Offensive suggestion (From York Press)
Get in touch: send your photos, videos, news & views by texting YORK to 80360 or send an email»
Offensive suggestion
11:34am Friday 15th February 2013 in Letters By Reader's letter
I AM sorry that Carol Runciman (Letters, February 13), whom I respect, endorses the suggestion that to oppose the same-sex marriage Bill is to be homophobic or against complete equality of the legal and fiscal rights of homosexual couples vis-à-vis heterosexual couples.
That suggestion is deeply offensive.
Like many of the issues taken up and promoted by contemporary political parties for populist reasons, it is treated superficially.
Marriage describes a union between a man and a woman and as such has been universally recognised for millennia as being beneficial to human society.
It is not better than a solemn commitment to each other by two people of the same sex; it is simply and specifically different from such an undertaking.
Same-sex couples have every right to equality of treatment by the civil authorities, and every right to mark such a public contract by a public celebration.
True progress that properly recognises the value of that commitment to society will be to give the contract and celebration a distinctive official title.
Maurice Vassie, Deighton, York
Comments(39)
Mulgrave
says...
12:17pm Fri 15 Feb 13
Stevie D
says...
1:40pm Fri 15 Feb 13
Marriage describes a union between a man and a woman and as such has been universally recognised for millennia as being beneficial to human society.Except in many cultures where marriage has been between a man and a girl, or between a man and women, or may be arranged without consent.
Marriage has adapted to changing social norms throughout history and throughout the world. It always has done, and it will continue to do so. There is no reason to draw a line in the sand now and say "We're not changing it any more". Denying same-sex couples the right to marry is wrong, and it's great that this is finally being recognised and remedied.
roclank2000
says...
1:41pm Fri 15 Feb 13
hendom
says...
4:25pm Fri 15 Feb 13
Many in the church are happy to embrace change and to allow equal rights to all.Too many will not change their views, but fortunately they are a dying breed.
CynicaloldGit
says...
4:31pm Fri 15 Feb 13
However, the, and I will use the terms following at the risk of upsetting the homosexual community, normal/straight community have to some degree contributed by using the euphemism, (coined in SanFransico many years ago by the homosexual community as a snipe at the straight/normal community.....GAY...
good as you), gay,when really, it actually hides or lessens the impact of what the straight/normal community feels. By normal society, using this euphemism, it give strength to the homosexual community to keep hacking away bit by bit till society simply sees homosexuality as normal between human beings.
Even if you believe in evolution, rather than God and creation, evolution developed the male and female to procreate, something homosexuals cannot do.
If homosexuals want to live together, so be it. If they want to tie together in a civil partnership, so be it....if they want to make a mochery of marriage, so be it, in a registry office, lots of straight / normal people do, but please have the resect you want from others, by not forcing your demands on an institution and it's members, who follow the teachings of "Word of God" and making that said instituion go against what is refered to as an abomination before God.
In answer to Stevie D, all the things you mention are correct but you miss out one vital thing, they are all unions, whether they are right in our eyes, between MALE and FEMALE
And before anyone complains about homophobia..........
.1. I do not have an irrational fear of homosexuals, 2. I hate the sin, not the sinner.
Dan595
says...
7:08pm Fri 15 Feb 13
CynicaloldGit wrote:How does providing equal marriage that is not forced upon religions who want to opt out make a mockery of marriage. Baring in mind that the ONS have said that now 50% of marriages end in divorce how can allowing more people to embrace the tradition make it worse. People who if we live by the "word of god" were created by god should be able to have the same rights as everyone else in our secular society.
There are a lot of people in society and some who contribute to this website, find homosexuality offensive. They may not voice their opinions, till issues such as homosexual marriage is put forward.
However, the, and I will use the terms following at the risk of upsetting the homosexual community, normal/straight community have to some degree contributed by using the euphemism, (coined in SanFransico many years ago by the homosexual community as a snipe at the straight/normal community.....GAY...
good as you), gay,when really, it actually hides or lessens the impact of what the straight/normal community feels. By normal society, using this euphemism, it give strength to the homosexual community to keep hacking away bit by bit till society simply sees homosexuality as normal between human beings.
Even if you believe in evolution, rather than God and creation, evolution developed the male and female to procreate, something homosexuals cannot do.
If homosexuals want to live together, so be it. If they want to tie together in a civil partnership, so be it....if they want to make a mochery of marriage, so be it, in a registry office, lots of straight / normal people do, but please have the resect you want from others, by not forcing your demands on an institution and it's members, who follow the teachings of "Word of God" and making that said instituion go against what is refered to as an abomination before God.
In answer to Stevie D, all the things you mention are correct but you miss out one vital thing, they are all unions, whether they are right in our eyes, between MALE and FEMALE
And before anyone complains about homophobia..........
.1. I do not have an irrational fear of homosexuals, 2. I hate the sin, not the sinner.
CynicaloldGit
says...
7:31pm Fri 15 Feb 13
NOT WHEN HE CONDEMNS IT.........He, if you believe in him, is the boss, created mankind, and has the right to make the rules, and HE condemns homsexuality
Dan595
says...
7:34pm Fri 15 Feb 13
CynicaloldGit wrote:But if he is the creator he must have also created homosexuality
People who if we live by the "word of god" were created by god should be able to have the same rights as everyone else in our secular society.”
NOT WHEN HE CONDEMNS IT.........He, if you believe in him, is the boss, created mankind, and has the right to make the rules, and HE condemns homsexuality
/kev/null
says...
7:48pm Fri 15 Feb 13
Fortunately most of the country has moved on and developed a more consistent moral code than that offered by christianity.
CynicaloldGit
says...
7:58pm Fri 15 Feb 13
in both old and new testiments) and not agreeing if it does or doesn't come into it. The bible if it is God's word, is not open to our interpretation, it comes down to what God says. There are many laws of our land that could be open to our interpretation should we want to be awkward, take the agrument MPs are saying about not breaking the rules, but the courts have said they are in many instances...........
...NO, it's not what we believe, it's what God says and all the Peter Tatchels in the world will not make their lifestyle acceptable to God if HE says it's not.
You see, from my observations, people fall into two camps......non believers in a God, and believers, that think no matter what they do, HE is all forgiving, even after they have disregarded his rules in the bible.
If the bible be true, then there are a lot of people going to very very shocked in the coming future. The way the world is going, it may even be make your mind up time, who knows?
hendom
says...
8:23pm Fri 15 Feb 13
a) was here a long time before the present gods were invented, and
b) is not an exclusively religious affair
Dan595
says...
8:45pm Fri 15 Feb 13
/kev/null
says...
10:52pm Fri 15 Feb 13
"(the bible does actually condemn homosexuality.......
in both old and new testiments) and not agreeing if it does or doesn't come into it. The bible if it is God's word, is not open to our interpretation, it comes down to what God says."
The problem you've got here is that:
i) God didn't write the Bible. Actually most of the basis of Christian belief came from the apostle Paul. Given your familiarity with the bible, would you say Paul comes across as a credible and consistent sort of guy?
ii) Even if Paul did accurately record the complete word of god, how many times has the bible been translated into English? Four or five times is it? What was wrong with the first three or four translations - did someone get god's instructions wrong? How do we know they haven't still got some of them wrong?
iii) Ambiguity also arises from the use of archaic language and how those words are interpreted by a modern audience. You'll find this has created some disagreement about god's attitudes toward gay people. I'm sure you're well aware of this disagreement within the church, given that this is apparently a hot topic for you.
Given the above considerations, your strong christian beliefs and your off-the-cuff assertion that the apocalypse may well be nigh, don't you think you should give this some more thought?
How silly would you look if you stood infront of your creator on judgement day and he said 'Of course I didn't want you to discriminate against gays - I created you all equal!' and then smote the crap out of you with lightning or whatever?
Matt_S
says...
1:45am Sat 16 Feb 13
Deuteronomy 23:1
I don't see these anti-gay-marriage types standing outside churches fondling other men's genitals to make sure they've not had testicular cancer.
That's followed up by:
"A **** shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD"
Deuteronomy 23:2
True Christians really need to make more of an effort to insist that everyone else provides a family tree going back 10 generations, AND prove that everyone since then was not born outside of marriage, before they can enter the church.
There are countless of other examples that Christians mostly ignore, probably because it would demonstrate how they were not following the Bible exactly. It's funny how they decide to pick on others rather than sorting out their own behaviour.
CynicaloldGit
says...
6:37am Sat 16 Feb 13
There are countless of other examples that Christians mostly ignore, probably because it would demonstrate how they were not following the Bible exactly. It's funny how they decide to pick on others rather than sorting out their own behaviour.”
Couldn't agree more Matt, however, because that is so, let Christians go farther and add another sin to what they do.
Personally I couldn't care less what homosexulas do as long as they leave me out of it............I couldn't care what the churches do either, as you say, they are led by hypocrits anyway.
But what I am sick and tried of, is Peter Tatchel and his mates telling me that I have to accept their view of things. I'm sick of reading that people who don't care for what homosexuals do, have to allow them into their guest houses, especially when they say that they would allow unmarried straight couple to stay either.
No one can or could justify the old days of queer bashing, but now, people's maorals are being made by decree.
However, if the bible isn't the word of God, then everyone will be ok, but if it is the word of God, then people had better watch out because the bible also says that soon he will destroy the wicked, just as in the days of Noah and Sodom and Gomorah
anistasia
says...
8:02am Sat 16 Feb 13
.nobody can say god told them their relationship should be a man and a woman.man wrote the bible.gay/lesbian people are not vile let them get on with their lives if they are consenting adults.I would not mind living next to any one with any sexual preference.they don't harm anyone.I would like to see the effort people put in to complaining about something legal to be put in to child abusers.something only one side of the relationship can be legal.I have lesbian friends who have brought up great kids and their parents sexual orientation as made no difference to their children all grown up in heterosexual relationships.
CynicaloldGit
says...
5:28pm Sat 16 Feb 13
However, get away from the God bit, why I wonder, did evolution not develope where two men or two women could procreate....why did humans not evolve into hermaphrodites?
Whether you believe in God, or evolution, neither of these developed so men could go with men and women with women do they?
Dan595
says...
6:39pm Sat 16 Feb 13
CynicaloldGit
says...
7:22pm Sat 16 Feb 13
Dan595 wrote:same old semantics and same old arguments.........ho
That doesn't mean it is wrong, and that isn't a reason to prevent equal marriage. Is marriage is about pro creation then should infertile be stopped from marrying?
w do people know they are infertile till they try for children...homosexul
as cannot try for children
anistasia
says...
7:50pm Sat 16 Feb 13
CynicaloldGit
says...
8:58pm Sat 16 Feb 13
anistasia wrote:But the roman empire, if you know anything at all about history, declined and fell because the family unit broke down.
Think of the Romans etc always sleeping with each other all these 1000s years ago and the human race still expanding.it's equal rights for all what would heterosexual couples make of it if the law changed and said heterosexual couples could not marry they would not like it so in this modern day and age let them get on with it.how many mps have come out would it make any difference if we had a gay prime minister.if he/she can do the job all good and well .but how many would vote against them just because of their sexual orientation and not on their policies.
Now you apologists can wrap it up anyway you want, to serve your own interests, ot the interests of your friends, but the answer is simple.
Whilst we normal people would not harm, promote harm or likewuse against fellow humans, you will not get us to agree with the homosexual act. Get on with you lives, lobby the gov't to give the same rights to homosexulas in a relationship as those in a hetrosexual relationship, but please, allow me to quote Mrs Merton............st
op ramming it down everyone eles's throats.
And while you are all on about equality........do you know, that hetrosexual couples cannot have a civil partnership, they can only live together ot be married so till normal people can have a civil partnership, why should homsexuals have a marriage........sema
ntics on normal people's parts this time.
Dan595
says...
9:29pm Sat 16 Feb 13
CynicaloldGit wrote:So it's okay for religious people who are against equal marriage to ram it down people's throat and serve their own interests by fighting it. However when it is the lgbt community and its supporters it is wrong? It is wrong to fight for equality?
anistasia wrote:But the roman empire, if you know anything at all about history, declined and fell because the family unit broke down.
Think of the Romans etc always sleeping with each other all these 1000s years ago and the human race still expanding.it's equal rights for all what would heterosexual couples make of it if the law changed and said heterosexual couples could not marry they would not like it so in this modern day and age let them get on with it.how many mps have come out would it make any difference if we had a gay prime minister.if he/she can do the job all good and well .but how many would vote against them just because of their sexual orientation and not on their policies.
Now you apologists can wrap it up anyway you want, to serve your own interests, ot the interests of your friends, but the answer is simple.
Whilst we normal people would not harm, promote harm or likewuse against fellow humans, you will not get us to agree with the homosexual act. Get on with you lives, lobby the gov't to give the same rights to homosexulas in a relationship as those in a hetrosexual relationship, but please, allow me to quote Mrs Merton............st
op ramming it down everyone eles's throats.
And while you are all on about equality........do you know, that hetrosexual couples cannot have a civil partnership, they can only live together ot be married so till normal people can have a civil partnership, why should homsexuals have a marriage........sema
ntics on normal people's parts this time.
The people who support the church always say people must respect the churches beliefs which I do respect people may believe different to me, but I think that if it is used to restrict somebody else's freedom then it shouldn't be tolerated.
What happened to freedom? What happened to equality?
Also I do realise that heterosexuals are unable to get a civil partnership, but they can get married in a not religious place and civil partnerships provide less rights that what a marriage would. However I would support such legislation should it come about.
Magicman!
says...
3:41am Sun 17 Feb 13
I know of homosexual couples who do not want to get married, and others that opposed the same-sex marriage bill.... so according to the councillor, these homosexual people would themselves be homophobic - how absurd!
anistasia
says...
5:53am Sun 17 Feb 13
CynicaloldGit
says...
8:03am Sun 17 Feb 13
And as far as the Church people rammoing their views down others throats, they never mentioed anything until the homosexual activists did.
And whilst some of you are on about equal rights, just sit down and think of ALL the areas where we don't have equal rights apart from Homosexual marriage........you'
d be staggered, so why should homosexuals be equal when no one else is?
Buzz Light-year
says...
8:35am Sun 17 Feb 13
CynicaloldGit
says...
9:16am Sun 17 Feb 13
Dan595
says...
9:24am Sun 17 Feb 13
CynicaloldGit wrote:So because other people face inequality more and more people should face it to than trying to move towards equality?
I told you, personally I could give a flying ****.........But I welcome the upset it's causing, as it means that the Nasty Party will not get elected again in 15. More than half ot their MPs are agin it and are voicing their disgust to it.
And as far as the Church people rammoing their views down others throats, they never mentioed anything until the homosexual activists did.
And whilst some of you are on about equal rights, just sit down and think of ALL the areas where we don't have equal rights apart from Homosexual marriage........you'
d be staggered, so why should homosexuals be equal when no one else is?
And the 'homosexual activists' are well within their rights to speak up for equal marriage when it holds majority support in the country, if moving towards and equal society is a bad thing then it must be terrible that they want to fight for equality.
By your logic we should allow segregation because some people aren't as equal as others
anistasia
says...
9:27am Sun 17 Feb 13
ColdAsChristmas
says...
6:09pm Sun 17 Feb 13
How about equality for Fathers, both pre birth and later?
In fact why not install a black lesbian Pope and have done with it?
In days gone bye, sexuality would have been a private issue and discrimination / equality not brought into question. Now we are told it has to be in your face and children's faces.
And Carol, how about organising pothole repairs and resurfacing the roads in your patch before someone is killed, instead of stirring up a heap of unnecessary trouble!
Dan595
says...
6:25pm Sun 17 Feb 13
ColdAsChristmas wrote:But why should we have to hide sexuality like it is wrong? And the Tory manifesto isn't the manifesto that we are governed under, in fact it is the coalition agreement which due to it been decided after the election the government has no mandate for. Therefore NHS reform, welfare reform and equal marriage are all been done its no Mandate, but which of those held a majority support in the public opinion polls, equal marriage. Also how does allowing the LGBT community equal marriage rights does that effect your everyday life, because people can have a day to celebrate their love and be together in unity under the name of marriage is that a bad thing? It's not in anyone's faces, and not in children's faces, these are just ridiculous statements used to belittle equal rights.
This is all about rocking the state and establishment + divide the people in a way the violent Islamic nutters could never do. Callmedave has fallen straight for it without it being in any manifesto or the Queen's Speech!
How about equality for Fathers, both pre birth and later?
In fact why not install a black lesbian Pope and have done with it?
In days gone bye, sexuality would have been a private issue and discrimination / equality not brought into question. Now we are told it has to be in your face and children's faces.
And Carol, how about organising pothole repairs and resurfacing the roads in your patch before someone is killed, instead of stirring up a heap of unnecessary trouble!
ColdAsChristmas
says...
2:19am Mon 18 Feb 13
What about equal rights for Fathers?
You didn't even bother to go there!
How about Civil Partnerships for heterosexuals without Marriage?
How about male only swimming sessions to equal female only swimming sessions?
Carol, you should be ashamed of yourself. Now how about fixing our roads and cutting our council tax?
MrsHoney
says...
8:40am Mon 18 Feb 13
Dan595
says...
9:25am Mon 18 Feb 13
ColdAsChristmas wrote:Promoting a 'gay agenda'? What agenda is that, that we should be respected and viewed as equal. And at no point did I say those weren't issues, however the letter focuses on gay rights. And I have previously mentioned tha I would support civil partnerships for heterosexuals should legislation be proposed, so get your facts right.
Ridiculous my foot Dan, you are promoting a gay agenda under the cover of equality.
What about equal rights for Fathers?
You didn't even bother to go there!
How about Civil Partnerships for heterosexuals without Marriage?
How about male only swimming sessions to equal female only swimming sessions?
Carol, you should be ashamed of yourself. Now how about fixing our roads and cutting our council tax?
ColdAsChristmas
says...
4:35pm Mon 18 Feb 13
Just because you agree with it and would support equal Civil Partnership does not mean it will happen.
Solve that inequality first.
Dan595
says...
5:34pm Mon 18 Feb 13
ColdAsChristmas
says...
12:17am Tue 19 Feb 13
We all know that politicians are generally out of touch.
At the end of the day there are far more important things to debate and gay marriage will ridicule the Church in a bigger way than female Bishops might.
Dan595
says...
7:21am Tue 19 Feb 13
ColdAsChristmas wrote:Seems to me like you are out of touch
You mean majority support in the House of Commons. Nobody asked me!
We all know that politicians are generally out of touch.
At the end of the day there are far more important things to debate and gay marriage will ridicule the Church in a bigger way than female Bishops might.
The Great Buda says...
12:17pm Fri 15 Feb 13
If you repress people, then you should be called out on it.
If two people love each other, then why can't they be married?