View Poll Results: Vote on Gay Marriage - Yea or Nay?
Voters: 157. You may not vote on this poll
Gay Marriage Vote - cast yours!
Oh OK, it's just it was a tube station last time you made up ... sorry, told the story 
OK actual scenario I unfortunately witnessed in London.
Walking into a tube station, and two homo's were waiting to meet one another.
When they met, they then began to snog.
I found that disgusting, and judging by the comments and reactions of other folk, they also found it disgusting.
Walking into a tube station, and two homo's were waiting to meet one another.
When they met, they then began to snog.
I found that disgusting, and judging by the comments and reactions of other folk, they also found it disgusting.
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,356
Likes: 58
From: in the woods...........555 Wagon Sqn
Don't remember seeing two poofters in a tube station
Most sex is recreational anyway, with contraception most heterosexual couples, most of the time have the same chance of conceiving as a gay one, for example we have been married 18 years next week and have three kids, so thats only 3 out of 18 ***** that resulted in a baby 
Well that's because it probably didn't happen
Your quote clearly saying you saw it in a tube station is there and that's from the infamous 'Pacquaio gays must be put to death' thread.
Here you go - from the very thread:
So you have either forgotten, are mistaken or were just making it up to support your stance.... I don't care which, I just find it funny you seem to have changed your story
Your quote clearly saying you saw it in a tube station is there and that's from the infamous 'Pacquaio gays must be put to death' thread.
Here you go - from the very thread:
OK actual scenario I unfortunately witnessed in London.
Walking into a tube station, and two homo's were waiting to meet one another.
When they met, they then began to snog.
I found that disgusting, and judging by the comments and reactions of other folk, they also found it disgusting.
Walking into a tube station, and two homo's were waiting to meet one another.
When they met, they then began to snog.
I found that disgusting, and judging by the comments and reactions of other folk, they also found it disgusting.
Last edited by f1_fan; Feb 11, 2013 at 02:44 PM.
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 13,356
Likes: 58
From: in the woods...........555 Wagon Sqn
I think that really, any overt sexual display in a public place is not on, dont want to see a straight couple snogging each others faces off either, save it for somewhere private.
I do think that some gays do like to shock and get a reaction, I think these days most people arent bothered and I think, for some that was all part of the fun, being a bit outraegeous, being a "Notorious Homosexual", I think they captured that in Little Britain pretty well with the Daffyd character.
I do think that some gays do like to shock and get a reaction, I think these days most people arent bothered and I think, for some that was all part of the fun, being a bit outraegeous, being a "Notorious Homosexual", I think they captured that in Little Britain pretty well with the Daffyd character.
Well that's because it probably didn't happen
Your quote clearly saying you saw it in a tube station is there and that's from the infamous 'Pacquaio gays must be put to death' thread.
Here you go - from the very thread:
So you have either forgotten, are mistaken or were just making it up to support your stance.... I don't care which, I just find it funny you seem to have changed your story
Your quote clearly saying you saw it in a tube station is there and that's from the infamous 'Pacquaio gays must be put to death' thread.
Here you go - from the very thread:
So you have either forgotten, are mistaken or were just making it up to support your stance.... I don't care which, I just find it funny you seem to have changed your story
That was on this ******* thread
Anyway, tube or station is irrelevant
Last edited by urban; Feb 11, 2013 at 03:28 PM.
This thread was one time.
and then....
The Pacquaio thread was last time.
Certainly is as the whole story is obviously made up.... how sad you feel the need to stoop to fantasy to justify your prejudice!!!
But whatever you think
The authorities were correct to chuck the filthy things out though
Scooby Regular
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
From: West Yorkshire
Just a quick post to answer those who are asking "what difference will it make changing the definition of marriage?" or those saying "just let them do it, it doesn't matter does it?"
It will have an impact on society, and not in a positive way, and I will give you the evidence for this below.
Now just before I do this.... A little note to f1_fan, who would appear to be the self appointed Patron Saint of Homosexuals, and a few others (you know who you are) start to jump all over this as they have just about every other poster opposing their slightly ominous stance... Anything you post in reply to this will be disregarded and won't be replied to (at least by myself) as it is clear that you are only on this thread to gratify your ego & not to actually objectively discuss the topic at hand. So don't even bother responding. If you do I will take that as more evidence that you are indeed bent on gratifying yourselves by antagonizing, insulting and belittling anyone and everyone who disagrees with homosexuality or the current topic at hand, which is the redefinition of marriage.
So, on with the evidence, which shows why re-defining marriage will have a negative effect on our society:
10 reasons why the government is wrong to redefine marriage:
Reason 1
It will undermine marriage
Evidence shows that redefining marriage
actually undermines support for marriage
in wider society. Neither has it delivered
the promised stability for same-sex
couples. In Spain, after gay marriage
was introduced, marriage rates across
the whole population plummeted.1 In
the Netherlands too there has been a
significant fall in the marriage rate since
marriage was redefined.2 Same-sex
marriage does not promote marriage.
Reason 2
Marriage is part of our history
Marriage between a man and a woman
is not a recent social invention. Everyone
knows that marriage predates law, nation
and church. It goes back to the dawn of
time. Yes, matrimonial law may have been
tweaked over the years, but the law has
never fundamentally altered the essential
nature of marriage: a lifelong commitment
between one man and one woman. Samesex
marriage would rewrite hundreds
of years of British legal tradition and
thousands of years of cultural heritage.
Reason 3
Equality already exists
Same-sex couples already have equality.
All the legal rights of marriage are already
available to same-sex couples through
civil partnerships. Equality doesn’t
mean bland uniformity or state-imposed
sameness. If the Government genuinely
wants to pursue equality, why is it banning
heterosexual couples from entering a civil
partnership? Same-sex couples have equal
rights through civil partnerships, but they
don’t have the right to redefine marriage
for everyone else.
Reason 4
Impact on schools
The current law requires schools to teach
children about the importance of marriage.
If marriage is given a new definition, it
will be endorsed in schools. According
to expert legal advice, any teacher who
fails to endorse same-sex marriage in the
classroom could be dismissed. Parents
will have no legal right to withdraw their
children from lessons which endorse
same-sex marriage across the curriculum.
Already supporters of gay marriage are
recommending books for use in schools
which undermine traditional marriage, and
call on schools to get children to act out
gay weddings.3 The effect on schools will
be polarising and divisive.
Reason 5
Thin end of the wedge
If we redefine marriage once, what’s to
stop marriage being redefined yet further?
If marriage is solely about love and
commitment between consenting adults,
what’s to say we shouldn’t recognise threeway
relationships? It’s already happened in
nations that redefined marriage. In Brazil, a
three-way relationship was given marriagelike
recognition under civil partnership
laws.4 A similar situation has existed in the
Netherlands for several years.5 In Canada
after marriage was redefined, a polygamist
argued in court that his relationship should
be recognised in law.6 When politicians
meddle with marriage it all starts to
unravel.
Reason 6
Marginalises the majority
Calling opponents “bigots” is meant
to shut down debate and stop people
thinking for themselves. Nick Clegg
landed in hot water over a draft speech
which called opponents of redefining
marriage “bigots”.7 He later retracted the word, but there’s no doubt that many who support this radical agenda think
anyone who disagrees is not worthy of
respect. However, support for traditional
marriage has come from many respected
academics, lawyers, politicians of all
parties, and religious leaders. They all
know that redefining marriage would have
a profound impact.
Reason 7
Many gay people don’t want it
Polling shows that only a minority of
gay people (39 per cent) believe gay
marriage is a priority.8 And according to
the Government only 3 per cent of gay
people would enter a same-sex marriage.9
A number of gay celebrities and journalists
are themselves opposed to gay marriage.
Latest official data shows that only 0.5 per
cent of households are headed by a samesex
couple.10 Not all of them want, or will
enter, a same-sex marriage. So, why is
such a monumental change being imposed
throughout society?
Reason 8
The public don’t want it
Seven in ten people want to keep
marriage as it is.11 Other polling which
purports to show public support for gay
marriage fails to tell respondents that
equal rights are already available through
civil partnerships.12 When people are told
this crucial fact, most people say keep
marriage as it is.13 MPs say their postbags
have been dominated by public opposition
to redefining marriage.14 Ordinary people
want the Government to concentrate
on reviving the economy and providing
better public services, not meddling with
marriage.15
Reason 9
A huge change to society
Since we already have civil partnerships,
isn’t same-sex marriage just a small logical
next step? No. Rewriting the meaning
of marriage will have a far-reaching
impact on society. Over 3,000 laws make
reference to marriage. The Government
has already admitted that official
documents will need to be rewritten to
remove words like ‘husband’ and ‘wife’.
In France the Government is eradicating
the words ‘father’ and ‘mother’ from
all official documents. The Church of
England has warned that it could lead
to disestablishment and a constitutional
crisis.16
Reason 10
Freedom of conscience will be eroded
The civil liberty of people who believe
in traditional marriage is already being
eroded. A housing manager from
Manchester was demoted and lost 40
per cent of his salary for stating, outside
work time, that gay weddings in churches
were “an equality too far”.17 Conferences
and symposiums in support of traditional
marriage have been thrown out of venues.
Adverts in support of a 600,000-strong
public petition in favour of traditional
marriage have been investigated as
“offensive”.18 And all this has taken place
before any change to the law has taken
place. What will it be like if the law does
change? A leading human rights lawyer
has outlined the devastating impact of
redefining marriage on civil liberties.19
For references: http://c4m.org.uk/downloads/10reasons.pdf
There is SO much more information on this so make sure you check out: http://c4m.org.uk/
It will have an impact on society, and not in a positive way, and I will give you the evidence for this below.
Now just before I do this.... A little note to f1_fan, who would appear to be the self appointed Patron Saint of Homosexuals, and a few others (you know who you are) start to jump all over this as they have just about every other poster opposing their slightly ominous stance... Anything you post in reply to this will be disregarded and won't be replied to (at least by myself) as it is clear that you are only on this thread to gratify your ego & not to actually objectively discuss the topic at hand. So don't even bother responding. If you do I will take that as more evidence that you are indeed bent on gratifying yourselves by antagonizing, insulting and belittling anyone and everyone who disagrees with homosexuality or the current topic at hand, which is the redefinition of marriage.
So, on with the evidence, which shows why re-defining marriage will have a negative effect on our society:
10 reasons why the government is wrong to redefine marriage:
Reason 1
It will undermine marriage
Evidence shows that redefining marriage
actually undermines support for marriage
in wider society. Neither has it delivered
the promised stability for same-sex
couples. In Spain, after gay marriage
was introduced, marriage rates across
the whole population plummeted.1 In
the Netherlands too there has been a
significant fall in the marriage rate since
marriage was redefined.2 Same-sex
marriage does not promote marriage.
Reason 2
Marriage is part of our history
Marriage between a man and a woman
is not a recent social invention. Everyone
knows that marriage predates law, nation
and church. It goes back to the dawn of
time. Yes, matrimonial law may have been
tweaked over the years, but the law has
never fundamentally altered the essential
nature of marriage: a lifelong commitment
between one man and one woman. Samesex
marriage would rewrite hundreds
of years of British legal tradition and
thousands of years of cultural heritage.
Reason 3
Equality already exists
Same-sex couples already have equality.
All the legal rights of marriage are already
available to same-sex couples through
civil partnerships. Equality doesn’t
mean bland uniformity or state-imposed
sameness. If the Government genuinely
wants to pursue equality, why is it banning
heterosexual couples from entering a civil
partnership? Same-sex couples have equal
rights through civil partnerships, but they
don’t have the right to redefine marriage
for everyone else.
Reason 4
Impact on schools
The current law requires schools to teach
children about the importance of marriage.
If marriage is given a new definition, it
will be endorsed in schools. According
to expert legal advice, any teacher who
fails to endorse same-sex marriage in the
classroom could be dismissed. Parents
will have no legal right to withdraw their
children from lessons which endorse
same-sex marriage across the curriculum.
Already supporters of gay marriage are
recommending books for use in schools
which undermine traditional marriage, and
call on schools to get children to act out
gay weddings.3 The effect on schools will
be polarising and divisive.
Reason 5
Thin end of the wedge
If we redefine marriage once, what’s to
stop marriage being redefined yet further?
If marriage is solely about love and
commitment between consenting adults,
what’s to say we shouldn’t recognise threeway
relationships? It’s already happened in
nations that redefined marriage. In Brazil, a
three-way relationship was given marriagelike
recognition under civil partnership
laws.4 A similar situation has existed in the
Netherlands for several years.5 In Canada
after marriage was redefined, a polygamist
argued in court that his relationship should
be recognised in law.6 When politicians
meddle with marriage it all starts to
unravel.
Reason 6
Marginalises the majority
Calling opponents “bigots” is meant
to shut down debate and stop people
thinking for themselves. Nick Clegg
landed in hot water over a draft speech
which called opponents of redefining
marriage “bigots”.7 He later retracted the word, but there’s no doubt that many who support this radical agenda think
anyone who disagrees is not worthy of
respect. However, support for traditional
marriage has come from many respected
academics, lawyers, politicians of all
parties, and religious leaders. They all
know that redefining marriage would have
a profound impact.
Reason 7
Many gay people don’t want it
Polling shows that only a minority of
gay people (39 per cent) believe gay
marriage is a priority.8 And according to
the Government only 3 per cent of gay
people would enter a same-sex marriage.9
A number of gay celebrities and journalists
are themselves opposed to gay marriage.
Latest official data shows that only 0.5 per
cent of households are headed by a samesex
couple.10 Not all of them want, or will
enter, a same-sex marriage. So, why is
such a monumental change being imposed
throughout society?
Reason 8
The public don’t want it
Seven in ten people want to keep
marriage as it is.11 Other polling which
purports to show public support for gay
marriage fails to tell respondents that
equal rights are already available through
civil partnerships.12 When people are told
this crucial fact, most people say keep
marriage as it is.13 MPs say their postbags
have been dominated by public opposition
to redefining marriage.14 Ordinary people
want the Government to concentrate
on reviving the economy and providing
better public services, not meddling with
marriage.15
Reason 9
A huge change to society
Since we already have civil partnerships,
isn’t same-sex marriage just a small logical
next step? No. Rewriting the meaning
of marriage will have a far-reaching
impact on society. Over 3,000 laws make
reference to marriage. The Government
has already admitted that official
documents will need to be rewritten to
remove words like ‘husband’ and ‘wife’.
In France the Government is eradicating
the words ‘father’ and ‘mother’ from
all official documents. The Church of
England has warned that it could lead
to disestablishment and a constitutional
crisis.16
Reason 10
Freedom of conscience will be eroded
The civil liberty of people who believe
in traditional marriage is already being
eroded. A housing manager from
Manchester was demoted and lost 40
per cent of his salary for stating, outside
work time, that gay weddings in churches
were “an equality too far”.17 Conferences
and symposiums in support of traditional
marriage have been thrown out of venues.
Adverts in support of a 600,000-strong
public petition in favour of traditional
marriage have been investigated as
“offensive”.18 And all this has taken place
before any change to the law has taken
place. What will it be like if the law does
change? A leading human rights lawyer
has outlined the devastating impact of
redefining marriage on civil liberties.19
For references: http://c4m.org.uk/downloads/10reasons.pdf
There is SO much more information on this so make sure you check out: http://c4m.org.uk/
Last edited by Sambob; Feb 11, 2013 at 03:39 PM.
I am the highest poster .... probably because I believe that irrational prejudice is wrong and there is plenty of that on here. You being a prime example!
