Didn't ask for grief guys, or a debate, I just wanted to promote a campaign which is close to my heart.

Oh the response to this topic is such a surprise and not to be expected on a RL forum



Knew full well what you were doing putting it on here.

Over 500,000 have already signed the petition. I thought there would be many among us who would pledge their support to traditional marriage.

You wanted to promote your cause on a public forum but don't want to debate it's merits. Well, as you chose a public forum here's my twopenneth whether you want it or not.

I was raised in an environment that gets a lot of blame for the ills of society, particularly from the previous Tory government and the present coalition government.

I was raised by a single mother, on benefits and we lived on a council estate. We lived with my grandmother and there wasn't a father or a marriage in sight. However, I was raised with greater displine and values than many or most of my peers who were raised within marriage and have less issues than those raised within marriage that led to divorce. I have become a full pledged tax paying member of society with no criminal record and have worked since leaving school as well as furthering my educatiopn on a part time basis.

I have a child out of wedlock that I have helped raise with my ex and I think he's turning out OK as he heads off to university. I am also now married and my wife and I are raising a daughter.

The same "morals", values and guidance have been prevelant in all of the above relationships within and without marriage so I think you and your campaign are completely missing the point. Marriage or no marriage is not the issue and I am sure the same values displayed by my mother, grandmother, ex, wife and hopefully me can be passed on to children by parents whether they be married, un-married, same sex or different creeds.

Your cause is no cause at all.

It's a non argument. Looking at it with my Mr Spock head on I see logic flaws on every side.

1. Why do same sex couples need to have their legally recognised partnership called a "marriage"? It's just a word, if they are together, they love each other, and they already have equivalent legal status it seems an irrelevence. Why don't they just call themselves married and f*** everyone who complains?

And.......

2. Why do those that protest actually protest? Marriage is just a word. I'm married and I don't spend my maried life worrying over who else is declared married. Frankly, if you could marry pets and call them "married" I wouldn't give a monkey's. What negative effect does it have on married people? None that I can see.

Unfortunately there's always going to be a minority of bigoted homophobes. You know from your previous exploits on similar subjects on the board that your views are limited to pretty much just you. Take it elsewhere.

You've certainly achieved a lot and have a lot to be proud of - please understand that I'm not trying to patronise you.

What I am trying to do is promote the ideal, to promote the sanctity of biblical marriage. This doesn't automatically mean that I'm lamenting all alternative setups.

Is see too that your views have been met with the same reaction on the Sin Bin, so your posts have achieved something positive in that they have highlighted just how outdated this rubbish is, at least on here.

That is sad, but I do not apologise for the Word of God.

I thought we'd established that the bible gives rather different definitions of marriage to what you appear to be promoting as the ideal? Why are you going against God's word???

We have established no such thing.

What has been quoted are descriptions of various types of relationships throughout history, not a prescription of what marriage should be.

I suggest you read some Matthew 19, 1 Corinthians 7 and Ephesians 5.

Fair enough. I'll respect your view and your faith, even though I don't necessarily agree with your ideal.

You can't argue against blind faith where any reason or logic can be swept away with a simple "God's will" statement.

In the same way you can't turn the tide or prevent the sun from rising, trying to convince someone with blind, indoctrinated faith that they are wrong is woefully futile.

I will treat the OP with the same amount of attention I give those deluded bible-bashers who insist on shouting at me on Briggate and simply walk past uttering “f**king nutters”.

perhaps the OP studied at Liberty University, where they have dinosaur fossils that are only 'three thousand years old', creationism is part of the curriculum and students can be suspended for a whole range of offences including sharing a motel room with two members of the opposite sex and 'witchcraft'. The fact that a man who could be president of the USA has given a talk at this nuthouse beggars belief.

I am not a Mormon.

.....but you [iare[/i a bigot who believes in a super being because somebody else has told you he/it exists.

No one has told me He exists; I have come to this conclusion by myself.

You should also remind yourself of the definition of bigotry and see if applies to your own actions before accusing others.

god

help us......is that anywhere near the creationism museum I remember recently reading about ?
Thing is which story of creationism do they endorse ? There are some great variations to choose from around the world......!!!

oh ffs some of the replies to the OP are showing yourselves up and showing your own attitudes and lack of understanding.

If kirkstaller has those veiws then respect them and him for what he feels. i dont agree with them and feel he is wrong and i wouldnt dream to sign up but i will defend his right to hold them.

Do you think you would have that same concept of a god you have concluded exists if you were born in a different part of the world......say some remote Amazonian tribe that has not ever had contact with the world you know ?

I do [inot[/i have a complete intolerance of any creed, belief, or opinion that differs from my own.....IF their beliefs and opinions are based on logic and reason.

God judges us according to what we know. I'm sure my understanding of Christianity is better than if I had lived in the Amazon, but that does not absolve them of responsibility.

Would you still defend the rights of those who believe infidels/those who dare to believe in another religion/god should be rightfully decapitated with a blunt knife or be blown apart indiscriminately by bombs ?

Or is there a point where you would draw a line ?

Am I advocating harm against others?

Fully agreed, and whilst we are at it if the KKK and Stormfront hold views that black people are inferior to whites and should be denied the same basic rights as white people then we should respect those views and these organisations for what they beleive.

On a serious note no one on this or the sin bin thread have said he cannot hold those views but people have rightly criticized those views and demonstrated their opposition to those views. Freedom of speech allows you to express opinions it does not however allow you to express opinions without criticism.

If someone wants to express their homophobia in an open society then they are fully entitled to do so, however other people are allowed to criticize those views, which has been the case here.

no even those have point and is it despair they reached a point when they feel violence is the only way to be heard.

as i said i dont agree with them but they have a right to have the veiws