How Do You Feel About Gay Marriage?

one thing is cultural and the other is genetics.

it's completely different.

but yes, it would make a good sci-fi, a bit like Children of Men.

Hipster_Nebula wrote:one thing is cultural and the other is genetics.

it's completely different.

but yes, it would make a good sci-fi, a bit like Children of Men.

I'm sure in 20 years or so there will be technology available where by a small ring or chip could be put around the shaft of a man's penis, if it comes into contact with a vagina it givesoff a deadly electric shock that kills both parties.

You heard it here first.

Natasha Whittam wrote:
I'm sure in 20 years or so there will be technology available where by a small ring or chip could be put around the shaft of a man's penis, if it comes into contact with a vagina it givesoff a deadly electric shock that kills both parties.

You heard it here first.

I'd be the first to top myself if this became a reality Natasha. But you've given me a laugh tonight!

[/quote]

I'm sure in 20 years or so there will be technology available where by a small ring or chip could be put around the shaft of a man's penis, if it comes into contact with a vagina it givesoff a deadly electric shock that kills both parties.

You heard it here first.[/quote]

An electric Prince Albert ? Whatever next ?

Natasha Whittam wrote:Have you ever "experimented" Chris, you seem an open-minded sort of guy.

They say 1 in 4 men have tried it....that means one of you, RT, Hipster or sluffy has had gay sex. I might do a poll.

I have to admit I laughed out loud at this.

But I'd be astonished if 1 in 4 men had tried gay sex. Absolutely astonished.

I am in favour of civil partnerships, but I am not in favour of gays being able to have civil weddings. I think marriage between a man and a woman is not an institution or concept any government has a right to redefine. It wasn't in their manifesto, nobody has voted for it, and it's not one of the pressing issues of the day.

largehat wrote:

But I'd be astonished if 1 in 4 men had tried gay sex. Absolutely astonished.

You say that but sluffy's keeping extremely quiet.

Being older and falling apart more than you youngsters, I once was required to have an inspection of my prostate by the doctor which was done manually - lube out, rubber glove on, knees up to my chest, etc!

I can honestly say that the only silver lining to this unfortunate and very uncomfortable experience was that it confirmed what I already knew - that gay love is definitely not for me!

Natasha Whittam wrote:Have you ever "experimented" Chris, you seem an open-minded sort of guy.

They say 1 in 4 men have tried it....that means one of you, RT, Hipster or sluffy has had gay sex. I might do a poll.

Apologies for my late reply as just got back from driving my Delorean to Blackburn to Dingle-bash Bolton Hater!

Never experimented as I like women. I am just an open-minded guy, as in each to their own.



Also if they did introduce an electric-shock Prince Alber, then i would have to do a "Logans Run" - youngsters look it up, as I aint explaining the film/TV series here.

Here's another possibly fictitious gay statistic:

40% of gay men don't have anal sex.

Its about as queer as you can get.Cameroon needs shagging with a Ragmans Bugle for entertaining it.

Angry Dad wrote:Its about as queer as you can get.Cameroon needs shagging with a Ragmans Bugle for entertaining it.

That's one way of putting it!

The Catholic Church in Scotland clearly want no truck with Satans Alley.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9121424/We-cannot-afford-to-indulge-this-madness.html

Can't say I am in favour for the whole marragie thing, as it was once famously put ''god created adam and eve not adam and steve''.

aaron_bwfc wrote:Can't say I am in favour for the whole marragie thing, as it was once famously put ''god created adam and eve not adam and steve''.

It's a bloody political hot potato is what it is..... Although the Catholic Church are perhaps not the best organisation to be spouting virtue with the track record of some of their brethren .

aaron_bwfc wrote:Can't say I am in favour for the whole marragie thing, as it was once famously put ''god created adam and eve not adam and steve''.

well said that man.

Males are not meant to have sex with other males.
For a start the world dont work that way.
We have attractive females with boobs and vaginas to have sex with.
Lets say you have kelly brook naked bending over asking you to do her and next to her you have some hairy arsed ball hanging dude wiggling his arse and balls at you, you,d have to be a sick fcuck to want the dude!!!

Reebok Trotter wrote:

Angry Dad wrote:Its about as queer as you can get.Cameroon needs shagging with a Ragmans Bugle for entertaining it.

That's one way of putting it!

The Catholic Church in Scotland clearly want no truck with Satans Alley.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9121424/We-cannot-afford-to-indulge-this-madness.html

That photo of that sad old queen always makes me want to hurl.

I think gay marriage is a bit of an anachronism for the following reason:

There is a difference between believing in "God" and believing in religion. Both are man-made constructs, but whilst there is mileage in believing in "God" - at least in terms of believing in a creative force that created something from nothing - even if it is in questioning what created the quarks and subatomic particles that existed prior to the Big Bang as a foundation to some form of spirituality.

Religion on the other hand is a man-made construct that was designed by people to meet social, economic, political and cultural needs and is very much open to debate. The "teachings" themselves are dubious as they are open to interpretation - witness the ramblings of Catholic priests before the Bible was translated into English so that the people could make their own minds up about what it means - or present day interpretations of the Koran particularly for the benefit of Urdu or Indonesian speaking punters who can recite parrot-fashion but don't speak Arabic. Such Priests and Imams could tell people almost anything and there are numerous examples of the same piece of literature being interpreted in multiple ways.

So the issue for gay people is that most interpretations of teachings are homophobic. Presumably the gay people that want to get married 1) believe in "God" in one form or another - no problem there and b) are part of a religion - after all marriage is a religious ceremony created by humans to fulfill a socio-cultural need (perhaps to support the concept of family stability?) and that's where the problem lies.

I don't see why a person would seek a stamp of approval from an organisation that traditionally disapproves of the very act being approved. Where's the value? I feel sorry for gays who are conflicted by their own belief structure - must be helluva confusing for them.

It's a bit like British Asians wanting to join the BNP.

My main concern is where two gay men or lesbian women have children via surrogacy. I do not think it is fair to lumber a child with such a lifestyle. It must be a nightmare for young children living in this environment. Conflicting messages at home and school and church must make it very difficult for them to fit in.

Whats the john kid gonna think when he goes to school? my mums a man!! my dad thinks he,s a woman!! are his so called parents gonna creep him out when he discovers girls? or will he have been converted by then.