Lost for words at some of that crap.
Love Britain ? - Vote UKIP.
- Thread starter Moradin
- Start date
- Status
Lost for words at some of that crap.
Soldato
bahaha
Soldato
I don't think I've denied anyone anything. I've asked why its necessary to redefine something that, according to you, is antiquated and of no use any more.
Celebrate? Sorry, can that not be done at a civil ceremony? The ones I've been to where awesome parties and certainly a hell of a lot was celebrated. Moral stance? Absolutely nothing to do with the name given to the ceremony. Legal protection? The civil ceremony bill can do that without renaming or redefining something. Calling questioning the renaming of something homophobia is sheer nonsense.
I think that it's important to remember that some people genuinely desire (not quite sure why tbh) a proper church marriage with all the standard stuff. As I say, I can't fathom this considering that most religions hold gay people back to some extent, but that's how they feel anyway.
Don't see anything wrong with that, positive discrimination should be made illegal. It's just as abhorrent as discrimination in my opinon
Lol
And here is ukip's biggest aim "Giving MPs more freedom over their expenses" they are already milking the EU expenses and barely turning up, imagine what farage would be like in the commons
You couldn't make this stuff up.
Soldato
I concour that positive discrimination should be avoided but you can't enforce it.
What do you want a tax payers independent panel to review all employments made to make sure the best person got the job and that no favouritism or discrimination was used to influence the decisions makers decision?
It's absurd to suggest that people are employed for their skin colour to meet quotas over better candidates. If you truly believe you missed out on a promotion because you're a normal white person you're an idiot.
If anything the statistics say women are still being treated un equally what do you propose the ukip goverment will do for sexual equality? Since they are protecting the white man.....
I had a thought about this on the cycle home, and to be honest I don't care what you call the institute of a union between a woman and a man, a man and a man or a woman and a man. I do however understand why some people wanted to keep marriage as man and woman. You might not agree with religion, as I don't in many ways, but I don't really see it as my place to tell them they're wrong.
I would however point out the irony and yes bigotry of v0ns post.
Who are you to tell people that marriage is irrational and illogical? Or to tell them that marriage is an antiquated institution? Thats right: no one.
Last edited:
That is the framework for an nightmarishly Orwellian existence. Surprised it doesn't just go all out and put in doublethink. UKIP are insane.
Soldato
I understand that, but the religions can actually opt out. It hasn't been forced upon them. We have a relatively liberal church here.
Soldato
And there was me thinking that 1984 with a big dollop of Animal Farm was the New Labour manifesto under Blair and Brown...
Associate
I thought the point was that the ECHR could rule in a way that does effectively force it upon them.
It depends, some people have an old fashioned view of marriage and what it represents, those people could not have a problem with homosexuality but have a problem with gay marriage.
Marriage has been a thing for centuries. It's understandable that some old fashioned views of it exists.
Last edited:
I know they can opt out of it, that's not really the point though. As I said, it's not really my place (or anyones for that matter) to be telling them to do so. I just don't see it as homophobic.
Quite what I am thinking, although much more eloquently put.
Which is why I don't consider it homophobic for people to have that view.
Even ukip donors are banging out the crazy now
http://www.theguardian.com/politics...nds?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
http://www.theguardian.com/politics...nds?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Soldato
Great link in which I read
"The Guardian is getting very boring trying to dig up dirt every day on Farage and UKIP. Unfortunately it gets UKIP more votes. Why are the Guardian not worried about Clegg supporting the destruction of the NHS that is more of a concern"
Well said.
And I hope you don't support the German part of the green party.
Because the Guardian is tacit in the underhanded way things are going. How do I know because I offered to leak a substantial amount of stuff that a fair and free press would print however because it also implicated senior Labour figures they weren't the slightest bit interested and when I commented to that fact on CIF my comments got removed. Read into that what you will.
Soldato
Think you misread something there. I didn't call marriage irrational or illogical. In that quote I simply pointed that people don't marry because their love or feelings couldn't exist without marriage (it's that "to prove their feelings to each other" part that provides context to the entire sentence). And we don't. I then listed common rational and logical reasons why people do enter matrimony in modern world.
As for "antiquated institution" - of course it is antiquated - it is literally being modernised in front of your eyes to include other relationship compilations than standard man+woman and that's what we are arguing about.
Now, back to that UKIP thing...
Soldato
maybe his granddad flew with squadron 617 ?
- Status