Gay marriage

[SueEllen]

How is 36% "most"? 60%, a clear majority, did express a strong opinion.

"Not fussed" doesn't equal "No" and it doesn't equal "Yes".

It simply means pass the law if you have to I don't give a tulip.

[d000hg]

Is the kind of attention to detail you testers use

[Spacecadet]

Oh alright, due to expert review, new summary;

MANAGEMENT SUMMARY

Author; MTT

Version; 1.1

Some say that. EVERYONE ELSE IS HOMOPHOBIC RELIGIOUS NUTS

Still boring.

FTFY

Old Hack

[Spacecadet]

Is the kind of attention to detail you testers use

What i'm scared about is that he went straight to version 1.0 without ANY testing at all

[Old Hack]

FTFY

Old Hack

Bull. I am saying there is a link twixt Religion and homophobia.

It is a boring subject, for it's so emotive, there's no ground changing; people have a view and stick to it.

But, make no mistake, it's very easy to link homophobia to religion.

[NotAllThere]

But maybe 80 year old gay couples could marry because if they were straight they wouldn't be able to have kids anyway.

I'm pretty sure you're right about Jesus. St Paulay have had something to say about it all. But then he had some odd views.

It's quite clear from Paul's writings that he considered homosexual acts to be sinful. It's mentioned in a few places in his letters. The fact that there are no records of Jesus saying anything about homosexuality does not really mean that it can be argued he was ok with it. When arguing from silence, you have to look at the balance of probabilities.

However, out of Paul's writings it was only a very tiny bit overall, so I doubt very much whether it was such a big deal as certain segments of the religious community make it nowadays.

[d000hg]

I think Paul lumped homosexual sex in the general category of "sexual immorality" actually. The whole concept of sexual orientation and gender identity was nothing like how we see it these days - homosexuality was often seen as an overspill of depravity a bit like how straight people "turn gay" in prison with no women. Similarly bestiality.

This doesn't automatically mean he was against homosexuality itself, just sex outside of marriage which was a man-woman thing and therefore automatically included gay relations.

[MyUserName]

It's quite clear from Paul's writings that he considered homosexual acts to be sinful. It's mentioned in a few places in his letters. The fact that there are no records of Jesus saying anything about homosexuality does not really mean that it can be argued he was ok with it. When arguing from silence, you have to look at the balance of probabilities.

However, out of Paul's writings it was only a very tiny bit overall, so I doubt very much whether it was such a big deal as certain segments of the religious community make it nowadays.

If Jesus did not say it was wrong then aren't those area of the religious community who say it is straying into the 'judge not' territory? Which is something that Jesus did say not to do!

[TheFaQQer]

It's quite clear from Paul's writings that he considered homosexual acts to be sinful.

If it's the acts that the Bible has an issue with, does that mean that being in a celibate gay marriage is OK?

The Catholic church teaches that people with homosexual tendencies must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity and that any sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided, so they must be in favour of (at a minimum) celibate gay marriage, no?

[SueEllen]

The Catholic church teaches that people with homosexual tendencies must be accepted with respect, compassion, and sensitivity and that any sign of unjust discrimination in their regard should be avoided, so they must be in favour of (at a minimum) celibate gay marriage, no?

I'm not Catholic and resent them like any other section of a religion trying to force their views on the majority of people.