Petition: Campaign for Equal Marriage

[Eagle]

Are you serious? :?

They did, for a while, untill the Blackshirts started beating up the communists. Then the DM went off them all of a sudden...

 

[Badger]

I steer away from such papers because I disagree with some of the columnists (who I do consider to be bigots) and some of the practices they use (see news), but just like every paper has different columnists throughout, similarly every paper has different people reading it. I definately wouldn't go as far as to say I hate all Sun readers, or that all Sun readers (or even columnists!) are bigots, admittedly partly because I have friends who read the Sun who aren't, but also because that's tarring with the same brush all over again.


Edit: columnists not communists.

 

[Eagle]

Oh god, we're stuck in an infinite prejudice loop...

 

[SS4]

having looked at both petitions i signed the c4m version as opposed to the c4em version because that was the one that rang true with me.
this is not in any way an admission of bigotry or homophobia, i just can't be arsed hearing about anymore groups (minority or otherwise), continually demanding that one thing after another be changed just because thats what they want, or it's become the new righteous cause of the pc brigade.

It is bigoted though.

Although death and divorce may prevent it, the evidence shows that children do best with a married mother and a father.

[citation needed]

"People's careers could be harmed, couples seeking to adopt or foster could be excluded, and schools would inevitably have to teach the new definition to children. If marriage is redefined once, what is to stop it being redefined to allow polygamy?"

Scaremongering, there is nothing to suggest allowing gay marriage would cause any of these things. Last time I checked Canada was still a fully functioning country.


By signing the c4m petition you are stating that you feel that gays do not deserve the same rights as straights and that is bigoted


As for "hearing about anymore groups (minority or otherwise), continually demanding that one thing after another be changed just because thats what they want" allow me to quote Martin Niemöller

First they came for the communists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist.

Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew.

Then they came for me
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

 

[90019]

They did, for a while, untill the Blackshirts started beating up the communists. Then the DM went off them all of a sudden...

It was also in the 30s, so it's not exactly current affairs.

 

[Badger]

Although death and divorce may prevent it, the evidence shows that children do best with a married mother and a father.

Ugh, I hate this kind of throwaround quote. It's probably the only thing I dislike about Dawkins (NB: this quote isn't Dawkins, in case I've confused), he uses imaginary "hypothetical" quotes and then debunks them, but if he had to make them up then they obviously aren't out there and citable...

But this one is also bad because:

- What evidence
- "Better" implies a rival, which isn't stated (better than what?)
- There is evidence that divorce rates are in fact higher in hetero marriages (source: http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2008/08/07/less-than-1-of-civil-partnerships-ending-in-divorce/ ) and vaguelly they seem to suggest divorce is bad for the child (although that's a matter for elsewhere)

 

[Anon Mouse]

I steer away from such papers because I disagree with some of the columnists (who I do consider to be bigots) and some of the practices they use (see news), but just like every paper has different columnists throughout, similarly every paper has different people reading it. I definately wouldn't go as far as to say I hate all Sun readers, or that all Sun readers (or even columnists!) are bigots, admittedly partly because I have friends who read the Sun who aren't, but also because that's tarring with the same brush all over again.


Edit: columnists not communists.

I despise the right wing press and all it stands for. Personally I would not wipe my bum with The Sun and wish people would stop subsidising the Murdoch Empire. I never said I hate all Sun readers and I find it pretty insulting that somebody further back took it on themselves to have a personal attack on myself.

I hate The Sun for may reasons;

1) It has a very right wing stance on most issuies
2) Its reporting of the Heysel and Hillsborough disasters were appaling and an attack on ALL football fans
3) It tried to influence people to attack the Trade Union movement during the Dockers strike and the Miners strike.
4) It supports The Conservative Party
5) It almost brainwashes people with its puns, basic words and simplistic reporting towards the right of the political spectrum.
6) Its incredibly sexist and still continuies to have a page 3 girl
7) It seldomly has any real news in, its mostly gossip and celeb guff
8) Jeremy Clarkson writes a colum and I find that man unbearable
9) It is full of thinly disgusied racisim and bigotry
10) Its too nationalistic for my personal preference

It annoys me that most of the popular papers lean to the right and sadly this is reflected in the attituides of quite a few people. My views are different sometimes to others and politically I may lean a bit towards the extreme left but I certainly don't think I am right all the time and everyone else is wrong and I am a firm beliver in free speach and discussion.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

No it's not. You referred to this mythical PC brigade but didn't say who they are, what they want, or what's so wrong with what they want.

Thank you!

 

[Eagle]

4) It supports The Conservative Party

That's only been the case for the last three or four years though (The Sun switches allegiance every few years, and for the last 35 has been a perfect bellwether for the winner of the next general election.)

 

[Anon Mouse]

It was also in the 30s, so it's not exactly current affairs.

Just a couple of questions if I may;

So does the Holocaust not matter because that was in the 40's?

Do the war dead who fought for our liberty during WW2 no longer matter because the ceasefire was in 1945?

 

[Badger]

The editors and journalists working for it at the time will be long gone by now, so with this respect it is a completely different team (although may or may not have kept the same values).

 

[SS4]

I despise the right wing press and all it stands for. Personally I would not wipe my bum with The Sun and wish people would stop subsidising the Murdoch Empire. I never said I hate all Sun readers and I find it pretty insulting that somebody further back took it on themselves to have a personal attack on myself.

I hate The Sun for may reasons;

1) It has a very right wing stance on most issuies
2) Its reporting of the Heysel and Hillsborough disasters were appaling and an attack on ALL football fans
3) It tried to influence people to attack the Trade Union movement during the Dockers strike and the Miners strike.
4) It supports The Conservative Party
5) It almost brainwashes people with its puns, basic words and simplistic reporting towards the right of the political spectrum.
6) Its incredibly sexist and still continuies to have a page 3 girl
7) It seldomly has any real news in, its mostly gossip and celeb guff
8) Jeremy Clarkson writes a colum and I find that man unbearable
9) It is full of thinly disgusied racisim and bigotry
10) Its too nationalistic for my personal preference

It annoys me that most of the popular papers lean to the right and sadly this is reflected in the attituides of quite a few people. My views are different sometimes to others and politically I may lean a bit towards the extreme left but I certainly don't think I am right all the time and everyone else is wrong and I am a firm beliver in free speach and discussion.
Thank you!

Hear Hear!

That's only been the case for the last three or four years though (The Sun switches allegiance every few years, and for the last 35 has been a perfect bellwether for the winner of the next general election.)

Or a scary reminder of how the media can (unfairly?) influence elections?

But definitely beyond the scope of this thread

 

[Anon Mouse]

That's only been the case for the last three or four years though (The Sun switches allegiance every few years, and for the last 35 has been a perfect bellwether for the winner of the next general election.)

Thats true, it did become a Blairite paper for a few years before reverting to its usual right wing stance. I still dispised the paper during that time as it seemed to have just jumped on the bandwagon!

 

[Eagle]

Thats true, it did become a Blairite paper for a few years before reverting to its usual right wing stance. I still dispised the paper during that time as it seemed to have just jumped on the bandwagon!

For "a few years" read 1995 to 2006...

It wasn't jumping on a bandwagon, it was a full-blown wainwright!

 

[Anon Mouse]

For "a few years" read 1995 to 2006...

It wasn't jumping on a bandwagon, it was a full-blown wainwright!

Mind you, for supporting Labour I never thought The Sun was really that much into it, as it still read like a right wing rag. Mind you New Labour did start heading towards the right anyway!

 

[table38]

The Sun and Daily Mail must be eternally grateful for all the free publicity they get on this site

 

[bb21]

Although death and divorce may prevent it, the evidence shows that children do best with a married mother and a father.

I find this sort of "evidence" laughable and ridiculous. I don't really know where to start.

Off the top of my head, I can think of these straight away as I type:

• How do you measure do best?
• How many years have passed since gay couple were first allowed to adopt children? There simply wouldn't have been enough statistics to say one way or another.

 

[blanco]

I find this sort of "evidence" laughable and ridiculous. I don't really know where to start.

Off the top of my head, I can think of these straight away as I type:

• How do you measure do best?
• How many years have passed since gay couple were first allowed to adopt children? There simply wouldn't have been enough statistics to say one way or another.

growing up is hard enough for kids without sticking out like a sore thumb for being the kid with two dads or two mums.
no matter how wrong it is to say it, it's the truth and kids like that will be hounded mercilessly by other kids.

 

[Anon Mouse]

growing up is hard enough for kids without sticking out like a sore thumb for being the kid with two dads or two mums.
no matter how wrong it is to say it, it's the truth and kids like that will be hounded mercilessly by other kids.

So because education standards are not high enough for kids to learn about and accept diversity then its not acceptable for a loving and caring couple to bring a child up just because they happen to be the same sex?

What next, would you be against black or asian parents sending their kids to a school with predominatly white kids as the kid may stick out like a sore thumb? In that case when my Wife and I have kids we better educate them at home rather than allow the other kids to learn about diversity?

 

[Nym]

[youtube]_jOcgQdh1E0[/youtube]

One only needs to see the 1st Joke, and this is coming from someone who really isn't from a nuclear family...

 

[blanco]

So because education standards are not high enough for kids to learn about and accept diversity then its not acceptable for a loving and caring couple to bring a child up just because they happen to be the same sex?

What next, would you be against black or asian parents sending their kids to a school with predominatly white kids as the kid may stick out like a sore thumb? In that case when my Wife and I have kids we better educate them at home rather than allow the other kids to learn about diversity?

i'm not saying it's right, i'm just saying it's the society we live in.

go to any school in the land and you'll see kids picked on for a variety of reasons but i'll guarantee it's always because they are "different".

 

[Anon Mouse]

i'm not saying it's right, i'm just saying it's the society we live in.

go to any school in the land and you'll see kids picked on for a variety of reasons but i'll guarantee it's always because they are "different".

Then the schools should tackle bullying instead of just accepting it because 'thats just the way it is'. Its not a reason to not accept diversity, and exactly why would a child who has parents of the same sex be classed as different? I would bet my bottom dollar its because of their own parents predjudce's so maybe its the adults who need a lesson or two in diversity.

 

[90019]

Just a couple of questions if I may;

So does the Holocaust not matter because that was in the 40's?

Do the war dead who fought for our liberty during WW2 no longer matter because the ceasefire was in 1945?

At what point did I say anything didn't matter?

My point was that being bigoted against an organisation because of views held by it's members around 80 years ago is a bit stupid.

 

[blanco]

Then the schools should tackle bullying instead of just accepting it because 'thats just the way it is'. Its not a reason to not accept diversity, and exactly why would a child who has parents of the same sex be classed as different? I would bet my bottom dollar its because of their own parents predjudce's so maybe its the adults who need a lesson or two in diversity.

since when have schools ever made any serious attempts to eradicate bullying.

children with parents of the same sex are classed as different because 99% of the other kids will have a mother and father as opposed to 2 dads or 2 mums.

before you ask, i've seen it up close and personal when i was a child growing up.

 

[Anon Mouse]

At what point did I say anything didn't matter?

My point was that being bigoted against an organisation because of views held by it's members around 80 years ago is a bit stupid.

Its because many of them views are still contained in that newspaper and I am sure they have never explained or apologized for their stance in the 30's either. It seemed you were just dismissing their history as not being of importance.

Shall we agree to disagree, its quite sad, we seem to have the same opinion about equal marriage too
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

since when have schools ever made any serious attempts to eradicate bullying.

children with parents of the same sex are classed as different because 99% of the other kids will have a mother and father as opposed to 2 dads or 2 mums.

before you ask, i've seen it up close and personal when i was a child growing up.

Them something should be done about it instead of burying our heads in the sand. Maybe the Goverment (very unlikely with this lot) should bring out legislation forcing Schools to do something about it.

 

[SS4]

since when have schools ever made any serious attempts to eradicate bullying.

children with parents of the same sex are classed as different because 99% of the other kids will have a mother and father as opposed to 2 dads or 2 mums.

before you ask, i've seen it up close and personal when i was a child growing up.

Children will pick on other children for anything. It's certainly no reason to deny adoption by gay people. I've seen children being bullied for being intelligent. Should we tell them to stop succeeding?

What's your opinion on these celebrity heterosexual marriages that are minutes long? If gay marriage is so bad why have those countries which have allowed it still functioning?

 

[90019]

Its because many of them views are still contained in that newspaper

You read it on a regular basis then?

I am sure they have never explained or apologized for their stance in the 30's either.

You're sure, but you don't actually know?

It seemed you were just dismissing their history as not being of importance.

I'm not dismissing history, but your reasons for being bigoted towards the Daily Mail.

Anyway, you never answered my question;

So you're allowed to be bigoted towards something because you feel you can justify it?

 

[bb21]

growing up is hard enough for kids without sticking out like a sore thumb for being the kid with two dads or two mums.
no matter how wrong it is to say it, it's the truth and kids like that will be hounded mercilessly by other kids.

I didn't say that is not true, however it bears no relation to CfEM's claim that children brought up by couples in a heterosexual union do best.

Children will pick on other children for anything.

Precisely. It does not mean that the bullies hold an informed view of anything. It is the school's job to tackle the issue of bullying through education although sadly not many do a good job due to various constraints.

Them something should be done about it instead of burying our heads in the sand. Maybe the Goverment (very unlikely with this lot) should bring out legislation forcing Schools to do something about it.

Whether we like it or not, the legacy of Clause 28 is still around in many schools.

 

[Nym]

Whether we like it or not, the legacy of Clause 28 is still around in many schools.

Very much so, homosexuality is still barely acknowledged, let along educated on...

 

[Anon Mouse]

You read it on a regular basis then?

You're sure, but you don't actually know?

I'm not dismissing history, but your reasons for being bigoted towards the Daily Mail.

Anyway, you never answered my question;

As for the statement I made about being sure that The Daily Mail apologized for its Facist stance in the 30's begs the question would you trust a revamped Nazi party gaining influence in the EU if they apologized for The atrocities of the Third Reich?

Actually I flick through the mail every now and then (as one or two of my collegues bring it in) and in my opinion it seems to be always full of the bile relating to right wing politics, gay bashing, foreigner bashing, europe bashing, socialist bashing and royalty worship with a sentimental harkening for Edwardian middle class values!

I don't exactly class my comments about two certain 'newspapers' as bigotry, it certainly was not (intented to be) offensive but a hint of sacrcasim relating to some of their readership being right wing bigots. (note some not all)

I don't feel I really need to justify anything I said and (rightfully so) some of the 'tennis' that started off after my tounge and cheek comments have been removed as being off topic.

Thank you and goodnight
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Very much so, homosexuality is still barely acknowledged, let along educated on...

and more the reason for something to be done about it, again I doubt this Goverment would be willing to make any moves towards erdicating predjuice. But who knows, we may be surprised....

 

[pinkpanther]

I signed this petition a while ago, and as far as I'm concerned the sooner full marriage equality happens the better.

I've been involved in wedding services for both gay and straight couples in our church, and as far as we are concerned the only difference between them are the artificial distinctions and arbitrary rules imposed by government.