General Chat

It is truly difficult to understand what all the fuss is about.

There are few people who are 100% heterosexual or gay, as with most things there are many shades of gray. The UK managed to get laws changed 50 years ago so that whatever yr preference it is legal.

It is very much worth remembering that there is a very long list of gay people who have contributed hugely to our country of whom I guess Oscar Wilde, L S Lowry, Alan Turing and Freddie Mercury are some of the best known though I could go on and on

It seems to be invidious that such people should not enjoy the choices in their private lives as everybody else and by extension all the ordinary Joes and Gillians as well.

Although the UK has the very odd constitutional quirk of an established church it is not ruled by any church but by a parliament which thankfully is very diverse.

The recent vote has done no more than allow gay people to enter into a long term commitment if they chose to do so.

As to the meaning of marriage - it is a loving commitment to another person forsaking all others. This is the irrefutable logic that the Commons has followed.

Of course most of the religious groups will adhere to the age old definition of " a man and a woman " though some won't e.g. the Quakers and many Anglicans have misgivings.

I doubt any legal challenges to the church opt out would be successful. OTOH employers, places offering marriage celebrations, insurers and so on will have to follow the law once the vote has been ratified. This is bound to cause some front page stories in the Daily Mail.

The Christian church is a religion of the New Testament not the Old. The whole point of the Christian movement is that it is inclusive, based on the concept of being respectful to your fellow human beings or as John Lennon put it "All You Need Is Love". There is no echo of Leviticus in the New Testament - probably the most subversive text of all time.

Unfortunately the ideas of Paul of Tarsus established a hierarchical, exclusive church confirmed in the Nicean creed. It is arguable that it has taken 2 000 years to start getting back to first principles.

As to those without religion it is impossible to imagine they could oppose the change in the law. On what basis when Dawkins postulates that we are all our own god ?

Me myself I live with a very sexy Latin lady and so have no personal axe to grind. I usually take communion with her in the RC church though I am a closet Anglican.

<3

terry is still offensive as far as I'm concerned

well terry has gone from one term to another equally insult -------homo,! perhaps he has a spelling problem........? :-P.

Well I've seen some trot written on here but,,,,,,confirmed batchelor,never heard of it used for any other purpose than what it is,a man who has never married because felt his life was content as a single person or other factors but never because he was attracted to another male......

.and *try to love each child the same* beggers belief.-

You get out and talk to a lot of different people John ... ? you spend your days on here from morning till night , the only time you go out is when you absolutely have too , and as for your views on this or any debate all you ever do is repeat or contradict yourself ,confirmed bachelor abusive ? you are clutching at straws to take people away from the stuff YOU have said , it is pretty obvious by reading your comments that you quite simply do not like gay people .

I know I do not have a closed mind to most things. My favourite programmes are Question Time and PM questions and Today in Senedd. You learn so much through debate. And I get out and talk to a lot of people of a very different mindset to mine.

What I am is stubborn. I will not give way to a debating point that begins "you are a ******!!!!" or "utter rubbish". You will note I have never descended to such a childish level of debate. I just filter that out.

But I often go away and think "she was right. I need to rethink my position". The fact that I have been accused often of shifting my position and not being consistent is probably evidence of that.

Closed mind? PLEASE!!!!!

Snap, Muffy :-)

Are you saying that "confirmed bachelor" is a euphemism for a homosexual man, John? Well that's a new one - I must lead a very sheltered life because I didn't realise that if a man doesn't marry then he must be gay. You live and learn :-0

AnnC has a closed mind? Mmmm.......pot, kettle.

Is it just me? I've never seen the term *confimed bachelor* as meaning anything other than a guy who prefers to remain single...and happily so.....certainly it's not used to suggest that a guy is gay...that's a new one on me !!!!

It is the real world, AnnC. Not the most pleasant of places very often. Sometimes I wish I could move to your parallel and much more inclusive parallel universe. I don't have to watch Jeremy Kyle to see how some others live and think.

Edit. Also, a lot of posters on here (me included) have argued for same sex marriage. I have argued that it is ridiculous since 1836 that we have had non religious civil marriage for mixed sex partnerships - yet we do not allow that priviledge to homosexuals.

I assume you disagree with that. Or that you have changed your point of view during this thread.

closed mind :-S I stand by what I said - "same sex marriage does not seem right any which way" - civil partnership on the other hand is fine

and as for "confirmed bachelor" being an abusive term, well all I can say is that you inhabit a much different world from mine - and that's something I am most happy about

The pc brigade? If that means that I'm one of those people who find words with nasty connotations offensive well so be it terryj. I won't ever apologise for that.

Paula. I offer my view without fee or favour. In the playground, we boys (who could be even nastier than girls sometimes) would use all sorts of words to make the "1 in 25" as it was in those days feel uncomfortable. Any boy a little effeminate was bullied. Perhaps other schools were different.

Now we quite rightly have to all be very careful what we say in the workplace and on threads. So people use other expressions with a nudge, nudge, wink, wink. But for the same purpose - to make the person feel isolated and a lesser human being.

I have to admit that confirmed bachelor a couple of years ago was used in a gentler way (it was used particularly about pop singers and celebrities who we were fond of and who allegedly dressed to the left). But it is being used nearly as aggressively now as the word that so upset this morning.

But if you are convinced that is rubbish - ok. Strangely closed mind from an Opening Poster who began the thread with "same sex marriage does not seem right any which way" :-S :-S :-S

post now edited to satisfy the pc brigade

you can not give offence
only take it

I have never considered confirmed bachelor was an abusive term. My friends son is 39 and has a wonderful life, he has girl friends from time to time but no desire to marry. Yesterday my friend said P is a confirmed bachelor. She is comfortable with it, he is happy with it, and certainly would be more than capable of answering abusive comments. I think he is a hunk. I can't see where the abuse comes in.......... :-S

rubbish, utter rubbish

You are entitled to your opinion, AnnC. Confirmed bachelor meant exactly that (Heathcliff, for example) till I have heard people use it a lot recently. They would claim it was teasing and leg-pulling. I would say it was abuse at a certain level.

It is a polite way of singling a minority out. No different in my mind to the words of the less polite that you object to. Think you might agree if it was not me who had made the point.

:-D :-D :-D :-D

absolute tripe John

We need more emoticons on here!

confirmed bachelor abusive? ridiculous