Vipa Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 (edited) i totally agree with you on that score , but , im still looking at it from a evolutionary angle , is the fact that humans are intelligent enough to outwit nature , actually just a part of nature and evolution ? , maybe im just a dinosaur because my late wife and i had children the old fashioned way ? , or , are humans evolving as a species and males and females will no longer need each other to breed ? , could it be that over the next million years or so that males and females will split into separate species ?. No.. There is a good chance however that the male of the species will become surplus to requirements.. The technology already exists to create life without a bloke and, whilst it pains me to say it ('cos I'm a bloke) there are very few things (of any relevance in the 21st century) that men can do better than women! As for the whole gay marriage debate... I'm certainly no homophobe, far from it, however I'm not unconvinced that a lot of the 'yes' votes in the commons were driven by a fear of being labeled 'homophobic.' For me this whole thing comes down to tradition and I see it as a further erosion of our heritage and a pandering to yet another minority group for fear of being seen as politically incorrect which, let's face it, is seen as the most heinous crime of our times! A little like multiculturalism..... The government have stated that we are no longer a nation of Brits but a multicultural society and apparently this is a good thing. Again, this is pandering to the minority in order to be seen to be righteous... Personally, I want to be British in a country that my ancestors laid their lives down to maintain their identity, traditions and culture for... All of these seemingly innocuous changes chip away at that thing that makes us and our glorious land British! This is nothing to do with religion in my view, difficult to argue on a religious front as an atheist! We live in a time of great paradox... Someone mentioned the association of black police officers... What would happen if an association of white police officers were to be founded? It would be seen as a racist organisation! We have the gay pride marches... How would the authorities view a 'hetro' pride march? It would be viewed as antagonistic and discriminatory! I think what gets my goat in reality is that, once again, the majority are marginalised for fear of upsetting a vocal minority... 'A step forward?' I don't see how! As a side note.. I too have seen that there is quite compelling scientific evidence to suggest that homosexuality in many species is quite normal biologically and becomes more prevalent as populations grow.... A natural limiter? Edited February 7, 2013 by Vipa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazzthompson Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 I'm actually against gay marriage truth be told. But then I'm against state defined heterosexual marriage. Everyone should get a secular civil partnership for legal property/child rights etc and leave marriage up to the churches/Anybody else who wants to call it whatever they want. But that's not going to happen, so I support equal marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njc110381 Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 Didn`t see who Mrs Miller is, but if she`s a politician I`m sure she won`t renege on the deal I`m sure there won`t be any loopholes at all My thoughts exactly! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
njc110381 Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 We live in a time of great paradox... Someone mentioned the association of black police officers... What would happen if an association of white police officers were to be founded? It would be seen as a racist organisation! We have the gay pride marches... How would the authorities view a 'hetro' pride march? It would be viewed as antagonistic and discriminatory! I think what gets my goat in reality is that, once again, the majority are marginalised for fear of upsetting a vocal minority... 'A step forward?' I don't see how! And that too. That's pretty much what I was trying to get at earlier but this is worded better! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beretta06 Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 I'm actually against gay marriage truth be told. But then I'm against state defined heterosexual marriage. Everyone should get a secular civil partnership for legal property/child rights etc and leave marriage up to the churches/Anybody else who wants to call it whatever they want. But that's not going to happen, so I support equal marriage. The irony now is homosexuals will be our betters, not our equals. They will have the right to a marriage (church or civil) OR a civil partnership. The Gov have confirmed that heterosexuals will NOT get the right to a civil partnership - only civil marriage or church marriage. Hardly seems to make everyone equal, does it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazzthompson Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 heterosexuals should indeed get access to civil partnerships. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVB Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 We have the gay pride marches... How would the authorities view a 'hetro' pride march? It would be viewed as antagonistic and discriminatory! I have been on a Gay Pride march (don't ask). It was a laugh. The thing is that straight people are welcome and it is very much a party. Nobody says "Gay is good, Hetro is bad". If you were to have a Hetro Pride march and the emphasis was on integration and fun and not hetro=good/gay=bad then I am sure it would go down well. However it wouldn't would it? You would end up with all the biggoted views and anger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vipa Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 (edited) I have been on a Gay Pride march (don't ask). It was a laugh. The thing is that straight people are welcome and it is very much a party. Nobody says "Gay is good, Hetro is bad". If you were to have a Hetro Pride march and the emphasis was on integration and fun and not hetro=good/gay=bad then I am sure it would go down well. However it wouldn't would it? You would end up with all the biggoted views and anger. The biggoted views and anger however would more than likely come from the non hetro community... Look at the debate in the commons... one 'no' MP told how he and his family had received death threats because of his stance! I didn't hear any one mention that type of militant coersion being attemped by those on the other side of the fence? When we had the debacle with the B&B couple down south turning away the 2 gay chaps, they were bombarded with hate mail and death threats afterwards, on top of it smacking of a set up in the first place! The point I'm making is that it is the small minority of the minorities that aren't satisfied with just being accepted and appreciated that ruin it for the rest (isn't that a truism for so many things!) they have to bang on and on and on and on long after they have got what they wanted in the first place.. They don't seem to want or be happy with 'equality,' they seem to want to some how come out on top and change society so that their way is viewed as not just equal but more equal than equal! I have deliberately not used the word normal as, biologically and societially, same sex relationships will not and can never be 'normal,' equal in stature yes, normal, no! And then there is the whole moral aspect of it... Now.. don't get me wrong, I quite enjoy a little BDSM in the privacy of my own home and would, by many, be classed as sexually deviant and just plain lucky by others! but I would never dream of flaunting that in public or trying to FORCE others to accept that as the norm... Why is it then the gay community think it's a good idea to parade down the streets in full on bondage gear etc? that then suddenly starts to move very much away from gay pride to sexual deviant pride which, is not acceptable and sends the completely wrong message, particularly to the younger members of our society, that promiscuity and deviance is normal......... it really isn't! But the biggest issue is that no one dares to challenge this for fear of instantly being labled 'biggott,' 'homophobe' etc... etc... This is no different to snogging teenagers.. I love snogging Mrs Vipa but I really don't want to see people (of any sexual pursuasion or age) trying to perform a tonsilectomy on each other with there tongues in public... it really gets my goat! This is not about prudism, it is about common decency and having a certain set of standards! Perhaps if these communities acted like the rest of us instead of constantly pushing the point and trying to shock, they may get a great deal more support and sympathy! Anyhoo... I'll get off my soap box now! Edited February 7, 2013 by Vipa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlosdesilva Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 Its not exactly rocket science to realise animals can't consent. Believe me they sure let you know when their not in the mood!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 (edited) The biggoted views and anger however would more than likely come from the non hetro community... dont make me laugh hetros have been bashing homo's for a very long time i read somewhere being gay in the 50's was positively dangerous hopefully things have got better since. my point is theres plenty of wicked hetros out there with bigoted views and anger. theres good and bad in all types. personally i like lesbians Edited February 7, 2013 by overandunder2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vipa Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 (edited) dont make me laugh hetros have been bashing homo's for a very long time i read somewhere being gay in the 50's was positively dangerous hopefully things have got better since. my point is theres plenty of wicked hetros out there with bigoted views and anger. theres good and bad in all types. And let's also not forget that being gay was illegal util quite recently and sodomy illegal until even more recently, either hetro or homo... And yes, it was dangerous, in some societies it was (and still is) punishable by death! Hetros have been bashing homos for a long time, with that I have no disagreement but we aren't talking about 50 years ago now, we are talking about NOW... and I'm sorry but the vast majority of the poulation are being bullied into agreeing to things because their elected officials are too afraid to be seen to be politically incorrect... It matter's not ones view on any minority issue, the fact is that we are now driven by 2 things, 1 is the media, the other is the 21st century cancer (not PPI claims companies... they are the other 21st century cancer!) which is political correctness! The minority groups of whatever colour/pursuasion/sexual preference/culture/nationality are the ones weilding the sword whilst the rest of us cower behind our MPs not wanting to be seen as racist/sexist etc.. I have ABSOLUTELY no issue with gay couples wanting to commit to each other, I have ABSOLUTELY no isues with being gay, what I do have an issue with is the destruction of our heritage and identity... marriage is an affirmation of commitment to each other and the underlying desire to procreate, the terms husband & wife have been with us for thousands of years and 'marriage' is the union of a man and a woman. As it is biologically impossible for this to happen naturally with anything other than a hetrosexual couple I don't see how marriage can be an institution entered into by 2 men or 2 women.. A sizeable portion of the gay community didn't want this which speaks volumes to me... it is almost one of those 'cures for a problem that in the main doesn't exist' situations! It is an emotive subject and the views will always be polarised. What concerns me more than anything though is that the views of our politicians don't seem to bear any resemblance to the views and wishes of the public that elected them in the first place. Edited February 7, 2013 by Vipa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kes Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 Who really cares ? Eventually, there will be nothing sensational about homosexual relationships and then they'll just be like heterosexuals. Tn to one that wont go down well with them though! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdubya Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 (edited) dont make me laugh hetros have been bashing homo's for a very long time i read somewhere being gay in the 50's was positively dangerous and what with aids etc its a site safer now eh! ooh ask freddy mercury or rock hudson forget you cant ! dubious fisherman saw to them. KW Edited February 7, 2013 by kdubya Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gazzthompson Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 (edited) Why is it the anti-gay marriage group that seem to mention and picture male homosexual sex so much? Is it really on your minds that much? Edited February 7, 2013 by gazzthompson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onearmshooter Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 I am shocked and appalled by some of the comments that are being made on this thread. You all sound like a bunch of Sun and Daily Mail readers…..oh wait, you probably are. Just for the record, gay people are NOT asking the government to change the law. I do not know a single gay person that wishes to wed, I know I don’t. For some strange reason the political class have got it in their heads that until gay people can wed then we are not equal. Well I have got news for you bigots, we are equal and the sooner you accept it and move on then the world will be a better place. It’s hilarious how some of you think that the world has gone to pot because of this. I get the impression by some of the comments here that you think we choose to be gay (yes we choose to be gay just to be awkward) you ****** plebs. The moderators here are doing a useless job and in some of the comments they are sticking their 2 pence in. BTW gay people own guns too.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beretta06 Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 going at it from a slightly different angle ooeerr mrs (or mr), it would be very interesting if darwin could give an opinion on the whole matter ?, i wonder if he would see gay marriage as a natural thing to do and just part of evolution ?. several years ago i watched some documentary type programme on tv , they filled a huge tank with rats and let them breed , when the tank became overpopulated the female rats started killing the young rats and the male rats turned gay ,the conclusion was that it was natures way of controling the rat population so as not to overstretch food and living space . could it be that the apparent explosion in the gay population is natures way of saying that the world is full and humans need to stop breeding ? , is gay marriage just a natural part of the human being that wants to have a life long partner but nature is stopping the breeding process and overpopulation of the planet. before you jump on me , im not comparing homosexuals with rats , im just looking at things from another (and i feel more natural and likely) angle Your observation is flawed in two areas. First, there is no 'gay explosion'. The number of homosexuals hasn't undergone some amazing increase!!!!! That's part of peoples' complaints that such a minority issue is taking up so much Parliamentary time. Second, if homosexuality was nature's way to cull/control the heterosexual community, HIV/AIDS would not continue to ravage the male homosexual community at levels higher now than ever before - wouldn't the homosexuals evolve into undersanding that safe sex IS key to their existance? The World Health Organisation recently described our male homosexual community as the biggest risk takers on the health map, seemingly refusing to accept the risks with a self-destructive attitude. So, no I don't think nature is thinning out/controlling the heterosexual population :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vipa Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 Your observation is flawed in two areas. First, there is no 'gay explosion'. The number of homosexuals hasn't undergone some amazing increase!!!!! That's part of peoples' complaints that such a minority issue is taking up so much Parliamentary time. Second, if homosexuality was nature's way to cull/control the heterosexual community, HIV/AIDS would not continue to ravage the male homosexual community at levels higher now than ever before - wouldn't the homosexuals evolve into undersanding that safe sex IS key to their existance? The World Health Organisation recently described our male homosexual community as the biggest risk takers on the health map, seemingly refusing to accept the risks with a self-destructive attitude. So, no I don't think nature is thinning out/controlling the heterosexual population :-) Interesting comment re the WHO... STDs are on the increase quite dramatically and mainly in the over 40s! due mainly to high instances of separation and a more promiscuous outlook in general but I watchd a program once, Horizon or Panorama seem to ring a bell but I can't be sure... anyhoo... the premis of the program was to do with the changing attitude towards HIV/Aids and in particular in the gay male community... there was one guy there who, after trying repeatedly, couldn't get infected and was getting really down about it! yes, you read right... He was desparate for his partner to infect him as he saw this as a sign of the ultimate commitment! Apparently not uncommon either! :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 Interesting comment re the WHO... STDs are on the increase quite dramatically and mainly in the over 40s! due mainly to high instances of separation and a more promiscuous outlook in general but I watchd a program once, Horizon or Panorama seem to ring a bell but I can't be sure... anyhoo... the premis of the program was to do with the changing attitude towards HIV/Aids and in particular in the gay male community... there was one guy there who, after trying repeatedly, couldn't get infected and was getting really down about it! yes, you read right... He was desparate for his partner to infect him as he saw this as a sign of the ultimate commitment! Apparently not uncommon either! :blink: if thats true he needs sectioning under the mental health act Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mel b3 Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 Your observation is flawed in two areas. First, there is no 'gay explosion'. The number of homosexuals hasn't undergone some amazing increase!!!!! That's part of peoples' complaints that such a minority issue is taking up so much Parliamentary time. Second, if homosexuality was nature's way to cull/control the heterosexual community, HIV/AIDS would not continue to ravage the male homosexual community at levels higher now than ever before - wouldn't the homosexuals evolve into undersanding that safe sex IS key to their existance? The World Health Organisation recently described our male homosexual community as the biggest risk takers on the health map, seemingly refusing to accept the risks with a self-destructive attitude. So, no I don't think nature is thinning out/controlling the heterosexual population :-) you may well be right , it might not be a gay explosion , it just seems like it to me , when i was growing up i didnt know that homosexuality even existed , i now have several gay friends both male and female and they happen to be pretty nice folks , maybe its the simple fact that homosexuals can be open about it these days and thats why it seem to be a gay explosion to me ?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mel b3 Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 if thats true he needs sectioning under the mental health act yep , trying to get infected is not the act of a sane rational person . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overandunder2012 Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 ok how many of you would abandon your best mate of say 30 years if he came out? or would he still be the same guy to you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vipa Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 ok how many of you would abandon your best mate of say 30 years if he came out? or would he still be the same guy to you My best mate was also best man at my first wedding.. he came out 10 years later (I always knew but he thinks everyone had missed that! ) He now lives with his fellah of 20 years younger in Manchester... he's still the same bloke but since he came out he has developed distinctly efeminate mannerisms and an efeminate voice which I find quite amusing (and make sure I let him know that at every opportunity!) The only thing I really struggle with is everytime I see a picture of him after a night out it is always of him snogging/groping some lad young enough to be his son (possibly even grandson from a biological perspective!) but that sentiment would be the same if it was some 50 year old bloke with his hands all over an 18 year old lass! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cranfield Posted February 7, 2013 Report Share Posted February 7, 2013 This subject has had a fair hearing but too many posts are being removed, time for it to close. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts