Gay People Against Gay Marriage

hurfdurf · 13 Jun 2013 at 23:54

neodude said:
To go off on a slight tangent. I have nothing against gay people but... The definition of marriage has always been "man and women". So by definition you can't have gay marriage. By all means have a ceremony/status exactly the same, but call it something different. Gayrriage?

It's like me trying to say a truck should be called a car because it has the right to be called that. Or that Red should have the right to be called Green.

Madness imho.

This is dumb + wrong m8

Hth

FoxEye · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:00

hurfdurf said:
"It's just trash-talk! We don't actually hate the gays/women/non-whites/etc! Why shouldn't we be able to use these words that have no meaning to us but years of negative/violent connotations for all those other groups?"

You are so removed, and dare I say privileged, from never having to deal with homophobia/sexism/racism/etc that it's like this little bubble where you can't perceive the impact those words have on some people.

Yes. We live in a society where increasingly people find the need to be offended. The act or intention can be harmless, but these days it matters little.

People will be offended by anything and everything. I suppose gay people aren't alone in that by any means.

To me, 'that's gay' is not hate speech. It's just a way of saying 'that's rubbish'.

RDM · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:01

FoxEye said:
Would that somehow make my opinion less valid?

No, but if you were to add a lack of empathy to the mix it might explain why you think it is so easy to brush off homophobic insults as just banter.

hurfdurf · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:06

FoxEye said:
Yes. We live in a society where increasingly people find the need to be offended. The act or intention can be harmless, but these days it matters little.

People will be offended by anything and everything. I suppose gay people aren't alone in that by any means.

To me, 'that's gay' is not hate speech. It's just a way of saying 'that's rubbish'.

Riiiight. So now you think its ok that we use part of someones identity to call other stuff so rubbish. You are a charmer aren't you big man.

FoxEye · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:07

hurfdurf said:
And by the way, countless studies have shown that people with your views are way more likely to be aroused by homosexual sex than straight people who are completely ok with homosexuals.

Makes you think m8

First I'm privileged, now I'm a closet gay. Awesome. Now if I can be a rape apologist too I'll have a full set

Hades · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:07

RDM said:
No, but if you were to add a lack of empathy to the mix it might explain why you think it is so easy to brush off homophobic insults as just banter.

hold on a minute. so being a white male in some way alters your view of the response? isn't that, dare I say it, predudiced? I'm not sure I like that view.

spudbynight · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:10

Edrof said:
Language changes, granddad.

(*Mischievous giggle*)

Yes, these days the word "gay" means rubbish.

RDM · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:11

Hades said:
hold on a minute. so being a white male in some way alters your view of the response? isn't that, dare I say it, predudiced? I'm not sure I like that view.

Not n the slightest, but f you are a white male who lacks empathy then you are much less likey to have suffered from discrimination and so will have no real reference point to judge it. It is the lack of empathy that is key.

Hades · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:14

RDM said:
Not n the slightest, but f you are a white male who lacks empathy then you are much less likey to have suffered from discrimination and so will have no real reference point to judge it. It is the lack of empathy that is key.

compared to a non white person who lacks empathy?

FoxEye · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:14

RDM said:
Not n the slightest, but f you are a white male who lacks empathy then you are much less likey to have suffered from discrimination and so will have no real reference point to judge it. It is the lack of empathy that is key.

But surely in the context of gay as 'rubbish', there is no homophobic sentiment? People don't even associate the word 'gay' with 'homosexual' in the majority of its usage.

The intent to offend of persecute simply isn't there. 'Fag' maybe a bit more offensive, but again in the context of 'that sniper on the roof is a fag', it isn't used as a insult towards gay people.

Does context and intent simply not matter?

Castiel · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:15

hurfdurf said:
It's still progress. Gay people will be able to get married and hold equal status to straight people. Civil partnerships are a seperate issue and I agree it should be sorted so both can have them.

I don't agree that it is a separate issue as the definition in respect of how they are treated under the law are the same. I am not bothered whether both Homosexuals and Heterosexuals have access to civil partnerships or whether they are removed as an option entirely....I simply want to see an equal provision for everyone, because that is what equality means....it certainly doesn't mean giving one group access to legal provisions that another doesn't have access to...and this legislation doesn't address the fundamental issue here...one of inequality and discrimination, something that was the problem with Civil Partnerships to begin with and why we are legislating again, in fact it extends the discrimination to a larger group instead.

There is no reason why an amendment cannot be addressed before ratification and passing of this bill into law. It is only expedient political capital that is the influential factor and not progress toward true equality for everyone regardless of their orientation, as this bill exacerbates the discrimination rather than lessening it.

titaniumx3 · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:19

Gay marriage, I don't care eitherway.

Gays adopting children, I simply can't agree with. Seems to be a massive flaw with it somewhere.

I also believe homosexuality is not normal.

RDM · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:19

Hades said:
compared to a non white person who lacks empathy?

The non white person who lacks empathy is more likey to have suffered discrimination so would therefore have a reference point to judge by. They may still ignore it however and still be offensive.

RDM · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:23

FoxEye said:
But surely in the context of gay as 'rubbish', there is no homophobic sentiment? People don't even associate the word 'gay' with 'homosexual' in the majority of its usage.

The intent to offend of persecute simply isn't there. 'Fag' maybe a bit more offensive, but again in the context of 'that sniper on the roof is a fag', it isn't used as a insult towards gay people.

Does context and intent simply not matter?

Can you not see how constantly making the inference that gay is equal to bad could be upsetting if you were homosexual?

RDM · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:24

titaniumx3 said:
Gay marriage, I don't care eitherway.

Gays adopting children, I simply can't agree with. Seems to be a massive flaw with it somewhere.

I also believe homosexuality is not normal.

As we have a shortage of people willing to adopt in the UK do you think a child remaining in care is preferable to them being adopted by a gay couple?

FoxEye · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:29

RDM said:
The non white person who lacks empathy is more likey to have suffered discrimination so would therefore have a reference point to judge by. They may still ignore it however and still be offensive.

Quite a nice position you have there.

If you don't find the term 'gay' offensive, you lack empathy...

It's a self-fulfilling argument. Anyone who disagrees with you lacks the required perspective or experience to understand the issue properly. Hence you cannot be wrong

I like it!

Captain · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:33

Who are gay couples hurting by getting married?

FoxEye · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:34

RDM said:
Can you not see how constantly making the inference that gay is equal to bad could be upsetting if you were homosexual?

We've adopted the word to mean rubbish. It used to mean 'jolly'. In a different context it would mean homosexual, such as 'gay couple'.

We have plenty of words with different meanings depending on context. That's just English.

If you want to decide that 'gay' can only mean homo, then it's your misunderstanding, no?

RDM · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:35

FoxEye said:
Quite a nice position you have there.

If you don't find the term 'gay' offensive, you lack empathy...

It's a self-fulfilling argument. Anyone who disagrees with you lacks the required perspective or experience to understand the issue properly. Hence you cannot be wrong I like it!

Not really, I don't find the term gay offensive, but I could certainly see why someone who is homosexual could. Much like I don't find the term retard offensive but could see why someone who has a sibling with Down's syndrome could.

RDM · 14 Jun 2013 at 00:36

FoxEye said:
We've adopted the word to mean rubbish. It used to mean 'jolly'. In a different context it would mean homosexual, such as 'gay couple'.

We have plenty of words with different meanings depending on context. That's just English.

If you want to decide that 'gay' can only mean homo, then it's your misunderstanding, no?

Just saying "no" would have been quicker...