],
[MENTION=13368]BLOCK F[/MENTION],
[MENTION=13089]Buck[/MENTION],
[MENTION=11956]bushy[/MENTION],
[MENTION=11804]Deanbha[/MENTION],
[MENTION=18559]dingodan[/MENTION],
[MENTION=12553]Don Quixote[/MENTION],
[MENTION=365]Dougal[/MENTION],
[MENTION=20812]dragonred[/MENTION],
[MENTION=1416]Ernest[/MENTION],
[MENTION=15183]FREDBINNEY[/MENTION],
[MENTION=16933]fruitnveg[/MENTION],
[MENTION=15034]Geriatric Seagull[/MENTION],
[MENTION=13472]jamesy's[/MENTION],
[MENTION=25389]Jay Cartwright[/MENTION],
[MENTION=13027]jordanseagull[/MENTION],
[MENTION=11697]kevtherev[/MENTION],
[MENTION=18523]Larry[/MENTION],
[MENTION=12225]MacKenzie[/MENTION],
[MENTION=3699]nevergoagain[/MENTION],
[MENTION=12740]pork pie[/MENTION],
[MENTION=6109]rusty redeyes[/MENTION],
[MENTION=12195]skipper734[/MENTION],
[MENTION=20390]Southern Scouse[/MENTION],
[MENTION=17050]Southern Toon[/MENTION],
[MENTION=20792]spongy[/MENTION],
[MENTION=22841]stripeyshark[/MENTION],
[MENTION=1877]supaseagull[/MENTION],
[MENTION=420]sydney[/MENTION],
[MENTION=12643]The Birdman[/MENTION],
[MENTION=12296]The Daddy[/MENTION],
[MENTION=15768]The Original[/MENTION],
[MENTION=14080]The Wizard[/MENTION],
[MENTION=10552]topbanana36[/MENTION]

Voted no. I'd be genuinely interested to know why. Why 'no' to gay marriage? Do gay people deserve to not be allowed into Churches for ceremonies? Are their relationships more likely to fail? Is it a good think to distinguish between marriage and civil partnerships? Really I can't fathom it? Perhaps it's just intolerance of people you see as different? I have no idea! If someone, anyone, can present a decent argument, I'd love to see it.

I voted no because i believe what is a important national issue should not be decided by just 650 Mp's, this country belongs to each & everyone of us not just the wankers in Westminster. As with a lot of other issues in this country ( European union, Immigration ) put it to a referendum & i would accept the outcome. What i cannot stand is living in a parliamentary dictatorship.

 

[BLOCK F]

That's interesting.

I'd say the problem is that people would not view a civil partnership on an equal footing to marriage. For example, if homosexuals aren't allowed to get married, would that not create a form of social snobbery (or as Aker put it a 'class system') that'd boil it down to 'this is something we can have, and you can't'.

A man and a woman cannot have a Civil Partnership,only those of the same sex!
Got to go out soon so unable to carry on discussion!

 

[JamesAndTheGiantHead]

f***ing HELL bushy. Wtf.

Hahaha, this is brilliant.

 

[Hamilton]

I voted no because i believe what is a important national issue should not be decided by just 650 Mp's, this country belongs to each & everyone of us not just the wankers in Westminster. As with a lot of other issues in this country ( European union, Immigration ) put it to a referendum & i would accept the outcome. What i cannot stand is living in a parliamentary dictatorship.

So let me get this right. You want to vote on every matter of national importance yes? Why don't you become an MP then?

 

[Biscuit]

A man and a woman cannot have a Civil Partnership,only those of the same sex!
Got to go out soon so unable to carry on discussion!

Yeah I know that! Although there's a couple that are (perhaps were?) trying as they didn't like the religious connotations that went along with marriage!

 

[Mackenzie]

I voted no [MENTION=307]Biscuit[/MENTION]. To me marriage is something than a man and a woman do. I guess must be really intolerant, but when I see two blokes kissing I don't think 'ohhh how sweet' but 'yeuch, that is horrible'. If that is offensive to any gays or straights reading this then I'm truly sorry, but its the way I am I'm afraid. Sorry lads.

 

[skipper734]

Well that's up to you and I understand it.

FYI by clicking on the numbers in the poll you will see who voted 'no'. I didn't intend to do this to 'name' anybody individually but rather engage a group of people in debate.

My intention was to find a single argument from the 'no' camp that stacked up. I'll carry on looking.

Let's hear your opinion of mine then. Post 315 in case you haven't read it!

 

[Hamilton]

"I love him/her and I'd like to get married."

"Cool. Do you promise not to harm other people and to keep the peace?"

"I do."

"Go ahead then, and by the way, have a fun life."

"Will do. Thanks. See you around."

 

[stripeyshark]

It allows gay people to be married. Chruches, Mosques, Synagogues or any other religious place of worship ARENT forced to marry gay people - and chances are they wont want to get married with a religion anyway so it doesnt matter. Weddings would happen in private venues, like registry offices or the Amex, for example.

Yeah I've got no problem with that. But I feel it'll go the way of alienating religious folk who don't want to marry gay couples.

 

[Horton's halftime iceberg]

"I love him/her and I'd like to get married."

"Cool. Do you promise not to harm other people and to keep the peace?"

"I do."

"Go ahead then, and by the way, have a fun life."

"Will do. Thanks. See you around."

The happy couple

 

[Horton's halftime iceberg]

Yeah I've got no problem with that. But I feel it'll go the way of alienating religious folk who don't want to marry gay couples.

Could you not argue they are already alienated

 

[HawkTheSeagull]

Yeah I've got no problem with that. But I feel it'll go the way of alienating religious folk who don't want to marry gay couples.

Its their choice if they dont want to but again i highly doubt the gay couple will want a religion to marry them.

 

[stripeyshark]

Its their choice if they dont want to but again i highly doubt the gay couple will want a religion to marry them.

I personally think any person should have a personal choice whether they want to marry two people, regardless of sexual orientation.

 

[Southern Toon]

So let me get this right. You want to vote on every matter of national importance yes? Why don't you become an MP then?

I never said i wanted a vote on every issue & as for becoming an MP, I would not want to force my views on anyone else as apposed to some minority groups.

 

[Hamilton]

The happy couple

Where'd you get a picture of my wife from!?

 

[Biscuit]

Ok. I'm gonna poke the Bear here.
Strange form of words Mr Biscuit. Bozza libeled all the No voters, by labeling us all bigots, nice.
I voted No because I cannot understand how Gay Marriage can be carried out under the same Law under which my marriage took place and then divorced.
Gay marriage cannot be consummated as required by British Law. To get divorced........ I've no idea how to describe adultery in a Gay marriage to conform to British Law.
So to enable there to be equality you have to completely rewrite the form of words that describes marriage, thus rendering all previous heterosexual marriages different from what would be current marriage, or have two different forms of marriage and where is the equality in that?

Let's hear your opinion of mine then. Post 315 in case you haven't read it!

I missed it, sorry!

Well I don't claim to be a lawyer but I actually think it's quite simple - it's not unheard of to have amendments made to laws. Any such amendment wouldn't render previous marriages null and void, it'd just redefine the boundaries in which the law exists. Like the redefining of the legal age of consent, it can be done, and wouldn't have a retrograde effect on what's gone before. I stand to be corrected by legal eagles!

 

[The Large One]

I voted no because i believe what is a important national issue should not be decided by just 650 Mp's, this country belongs to each & everyone of us not just the wankers in Westminster. As with a lot of other issues in this country ( European union, Immigration ) put it to a referendum & i would accept the outcome. What i cannot stand is living in a parliamentary dictatorship.

You weren't reading the question then.

 

[Horton's halftime iceberg]

I voted no because i believe what is a important national issue should not be decided by just 650 Mp's, this country belongs to each & everyone of us not just the wankers in Westminster. As with a lot of other issues in this country ( European union, Immigration ) put it to a referendum & i would accept the outcome. What i cannot stand is living in a parliamentary dictatorship.

Peter Bone MP who is against same sex marriage is arguing in the house this should be put to the public in the next national referendum in 2017, would be amazed if finances allow every law passed in parliament to be put to a public vote.