Wednesday, February 06 2013, 9:41AM
“The Church can still refuse to Marry them - in the same way they can refuse to Marry Heterosexual couples. It will be register offices all the way me thinks.Yet another way for immigrants to gain access to this country.”
Wednesday, February 06 2013, 12:46PM
“Is this a statement or a question for debating?”
Wednesday, February 06 2013, 3:33PM
“@City_C10: "Is this a statement or a question for debating?"
Both. Fire away.”
Wednesday, February 06 2013, 5:47PM
“Now they have got what they want can they now shut up. Be gay, be happy. But please do not expect everyone to agree. Is the a need to dance and perform in the streets to prove you are gay now over?”
Wednesday, February 06 2013, 6:09PM
“Right..as people know i am pro gay rights...but anyone who thinks this latest move has anything to do in Camerons mind of 'pro-gay' and furthering 'gay-rights' is sadly mistaken..this is more of an attack on the church of England. i am also a christian. i am well aware of the history concerning the conservatives relationship with christians, and the conseratives relationship with gay rights, and the christians relationship with gay rights....Christian in modern days, do not condemn gay relationships, in fact they do not condemn any loving, faithful relationship. However, even us modern day christians have respect for the original faith and the bible..as any religion does, it is not for a government to dictate change for that..The relationship between christians and conservatives however is more frought, we are much for the protection of the poor and indeed anyone in need, and our fellow man...whereas the opposite is seen with conservatives, after all it was the church of england that provided welfare before the state was set up..as for gay rights, lets just say for the many that wanted to fight the bill in the conservatives, they obviously didnt outweigh those that wanted to attack the religious beliefs that have a strong holding against their party :)”
Wednesday, February 06 2013, 7:45PM
“Prog – I do not see a question just an opinion on the right for marriage regarding gay marriages? I feel the only way to debate on this is to ask the question do others agree that the 'Bill' that has been passed is right, equal, and fair? My view is sure, why not… No point of having any 'monkey business', over this topic, love is love no matter what a person's sex orientation is.”
Wednesday, February 06 2013, 7:58PM
“prog_rock_fan you seem keen and interested on this, what are your thoughts as this is your post?”
Wednesday, February 06 2013, 8:01PM
“That is very true City, love is love, i dont think many will disput that..but marriage is a religious ceremony, that is the business of religion, the churches to which the ceremony is held, and the couple involved. The problem now is the churches will have to choose between their religious beliefs and following a law, or risk being sued for not following...this really was not a government decision in my opinion..civil partnerships are already ongoing, and many non-conventional churches hold marriages..”
Wednesday, February 06 2013, 8:47PM
“Jaybe11, this is half the problem, along side the religious definitions of various aspects of 'marriage' which would need redefining, even beinf rewritten, a couple may be able to go to the court of human rights regarding any church refusing to marry them if it becomes law. As we know laws are laws.
It is something that should be challenged within religion etc...Im all for gay marriages, but this current ruling is a hinderance not a help..there is no point changing a law that has its basis in religion without the churches involved being onboard...”
Wednesday, February 06 2013, 9:42PM
“Mam -Sorry I'm not really that informed on the legalities of this, but how is refusing to hold same sex marriages different to refusing to marry divorcees? The church hasn't been taken to the courts over that. It strikes me as a little alarmist and if its the only or main argument being put forward it could well turn into a self fulfilling prophecy.”
Wednesday, February 06 2013, 9:49PM
“Not alarmist, just looking at the possibilities, none of us can say how a new law may be enforced..at the moment there is no law saying divorcees are legally entitled to remarry. The point im trying to make is this really hasn't achieving anything, if the churches do still refuse to conduct a marriage, yes a gay couple may have a route to take as in enforcing their rights through this new law, but really it would be better to get the acceptance of churches to make a real difference..otherwise nothing has really changed has it?”
Wednesday, February 06 2013, 11:45PM
“Mam35 - you cannot summise that the Conservatives are anti church of England,
as a lot of Tories voted against the bill, it was the rest of the house who provided the majority.”
Wednesday, February 06 2013, 11:48PM
“It's still got to get through the house of Lords - which includes bishops yet..”
Thursday, February 07 2013, 9:19AM
“I didnt say they were 'anti' But I do feel there is a little tension (the vote was split almost half/half Chappy 139/132) As we know the CofE has made its feelings known regarding the welfare bill and some plans for the EU, among other things.
Gay marriage would be a welcome move, but its the religious aspects that need tackling before any bill is passed really. What is the point, if churches will still refuse to marry a couple? Maybe someone will explain it to me, what achievement they feel has been done here? That wasn't already there (if the bill is finalised)”
Thursday, February 07 2013, 10:15AM
“Mam, the quadruple lock will protect churches that don't want to conduct Same sex marriages, the concern that gay couples up and down the country will take churches to the ECHR is, i'm sorry, completely alarmist and extremely unlikely to happen.
There are gay vicars/priests around the country that will be willing to hold these ceremonies and if the church(s) stamps its foot of authority and says no still.... well there are still the Quakers who have been campaigning for the right to conduct same sex marriage since 2009!! :) (very forward thinking but then the Quakers seem to have been for a looooooong time, just look at the Rowntree foundation (set up by Joseph Rowntree, a Quaker))
All these concerns of course centre around the idea that most same sex marriages will be a religious/spiritual event, this is simply not true, in fact i know very few gay/lesbian people that affiliate themselves with any religion. It is more probable that these same sex marriages will be civil marriages NOT religious marriages.”
Thursday, February 07 2013, 10:45AM
“It is not alarmist.. it is normal to look at all possibilities that have been bought forward by both sides in any debate, and it is one that has been raised by various religious organisations, whether unlikely to happen or not. There is a clause being put in regarding the ECHR, so it is unlikely, but still a possibility, the EHRC is a complicated area.
I know there will be clauses and certain 'aspects' of the bill that will give religious organisations the freedom of choice as to whether to conduct a marriage. I still think its little achieved until it is accepted across the board. People should have the freedom to marry no matter what sexual orientation, whether religious or not. There are still some gay couples (and I know a few too) who are religious, and would like to be accepted for marriage in their chosen church and religion..little change for them.”
Thursday, February 07 2013, 12:20PM
“What I don't understand is that when you reach a certain age you can't have help with IVF in this country to have your own child. It may be that like me you've served your country and never really met anyone you wanted to settle down with until relatively late in life.
Gay couples must know that there is Zero chance of pro-creation by natural means,
yet they have the right to artificial insemination using either surrogate mothers, or donated sperm. They have full access to the adoption program. I once vouched for a gay couple as a referee to adopt.. so I am not against it - they provided a secure home for the child, but he now gets bullied at school and has become insular, so I have to question if it's the right environment for him to be brought up in. He wasn't old enough to understand when adopted.
We have been so caught up in the equality argument that we have lost sight of what everyone else wants, needs or feels. Being heterosexual is normal, you can't pro-create naturally without both sexes, children learn from both parents, it is common that Boys brought up without the father present have no role model and often have less respect for women when they grow up.
Marriage in a Church is a big event, looks good on photo's, a day to remember. I wouldn't ever deny anyone that. But if I wanted a wedding in a mosque I'd have to become a muslim, and I'd have to subscribe to their religious edicts and prove my faith.
Churches may well conduct gay marriages - but as a religion, with religious freedoms they cannot be forced to give gods blessing if it contradicts the teachings of their faith.
Gay couples should realise that their life choice has possibly scuppered their chances of having nice church wedding photos, and hotels and registrars are more likely going to be their first port of call, in the same way that I have to accept that my career choice scuppered my chances of having children naturally.”
Thursday, February 07 2013, 4:01PM
“Ok, third time lucky, I just hope my past 2 posts don't come up, as ive been having real probs with the site today and its not working properly :/
Chappy, as a christian, I will give you my view on your last post (and a new post you have put above)..Marriage is a commitment, forsaking all others, and pledging your alliance to the one you love..I will never remarry, despite being blissfully happy with my second partner, and being together many many years with children. I know many will not understand, but i made that pledge on my original marriage, and it was not a choice for that marriage to come to the conclusion that it did.
As a christian, I feel all couples should have the opportunity to commit, after all we promote fedility, and commitment and yet we are denying a big portion of society that follow our religion the chance to declare their commitment and love..it doesnt make sense, and I think it should be changed..this recent bill is not the way, it simply causes more friction in the religious orders. The way forward is to promote our beliefs in marriage and commitment. The bible does say about marriage, but it also says about loving our fellow man, to have understanding, to consider others positions and wishes..we just need to make the stalwarts of the traditional understandings of the bible to see the light really :)”
Thursday, February 07 2013, 7:25PM
“Mam it's not really about the rights and wrongs, or the mechanics of nature - it's about the gratification of rights to groups who make a choice.
Homosexuals - using the correct term - (As Gay - simply means happy in our language),
make a choice over sexual preference.
In my lifetime - they've come out of the closet.. (as does every Hetero Sexual who makes the leap from shyness to public affection).
They have formed awareness groups,
They have parades to celebrate their sexuality - whilst any heterosexual parade would be seen as parading pornography.
There have been government grants,
There have been tribunals and anti-discrimination bills.
The Media seems obsessed with having Homosexual presenters on everything and reality TV's demographic would have you believe there is an overwhelming majority.
It has become a club, a badge of honour, and it's continually in your face whether you want it or not.
My attitude to sexuality whether Hetero or Homosexual is that it's private.. it doesn't need to be on the streets, in the press, on the cover of the media.
As long as nothing illegal takes place - each to their own, so hopefully this bill will put their promiscuity back in the bedroom where it belongs like the rest of us.
Obviously after the first Gay Marriage in a Cathedral is shown on TV, shortly before the First Celebrity Gay Marriage - probably Elton John again..”
Saturday, February 09 2013, 4:58PM
“Chappy1884: I'm sorry but i have to completely disagree with your assertion that being homosexual is a choice. You do know that many species of animals have homosexual as well as heterosexual relationships. So are bisexual too. Also i completely disagree with your view that there is far too much homosexuality on tv. I think we see many more gay characters in american shows than British, also those shows are generally aired on digital channels. They obiviously attract sufficient audiences to continue being aired. I would say that if you added up all the hours of tv air time and counted how much air time was taken by certain demographics, it would adequetly serve most groups. White heterosexuals most certainly.
As for it being in your face, your having a laugh right? How many homosexual couples do you see walking around town holding hands, maybe having a little public display of affection? because i very rarely see it. what i do see are gay couples walking and talking at just the right distance to not be too obvious.
I'm getting the vibe that your the kinda person that will never be comfortable with homosexuals. We are to behave like victorian mental patients, hiden out the way in that glorious state of out of sight, out of mind.”
Saturday, February 09 2013, 5:23PM
You know absolutely nothing about me.
Can't remember the last Heterosexual parade I saw in any city..
Don't see many heterosexual couples especially men, being truly happy with holding hands with their missus in public.. and when you see others with their tongues down each other's throats, how many times have you heard people say "Get a room".. as it makes everyone else feel uncomfortable.
As for this..
Should it matter what sexuality childrens presenters are?”
Saturday, February 09 2013, 5:30PM
“Just for the record, I have a lot of Gay friends, but I also know a fair amount of Gay people,
They fall into two camps (excuse the pun)..
The Friends are the ones who I don't really regard as gay, because they get on with their lives and don't make a lifestyle out of it.
The Acquaintances are those who use apps like grinder, gaydar, wear stereotypical clothing, go to events, make being gay their life, not a part of it.. I just can't be doing with it..
Sorry if it makes me sound Victorian.. If someone gay got the wrong signals from me and approached me I wouldn't be offended I'd politely say sorry I am not into that.. so why do some (not all) gay people have to be so overt about things? That is all I want to know.”
Sunday, February 10 2013, 12:04PM
“WOW, there's a few things to answer within your last 2 posts!!
Firstly you are right that I don't know you (or at least hope I don't anyway!), but I have read a number of posts from yourself on this subject and the tone/language you use at times, has made me feel uncomfortable. I'm pleased you have some gay friends and you can feel comfortable in their company, as you have rightly stated not all gay people prescribe to the Apps, Fashion and Lifestyle choices you've highlighted but that doesn't mean the ones that do should stop.
As for your question about the sexuality of presenters, the story is about much more than just children's presenters but representation of Homosexuals on TV, ironically the report that the story is based on agrees with my views that although improved, homosexuality is still under represented. IF there had been more information easily available to me growing up I may have been less hell bent on proving my "straightness" as a teenager due to being scared senseless that I found myself attracted to other boys rather than girls. This issue was made worse by the fact that I only ever heard adults talk about queers, ******s, aids ridden mincers etc etc. I'm not saying we should have gay people on every channel every hour of the day, but much like we need positive black, Asian and female role models on TV for some minority groups, there does need to be some positive role models for young people questioning their place in a world that has so far told them they don't belong.
Now, can we clarify that you're problem with Gay people is that they confirm to "Normal" human behaviour buy choosing to socialise and affiliate themselves with the social group they feel closest too???? If so it kinda goes to prove that gay people are doomed if they do and doomed if they don't!!
Go to gay bars, clubs, pub, cafés and its a problem, go to straight bars, club and pubs and its a problem.....
Having separate clubs is indicative of the past when being gay was an underground activity, gay people were pushed to the periphrasis of society because of the wholesale attack on their liberties, just for happening to be attracted too and holding down loving relationships with people of the same sex. Rightly or wrongly, some feel safe staying in "their" environment. This is nothing new in human behaviour, look at the sheer scale of Hindus & Muslims that have migrated to Leicester, safety in numbers...
If its unacceptable for me to try to converse with other gays in public places, how am I meant to go on a night out to a straight venue and "pull", if I'm not meant to show even the slightest sign of my sexuality??”
Tuesday, February 12 2013, 1:41PM
“bikerdan, Like I've said in other topics, I have a lot of Gay friends, but I am like anyone else I guess, I don't care what anyone does in private, I just don't see the need for sexuality to be represented publicly regardless..
So whether a Childrens TV presenter is Gay or not it matters not to me.
I don't care whether the person doing a voiceover for a cartoon character is straight or gay..
it really doesn't matter.
Is Thomas the Tank Engine Straight or Gay.. neither, he's a Tank Engine.. so why does it matter? And if one of the pre-requisites for someone to have on their CV who went for a job doing the voiceover was their sexuality, then surely that would be discriminate.
How would this pan out?
2 People apply for a Job..
One is a Heterosexual - infinitely qualified - with a decent reputation,
The other is Gay - with very little qualifications.
The CV says Gay Quota must be realised where possible, but in the interests of fairness both go for audition.
The Qualified one turns in a text book interview, where the Gay one is not really what they want..
Do you let policy dictate? or do you take the one who has put the work in and given a good audition?
And does a 2 year old really care if Tinky Winky is Gay or straight?
I am not Anti Gay, I understand why there are Gay Clubs, common interests, common sexuality, I have had a great time in some Gay Clubs - simply because there is no pressure to get off with someone, and you feel like you are out with your mates, rather than playing gooseberry to them, or trying to separate two of your mates who fancy the same girl..trying to outdo eachother or embarrass each other (don't forget I was in the navy)..
I just feel as I've said in other topics - in day to day life, in jobs, in the media, your sexuality shouldn't be what you are known for, it shouldn't hinder your progress and nor should it be used as a qualification.
If Dale Winton, Julian Clary, Alan Carr, Graham Norton etc.. were straight, they'd still be ok in my book.. I don't need to know their preference.. David Walliams is still funny, and Jo Brand is not a lesbian - she's been married for 16 years - despite people assuming she was gay.
As I have said Bikerdan in the other topics - sometimes it's just not relevant..
Having strong gay role models on TV is fine - but at what age does it become relevant,
and for a childrens TV presenter, presenting to a mixed audience - do we really need to discriminate or even be aware of their preference?”
Monday, February 18 2013, 10:49AM
“But one of the problems of this new law is that other laws will be used to shut down complaints about the moral validity of such unions. An authoritarian police state in 21st Century needs a Progressive cover story. Many progressives are just useful idiots.”
Something about your area you want to voice and debate with others? Let your community know and see how they feel.
Join the debate
Copyright © 2013 Local World. All Rights Reserved.