Re: In Defense of the Marriage
 

Nope. That is why they left Europe in the first place.

Re: In Defense of the Marriage
 

am i miss b? ohh that makes me sound so mysterious :pp

Re: In Defense of the Marriage
 

Well done, one person agrees with you so other people's opinions no longer count.

Having a memory problem? You were the one who first resorted to bringing out the dictionary.


More importantly, do you have the brains to know what you are going on about?

Re: In Defense of the Marriage
 

i certainly do NOT agree with him :eek: :confused:

Re: In Defense of the Marriage
 

Waddy boy, she didn't agree, she understood what I meant.

Re: In Defense of the Marriage
 

Whoops, didn`t mean to tar you with the same brush.

Re: In Defense of the Marriage
 

:LOL: its ok i forgive you just this once..

now :notopic:

Re: In Defense of the Marriage
 

Isnt it unseasonally warm today...

Re: In Defense of the Marriage
 

:LOL: we sooooo need an "ontopic" emotcon :rofl:

Re: In Defense of the Marriage
 

i think marriage should be allowed between a gay couple, disallowing it would be a breach of a human right, that is to get married, i dont see a real problem in not allowing it to happen, except the religious section of society sticking there noses in to other peoples business.

marriage is about creating a new bond, solidifying the relationship you have with your partner.

if kids are to come in to the equasion adoption would be the route or the use of donors.............

if a reply to the child needs to given at a later date, as to why he/she has two same sex parents, then it would feasable to 'cover' this up until the child has reached a sufficient age to understand the situation.

Re: In Defense of the Marriage
 

At what age would you consider a child old enough to understand the situation?

The reason I ask is that we assume that children can understand the situation in a heterosexual relationship with no problems, and that isn`t something innate. If a child can understand one type of relationship I don`t see that they couldn`t understand the other type. Another bonus is that if these things are explained to them when they are young enough then hopefully then they won`t be misled by that propaganda put out by large sections of society.

Re: In Defense of the Marriage
 

Er no, I've been against that long before I became a Christian. If gays wish to have relationships then all well and good. But for me (and many others) marriage has been about children.

Yep fine, as long as both sides are opposite sexes.

Cool! So, lying to the child!

Tell me, why would you need to 'cover' anything up?

Re: In Defense of the Marriage
 

WTF? The propaganda?! Would that be the same propaganda that the majority of the human race has subscribed to for at least 2000 years? I call that established practice with long precedent.

Re: In Defense of the Marriage
 

aged 12-13

i would say 16 as a safeguard

yes but you dont expect a 5 year old to understand what a homosexual relationship is about, you have to think about the timeing, it would be individually balanced depending on the mentality of the person at the age they were told, not everyone can fully understand the opposite to something, especially if those around them meaning other children have a mother and father and you have to acknowledge there question and they feel 'abnormal'............

if you do mistime the education then you will ultimately confuse the child, the 'propoganda' as you put it would no come in to it, because the child would/should have sufficient protection from the parents to ensure other pupils dont question the child about not having a mother or father, but having said that things tend to 'get out'............

Re: In Defense of the Marriage
 

So do you agree that an upbringing by a homosexual couple is, shall we say, 'unconventional' enough to warrant the need to 'cover' it up to a child?

I say conventional upbringings sound much better!