Gays don't need the word 'Marriage'.

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.telegraph....ried-says-gay-MP.html

There have been many arguments for and against the need for gays to get 'married', but according to this gay MP homosexual marriage is just "pure politics", and they don't need to get married.

/// homosexuals had already won equal rights with the introduction of civil partnerships and had "never needed the word
'marriage' ". ///

[emmie]

sp, i was referring to these banners on the side of the bus, not a sex lesson to the kids, grandkids.

[jackthehat]

<<can you explain to a little child about someone's sexual preferences >>

It seems you were......!?

If these banners make people address their own thoughts on the matter, surely that can only be to the good?

[NOX]

I can't understand a problem in explaining to a child of any age what a gay couple is. As others have said you simply say soemthing along the lines of
'Some men marry ladies and some men prefer to marry other men and some ladies to marry other ladies- it just depends on who they fall in love with'.
Nothing dreadful, harmful or worrying in that surely, and yes gay people need to word 'marriage' because marriage should not belong to heterosexuals only or to the religious fundamentalist elite- it predates Christianity and all other major religions, so it does not ' belong' to any association that they uniquely try to attribute it to.

[Kromovaracun]

I won't pretend to have any special insight on this, but I don't see how a child asking "what does gay mean?" is any more awkward than a child asking "where do babies come from?" Surely an important part of being a parent is dealing with questions like that in appropriate ways? Others have already suggested perfectly reasonable ways of doing it. The word 'gay' isn't just about sex/'the act'.

[rockyracoon]

My kids asked what gay meant at a very young age, I told them without having go into sex, they understood and are very comfortable that there are gay people in the world.

[tamborine]

Its a huge advert on a bus which my g'kids would question with "get over what" ? You tell me the answer.

[tamborine]

thanx nox, I'll remember that :)

[NOX]

the answer is 'Some people don't like gay people becvause they are different to them, so say or do nasty things. This advert is trying to explain to them how wrong they are to discriminate'- then explain discriminate if necessary.
It's really not a big deal is it Tambo, just normal quesitons kids would ask?

[ladybirder]

Tambo you haven't answered my previous question to you.
If one of your grandchildren turned out to be gay, they would understand that it was OK, if you had explained it to them as JTH and NOX have said.

[EDDIE51]

'Marriage' was originally an institution for the procreation of children and raising of a family , not something a Gay couple are likedly to be very successful at !
In my book , marriage civil or religious is still a union between 2 people of opposite sex that provides a stable environment to have and bring up a family.
Gay couples can have a civil union/partnership and if they want can have that union blessed in a church , but don't call it 'marriage'
No apologies for this it is my deeply held view.

[jackthehat]

How very generous of you, Eddie........

[ladybirder]

Gay couples can have a civil union/partnership and if they want can have that union blessed in a church , but don't call it 'marriage'

Righty Ho. Thanks Eddie.

[maggiebee]

Well put Eddie!

[tamborine]

Ladybirder, I wouldn't mind in the least what their sexual preferences were. They're too young for me to discuss sex with them - that's their parents perogative.

[NOX]

Eddie:- 'Marriage' was originally an institution for the procreation of children and raising of a family'
Errrrr says who exactly? You around the first time the word 'marriage' was used were you? There is in fact a long history of same sex relationships being perfectly socially acceptable prior to the advent of Christianity ( just google it before you argue that no there wasn't) so you can't possibly know that your stement is accurate, you can only speak from your own first hand knowledge of what ' marriage' means to you.
It's a word, it's not yours or your religious group's to do with as it pleases, so it belongs to everyone equally and I don't actually think anyone needs your permission to use in context to a deeply committed gay couple. And I make no apology for finding your post remarkably crass, offensive and arrogant.

[naomi24]

//raising of a family , not something a Gay couple are likedly to be very successful at !
In my book//

I know a gay couple (male) who have successfully adopted two small children both under 3 years old – brother and sister - their mother a hopeless drug addict. The couple are wealthy, respectable, highly involved in their local community, and most importantly wonderfully loving parents. What’s the problem?

Oh, and by the way, the very suggestion any union that isn’t supported by the church in the first instance can be blessed by the church following a civil ceremony demonstrates the blatant hypocrisy of religion.

Next!

[ladybirder]

Tambo - you said "I dont want to have to explain this sign to my young g'kids".
JTH at 18.15 explains to you how to do it without even mentioning the word sex. It's not a question of discussing sex with your g'kids. You're just explaining the sign.

[Kromovaracun]

"'Marriage' was originally an institution for the procreation of children and raising of a family , not something a Gay couple are likedly to be very successful at ! "

Well, it's true that gay couples can't procreate. Nobody would dispute that. But they can certainly raise a family - if you believe they can't, the evidence is overwhelmingly against you. So that half of your argument simply doesn't work.

But to return to the procreation thing - marriage has gained far more cultural capital our society than simply being a rite of passage for procreation. Marriage is an important part of how we treat love between people as a culture. It's part of our heritage - not a part which I personally buy into very much, I admit, but it is one which a lot of people happen to see as very important. Some of those people are gay. You have not demonstrated why they should continue to be barred from it.

[mushroom25]

kromo, whilst the ability of all types or combinations of loving couples to raise families is adequately evidenced, I can't help but be reminded - in respect of Eddies "procreation" angle - of a scene from the Life of Brian, during a meeting of the People's Front of Judea:-

Stan: I want to have babies.
Reg: You want to have babies?
Stan: It's every man's right to have babies if he wants them.
Reg: But ... you can't have babies.
Stan: Don't you oppress me.
Reg: I'm not oppressing you, Stan. You haven't got a womb. Where's the foetus gonna gestate? You gonna keep it in a box?

[bundleone]

Strange that the majority of hertersexual couples choose not to marry these days or at least they live together for years before doing so, and now that gay relationships are accepable and they can have civil rights they want a legal marriage,How long before all those imprisoned in my young days for being in a homosexual relationship are claiming compensation for
'wrongful imprisonment'