t he and his "Equality" (or whatever shes called) Secretary just join the Labour Party, and leave the true Conservatives in peace? But, the Lib Dem tail is wagging the Tory dog. Somewhere, at the Daily Mail, they’re waiting with bated breath for the 'Soap Star Gives Lift To Muslim EU Doctor In Royal Corgi Sex-Change Mercy Dash!" story opportunity.Its a Daily Mail article…![]()
No this hasn’t been proposed exactly - but on BBC radio news just this morning there was a story that when the same sex marriage gets past we would not be allowed to use the words ‘husband’ and ‘wife’ anymore because it would be discriminatory to ‘assume’ it was a heterosexual marriage. I would have taken the discussion as being rather tongue in cheek but the BBC is not known for a sense of humour when discussing the news!Its a Daily Mail article…
The “Progenitors A and B” refers to birth certificates in Spain. It hasn’t been proposed in the UK. Moreover, those terms are unrelated to the passage of same-sex marriage in Spain, other than that the wording on the birth certificates were changed a year later. I’m sure a lot of things happened in Spain a year after passage of the same-sex marriage law.
When the coalition came in I thought ‘well the poor will be abandoned but at least we will not have the madness of chasing every mad liberal idea going’. But Cameron seems to be going out of his way to appease the homosexual community more than Labour. Is this all going to come into law and then we will find its just because most of his front bench are ‘Martha rather than Arthur’ ?!Is Cameron trying to commit political suicide? Why dont he and his "Equality" (or whatever shes called) Secretary just join the Labour Party, and leave the true Conservatives in peace? But, the Lib Dem tail is wagging the Tory dog.![]()
It seems that the “equalities minister” is more equal than other people. If there is true equality than every person has a right to accept or reject gay marriage and the government has to allow that. Of course there isn’t true equality, there is only servitude to the new kings - a new feudal system.When the coalition came in I thought ‘well the poor will be abandoned but at least we will not have the madness of chasing every mad liberal idea going’. But Cameron seems to be going out of his way to appease the homosexual community more than Labour. Is this all going to come into law and then we will find its just because most of his front bench are ‘Martha rather than Arthur’ ?!
Husband and wife will be discriminatory. But what about people who want to use husband and wife. Aren’t proponents of “progenitor” or “partner” being discriminatory toward them? It’s all just pure hypocrisy. Any true liberal would spit on this, hence the people who support this aren’t true liberals, or humanists.Why not just say “parent” or “partner”? “Progenitor” sounds so sterile.
I suppose if heterosexual couples want to use husband and wife (or mother and father, as the case may be), then sure, but the same terms don’t apply to homosexual couples, but “spouse” and “parent” (or “caregiver”) are perfectly acceptable (and less sexist) gender-neutral terms.Husband and wife will be discriminatory. But what about people who want to use husband and wife. Aren’t proponents of “progenitor” or “partner” being discriminatory toward them? It’s all just pure hypocrisy. Any true liberal would spit on this, hence the people who support this aren’t true liberals, or humanists.
Why is it sexist to say male and female? Is it sexist to say cow and bull? Is it sexist to correct for sexes when calculating creatinine clearance in the laboratory? Based on that result dangerous drugs are dosed. If that were not done, plenty of people would get very sick and may even die. Is it sexist to assume different QT interval lengths on EKG for males and females? Misrepresenting those can lead to death. Should we let these people die, it seems we choose not to.I suppose if heterosexual couples want to use husband and wife (or mother and father, as the case may be), then sure, but the same terms don’t apply to homosexual couples, but “spouse” and “parent” (or “caregiver”) are perfectly acceptable (and less sexist) gender-neutral terms.
That’s what the gay lobby does not appreciate. If this legislation is passed, the institution will be generic and not really that which they have been jealous of all this time, isn’t it?I’m sorry, but this reduces marriage almost to the level of a business transaction.
I’ve met religious gays who wear crosses, go to church on Sundays and read the Bible. They would like religious marriage and they believe that God would allow such and perhaps even wants such. Many of them have rather conservative ideas too and findThat’s what the gay lobby does not appreciate. If this legislation is passed, the institution will be generic and not really that which they have been jealous of all this time, isn’t it?
That’s the problem…“like” and “want” addles the brain. All they end up with is a broken toy and a pretend “marriage”.I’ve met religious gays who wear crosses, go to church on Sundays and read the Bible. They would like religious marriage and they believe that God would allow such and perhaps even wants such. Many of them have rather conservative ideas too and find
some modern ideas also idiotic.
.