Obviously one doesn’t want to get involved in name calling and some peoples’ objections to gay marriage are based on deeply held religious bigotry

But frankly all of the arguments that have been put forward against it are just unsustainable tosh

But people were standing up and saying “Marriage is between a man and a woman”
I thought not any more princess it’s changed

That’s the thing with the law you see.

The law is one thing then it changes and then its something else

And then of course theres the argument “Well what next?”

Nothing next that’s it

“Well what next, will a man be able to marry his brother”

…. No,no

When Catholics were first allowed to stand in Parliament it didn’t then change so that furniture could stand.

When the franchise was extended to women it wasn’t then extended to sandwiches or carpets it does work like that, they’ve just changed the law to make it equal for gay and straight people and that’s all there is to it.

But there’s this huge fixation with other peoples’ private parts, I was listening to Charles Moore who used to edit the Telegraph was being interviewed and I thought if you didn’t have a posh public school accent, if you sounded like a cab driver they wouldn’t be bothering with you, you’d have to phone up Any Answers with all the rest of the personality disorders.

In fairness Cameron is trying to save the institution of marriage which not many people are interested in, he’s hoping that gays will do for marriage what they did for musical theatre…..

Report abuse

Think how advanced our comprehension of the universe would be if in Ancient Greece, for example, they had our current level of technological and scientific expertise…

Ancient scholars were just as intelligent as what modern intellectuals are, the former just lacked sophisticated technology and acceptance from the majority of the population.

Report abuse

For example the common believe on how the planets formed which to my mind has for a long time been portrayed as an issue solved with scientific “facts” but having watched some interesting clips by Dr Paul Francis it seems the “facts” my not be as clear after all?.

Lawrence Krauss and a universe from nothing has a rather misleading title also.

Too many science celebs i`m afraid and taken at their word often fills our minds with what we think are indisputable facts which often need more clarity on only to find some things are not quite as we been told.

Report abuse

Report abuse

Although one may argue that we are now at a stage where we can assess the validity of scientific and religious theories, we are nevertheless in the inchoative, even primitive, phase with regards to knowledge and understanding of such concepts, the marvels made over the last several millennia notwithstanding. For 1500 years (Antiquity to the Renaissance) the vast majority of the European population were convinced that Roman medical man Cladius Galen had comprehensively covered all aspects of medicine, surgery and anatomy, yet the Renaissance, Enlightenment and Scientific Revolution led to the alteration, and even abolition, of traditional medical theories in place of concepts that were scientifically sound.

This links to the situation occurring on this forum and in the whole if humanity as the majority of people display strong beliefs in either religion or science and believe that the concepts they support are impossible to debunk and therefore will be used as a source of knowledge for the origins of life on Earth for eternity. However, like I have said, we have much to learn in the fields of science and religion and so don’t commit yourself to particular views/beliefs this early on as such knowledge may be abandoned during the coming centuries and millennia since scholars may have discovered the truth.

I agree with your idea that the British Empire used religion as a pretext for violence, yet an arguably even more important factor was the emergence of Social Darwinism as the extension of ‘survival or the fittest’ so that it encompassed race afforded occupying Britons the excuse to oppress and ill treat indigenous communities and have these people work themselves to death. This was knowing that, they, as so-called ‘lesser breeds ‘ due to their allegedly lower brain mass and undeveloped physical features, we’re destined to be exploited by their Aryan superiors.

Report abuse

God created the moon and the stars to provide light. Very complex lights if you ask me.

Science is backed up by logic, reason and fact. Religion is backed up by an old book.

Report abuse

Report abuse

I doubt it’s just liberals who are pro-gay here. It’s called modern times. If you want to live by an outdated, contradictory book then so be it. But Christianity should no longer have an affect on the state.

Report abuse

Report abuse

Report abuse

I don’t doubt the existence of a Jesus at all. I know that records show that he was alive around 2000 years ago.

Report abuse

Report abuse

You hit the nail on the head when you used the word “story”. That’s all it is, a fairytale, full of silly little stories that together make up one large one. Quite how anyone is taken in by it amazes me, I guess brainwashing and fear are two of the reasons but surely nowadays people oughtn’t to be so gullible?

Report abuse

I agree that the argument against parent/child incest is a clear cut moral one. It is damaging without doubt. The film Savage Grace covers interesting and unnerving sexual themes including homosexuality and incest.

Regarding sibling incest the legal position is firm but the moral case is perhaps open for debate. If they are consenting adults it is a difficult one. Those who feel compelled towards this will have problems which will only be compounded by the legal position.

Regarding the in-breeding issue if one of them is infertile or if they are taking precautions does that not resolve the problem? What about sibling homosexual relationships – is that OK?

Report abuse

Report abuse