ARmy Rumour SErvice

"Because no man has the authority to set the moral standards in humanity"

So who DID set the moral standards of humanity?

Was it one of them religious 'imaginary friends'??

Originally Posted by Radiance

Who do these little men, David Cameron and Barack Obama, think they are to redefine it? Indeed, who is any man to redefine it?

Yer!!
They should at least apply to join the club of the hundreds (thousands? more?) who have rewritten the bloody thing first!

Originally Posted by Radiance

But don't water down the definition of marriage as being a heterosexual union.

Hang on... isn't that what you're doing?

My personal belief is that any religious types with bees in their bonnets over homosexuality should be forced to try it. I doubt it'd change their minds (well, not all of them) but at least they'd actually know what they were wibbling on about.

Originally Posted by Radiance

Because no man has the authority to set the moral standards in humanity.

So it was God who abolished slavery, apartheid and throwing Christians to the lions was it? Strange. I thought it was men. Because men (and women and gay people) set the moral standard and in a democracy at least it would be an ill advised politician who suggested under-age sex was OK. Cameron is flying a kite with the gay marriage thing. If he feels public opinion is behind the idea it will happen. Because fundamentalist religious voters do not form the majority in this country.

Originally Posted by Radiance

Because you are talking about a "secular" world where what is acceptable is relative.

With no fixed standards, what we define as a "consenting" today may change as whimsically as what we propose to do to heterosexual marriage.

As opposed to you dictating what is moral? Give me secular every time you preaching tosser.

Take your religion and ram it.

If Gay marriage is brought in, the next step is that you can't have two wives or two husbands on a marriage certificate, so the wording on the certificate will have to be changed to partner 1 and partner 2. this will mean that two types of certificate will have to be printed at great expense, this at a time that country is nearly bankrupt. So instead of printing two certificates, there will be one certificate with Partner 1 & 2 on it, which will be used by everyone who wants to get married. The next step on the gay agenda is Birth certificates, as a lot of Gay couples are using surrogate mothers, you can't have two mums or two dads. So the next step is to have birth certificates changed to parent one and parent two.
David Cameron it trying to change thousands of years of tradition to try and secure the Gay vote.

Couldn't careless, an individual should have the choice to do as they please. Why should some geriatric old fart in rome, who covers up paedophilia have a say and that goes for the other fuckwit geriatric in Canterbury as well.

Originally Posted by Radiance

With no fixed standards, what we define as a "consenting" today may change as whimsically as what we propose to do to heterosexual marriage.

If there weren't any 'fixed' moral standards that forbade it would you be comfortable with raping 9-year-old children?