We welcome gay marriage, but no weddings

Echo: We welcome gay marriage, but no weddings - says Father Howarth We welcome gay marriage, but no weddings - says Father Howarth

THE Church of England is specifically banned by law from offering same sex-marriages under the new law which legalises civil weddings.

Other faiths have been told they can “opt in” and offer ceremonies if they choose to, thought some churches, notably the Roman Catholic church, remain implacably opposed.

Father Dominic Howarth, parish priest of Our Lady and All Saints, in Basildon, said while the Catholic church celebrated love, in all its forms, it only endorsed traditional marriages involving a man and a woman.

He explained: “We believe in the tradition that goes back many thousands of years – throughout Christian and Jewish history – of marriage as a union blessed by God, between one man, and one woman, for life.

“For that reason, same-sex marriages cannot be celebrated in our churches.

“As a local priest, I know there can be a lot of struggles in family life, and no one should ever feel judged or excluded. Everyone is welcome in our churches, and I hope and believe everyone is met with love and kindness, whatever their situation.”

For long-serving Tory Castle Point councillor Cliff Brunt, David Cameron’s insistence of legalising same-sex marriage, was a step too far. He decided not to stand for election again in May, citing his party’s policy on gay marriage as a key reason.

Mr Brunt, who has represented Victoria ward, in Hadleigh, for ten years, spoke out when the law was passed by the coalition government.

He said: “It was a sad for day for this country when it was passed. I am a Christian and my view is marriage should be between a man and a woman.”

Comments (29)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:09am Tue 25 Mar 14

Keptquiettillnow says...

Some people could not see a problem with programs like 'Love Thy Neighbour' either.
Wake up, its 2014!
Some people could not see a problem with programs like 'Love Thy Neighbour' either. Wake up, its 2014! Keptquiettillnow
  • Score: 0

6:57am Tue 25 Mar 14

I hate the police! says...

That's like saying, we welcome blacks, but not Asians. It's either you have the full service or not.
That's like saying, we welcome blacks, but not Asians. It's either you have the full service or not. I hate the police!
  • Score: -7

7:23am Tue 25 Mar 14

southendcivilservant says...

It's as simple as this: If you don't agree with same sex marriage, don't marry someone of the same sex!
But don't try and deny other people the same rights you have to a life of happiness.
It's as simple as this: If you don't agree with same sex marriage, don't marry someone of the same sex! But don't try and deny other people the same rights you have to a life of happiness. southendcivilservant
  • Score: 13

7:29am Tue 25 Mar 14

LinfordsLunchbox says...

No its not. its like keeping things the way they have been for 2000 years and as described in the holy bible. I dont get why homosexuals feel they should be able to go against such a straight-foward part of the bible in a church and somehow expect the churches blessing. Its like me telling i dont have to take my muddy shoes off when i walk into your house because david cameron says so
No its not. its like keeping things the way they have been for 2000 years and as described in the holy bible. I dont get why homosexuals feel they should be able to go against such a straight-foward part of the bible in a church and somehow expect the churches blessing. Its like me telling i dont have to take my muddy shoes off when i walk into your house because david cameron says so LinfordsLunchbox
  • Score: 3

7:32am Tue 25 Mar 14

LinfordsLunchbox says...

Who is saying they cant have a life of happiness? I havent heard anybody say that.
Who is saying they cant have a life of happiness? I havent heard anybody say that. LinfordsLunchbox
  • Score: 6

7:33am Tue 25 Mar 14

southendcivilservant says...

LinfordsLunchbox wrote:
No its not. its like keeping things the way they have been for 2000 years and as described in the holy bible. I dont get why homosexuals feel they should be able to go against such a straight-foward part of the bible in a church and somehow expect the churches blessing. Its like me telling i dont have to take my muddy shoes off when i walk into your house because david cameron says so
I'm not talking about the right to marry in a church, I'm talking about the right to have a CIVIL marriage recognised by the State, which is what's about to start happening. Marriage and religion shouldn't mix, the institute of marriage predates the bible, and even emperor Nero married a man, so religious groups hijacked marriage.
[quote][p][bold]LinfordsLunchbox[/bold] wrote: No its not. its like keeping things the way they have been for 2000 years and as described in the holy bible. I dont get why homosexuals feel they should be able to go against such a straight-foward part of the bible in a church and somehow expect the churches blessing. Its like me telling i dont have to take my muddy shoes off when i walk into your house because david cameron says so[/p][/quote]I'm not talking about the right to marry in a church, I'm talking about the right to have a CIVIL marriage recognised by the State, which is what's about to start happening. Marriage and religion shouldn't mix, the institute of marriage predates the bible, and even emperor Nero married a man, so religious groups hijacked marriage. southendcivilservant
  • Score: 5

7:59am Tue 25 Mar 14

LinfordsLunchbox says...

Im not against civil partnerships, good for them, im not against gay people adopting, i wouldnt care if my neighbour, doctor, dentist was gay, i have had gay friends in the past, lost contact with them now as you do with old friends but i am a christian and object to the term "marriage" being used for a same-sex union, why does homosexuality trump religeon? If there was a hen party in my local bar i wouldnt demand to be allowed to join and call them sexist for objecting
Im not against civil partnerships, good for them, im not against gay people adopting, i wouldnt care if my neighbour, doctor, dentist was gay, i have had gay friends in the past, lost contact with them now as you do with old friends but i am a christian and object to the term "marriage" being used for a same-sex union, why does homosexuality trump religeon? If there was a hen party in my local bar i wouldnt demand to be allowed to join and call them sexist for objecting LinfordsLunchbox
  • Score: 2

8:18am Tue 25 Mar 14

supermadmax says...

Wow, they must be getting desperate for new parishioners.
Wow, they must be getting desperate for new parishioners. supermadmax
  • Score: 0

8:22am Tue 25 Mar 14

Kim Gandy says...

LinfordsLunchbox wrote:
Who is saying they cant have a life of happiness? I havent heard anybody say that.
Exactly... and these priests and vicars are entitled to their opinions too.

All these lefties get bent out of shape when anybody says the burka should be banned and get hugely defensive of any "religion" or cult that came from outside this country, some even defend their right to carry on with such horrors as female genital mutilation and marriage to minors but when just one person disagrees with marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman and they come screaming out of the woodwork, hand wringing and shouting accusations, labelling people with "isms".

So it's OK to indulge in vile mutilations on young females and force them to wear restrictive garments and to be second class citizens but not OK if you disagree with gay marriage?

It's pathetic.

It is possible to have friends who are gay but not agree with gay marriage. I know gays who don't agree with gay marriage. I know second and third generation Jamaicans who have very strong views on immigration.

The assumption, on the part of the loony left, is that anyone who disagrees with them is a "bigot", "racist", "sexist", "homophobe".

The selfsame people spout about freedom of choice and expression but then immediately jump on anybody who dares breathe a word of dissension at any new legislation, ideology or religion.

People are perfectly within their rights to oppose things they don't believe in. And they should be entitled to express it freely. Why is there one set of rules for incoming ethnicities or ideologies and another for people who have been brought up a certain way or who are resolute believers in a particular religion?

Personally I am against all types of religious oppression. However, that said, I don't see this as oppression; this is just a matter of differing opinions and interpretations. Nobody is saying people cannot be happy or denying them any right.

Nobody needs a piece of paper to confirm they are a couple these days. And it's absurd to blather on about being denied "rights" or happiness.

And why should it be any different for a Christian? Why should they be persecuted and labelled with ludicrous "isms" just because they dare to speak out? Why are these lefties not making huge and loud objections to FGM? Or are they saying it's OK because it's "cultural" and then denying another different cultural custom in the next breath?

I suggest it's the other way around, it's the Left that are discriminatory, racist, sexist and all the rest because they refuse to acknowledge that the majority of people are opposed to their particular ludicrous ideologies and rampant political correctness for its own sake.

I hear it all the time, people saying "well I think...... but I'm not allowed to say so, am I?"

My answer to that is "yes you are". We are ALL entitled to an opinion and do not have to belong to a particular ethnic minority or sexual preference. And if somebody is offended, that's tough. I'm constantly offended by the things I see and hear every day - I'm not allowed an opinion without somebody jumping on it. Hard cheese. I will still say it anyway.

The MAJority are still allowed to have opinions too, without being lambasted by the yoghurt knitters, tree huggers and other assorted loons that are now rife in our society.

By far my most detested group are white, middle class lefty loons who find offence at the slightest thing and who are self appointed moral guardians of society.

They cause more trouble than anybody else.
[quote][p][bold]LinfordsLunchbox[/bold] wrote: Who is saying they cant have a life of happiness? I havent heard anybody say that.[/p][/quote]Exactly... and these priests and vicars are entitled to their opinions too. All these lefties get bent out of shape when anybody says the burka should be banned and get hugely defensive of any "religion" or cult that came from outside this country, some even defend their right to carry on with such horrors as female genital mutilation and marriage to minors but when just one person disagrees with marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman and they come screaming out of the woodwork, hand wringing and shouting accusations, labelling people with "isms". So it's OK to indulge in vile mutilations on young females and force them to wear restrictive garments and to be second class citizens but not OK if you disagree with gay marriage? It's pathetic. It is possible to have friends who are gay but not agree with gay marriage. I know gays who don't agree with gay marriage. I know second and third generation Jamaicans who have very strong views on immigration. The assumption, on the part of the loony left, is that anyone who disagrees with them is a "bigot", "racist", "sexist", "homophobe". The selfsame people spout about freedom of choice and expression but then immediately jump on anybody who dares breathe a word of dissension at any new legislation, ideology or religion. People are perfectly within their rights to oppose things they don't believe in. And they should be entitled to express it freely. Why is there one set of rules for incoming ethnicities or ideologies and another for people who have been brought up a certain way or who are resolute believers in a particular religion? Personally I am against all types of religious oppression. However, that said, I don't see this as oppression; this is just a matter of differing opinions and interpretations. Nobody is saying people cannot be happy or denying them any right. Nobody needs a piece of paper to confirm they are a couple these days. And it's absurd to blather on about being denied "rights" or happiness. And why should it be any different for a Christian? Why should they be persecuted and labelled with ludicrous "isms" just because they dare to speak out? Why are these lefties not making huge and loud objections to FGM? Or are they saying it's OK because it's "cultural" and then denying another different cultural custom in the next breath? I suggest it's the other way around, it's the Left that are discriminatory, racist, sexist and all the rest because they refuse to acknowledge that the majority of people are opposed to their particular ludicrous ideologies and rampant political correctness for its own sake. I hear it all the time, people saying "well I think...... but I'm not allowed to say so, am I?" My answer to that is "yes you are". We are ALL entitled to an opinion and do not have to belong to a particular ethnic minority or sexual preference. And if somebody is offended, that's tough. I'm constantly offended by the things I see and hear every day - I'm not allowed an opinion without somebody jumping on it. Hard cheese. I will still say it anyway. The MAJority are still allowed to have opinions too, without being lambasted by the yoghurt knitters, tree huggers and other assorted loons that are now rife in our society. By far my most detested group are white, middle class lefty loons who find offence at the slightest thing and who are self appointed moral guardians of society. They cause more trouble than anybody else. Kim Gandy
  • Score: 0

9:00am Tue 25 Mar 14

GrumpyofLeigh says...

The concept of "marriage" - the union of a couple and the community coming out to celebrate - long pre-dates organised religion as it was based on the expectation of procreation and the security that gave to the future of that community.
Its the anthropological norm, however it might be addressed today in language of "exclusion"/"judgeme
nt" or something similar.
The concept of "marriage" - the union of a couple and the community coming out to celebrate - long pre-dates organised religion as it was based on the expectation of procreation and the security that gave to the future of that community. Its the anthropological norm, however it might be addressed today in language of "exclusion"/"judgeme nt" or something similar. GrumpyofLeigh
  • Score: 5

9:23am Tue 25 Mar 14

ravnos says...

The 2 most hyopcritical things in the world - religion & poloticians.
The 2 most hyopcritical things in the world - religion & poloticians. ravnos
  • Score: 3

9:45am Tue 25 Mar 14

DogsMessInLeigh says...

ravnos wrote:
The 2 most hyopcritical things in the world - religion & poloticians.
Is a polotician someone who works with polo mints.?
[quote][p][bold]ravnos[/bold] wrote: The 2 most hyopcritical things in the world - religion & poloticians.[/p][/quote]Is a polotician someone who works with polo mints.? DogsMessInLeigh
  • Score: 0

10:13am Tue 25 Mar 14

maddriver says...

'All these lefties get bent out of shape when anybody says the burka should be banned and get hugely defensive of any "religion" or cult that came from outside this country, some even defend their right to carry on with such horrors as female genital mutilation and marriage to minors but when just one person disagrees with marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman and they come screaming out of the woodwork, hand wringing and shouting accusations, labelling people with "isms".

So it's OK to indulge in vile mutilations on young females and force them to wear restrictive garments and to be second class citizens but not OK if you disagree with gay marriage?'

I can't see how the support of gay marriage equates someone with being a supporter of FGM, minors marrying and wearing of burkas. In the course of my travels I come across a lot of liberal thinking people, but I have never met anyone who agrees with these things. Perhaps you ought to understand that opposition to gay marriage because of religious beliefs is not a major political decision but a personal decision based on those beliefs.
'All these lefties get bent out of shape when anybody says the burka should be banned and get hugely defensive of any "religion" or cult that came from outside this country, some even defend their right to carry on with such horrors as female genital mutilation and marriage to minors but when just one person disagrees with marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman and they come screaming out of the woodwork, hand wringing and shouting accusations, labelling people with "isms". So it's OK to indulge in vile mutilations on young females and force them to wear restrictive garments and to be second class citizens but not OK if you disagree with gay marriage?' I can't see how the support of gay marriage equates someone with being a supporter of FGM, minors marrying and wearing of burkas. In the course of my travels I come across a lot of liberal thinking people, but I have never met anyone who agrees with these things. Perhaps you ought to understand that opposition to gay marriage because of religious beliefs is not a major political decision but a personal decision based on those beliefs. maddriver
  • Score: 4

10:22am Tue 25 Mar 14

DannyK86 says...

southendcivilservant wrote:
LinfordsLunchbox wrote:
No its not. its like keeping things the way they have been for 2000 years and as described in the holy bible. I dont get why homosexuals feel they should be able to go against such a straight-foward part of the bible in a church and somehow expect the churches blessing. Its like me telling i dont have to take my muddy shoes off when i walk into your house because david cameron says so
I'm not talking about the right to marry in a church, I'm talking about the right to have a CIVIL marriage recognised by the State, which is what's about to start happening. Marriage and religion shouldn't mix, the institute of marriage predates the bible, and even emperor Nero married a man, so religious groups hijacked marriage.
I'm not sure Nero was a great role model!
[quote][p][bold]southendcivilservant[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LinfordsLunchbox[/bold] wrote: No its not. its like keeping things the way they have been for 2000 years and as described in the holy bible. I dont get why homosexuals feel they should be able to go against such a straight-foward part of the bible in a church and somehow expect the churches blessing. Its like me telling i dont have to take my muddy shoes off when i walk into your house because david cameron says so[/p][/quote]I'm not talking about the right to marry in a church, I'm talking about the right to have a CIVIL marriage recognised by the State, which is what's about to start happening. Marriage and religion shouldn't mix, the institute of marriage predates the bible, and even emperor Nero married a man, so religious groups hijacked marriage.[/p][/quote]I'm not sure Nero was a great role model! DannyK86
  • Score: 5

10:50am Tue 25 Mar 14

Dan-Hockley says...

Nice to see the church keeping up with modern times!!!

Seriously, the churches of all faiths should realise that since they wrote their respective piles of crap and drivel some 2000 odd years ago, the world has moved on beyond all recognition

Surely, it's about time a more relevant and appropriate set of social rules, disguised as a faith, should be written.
Nice to see the church keeping up with modern times!!! Seriously, the churches of all faiths should realise that since they wrote their respective piles of crap and drivel some 2000 odd years ago, the world has moved on beyond all recognition Surely, it's about time a more relevant and appropriate set of social rules, disguised as a faith, should be written. Dan-Hockley
  • Score: 2

11:06am Tue 25 Mar 14

profondo asbo says...

it's the thin end of the wedge. what will it be next - legalisng the union of men and donkeys?
it's the thin end of the wedge. what will it be next - legalisng the union of men and donkeys? profondo asbo
  • Score: -10

5:57pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Cor Blimey says...

Oh what a surprise! Typical comment from the church.
These pre historic attitudes are exactly why church parish numbers are in decline - get your head out of your @rse!

Then again these old stone building formally known as the 'house of god' will make great gay bars.
Oh what a surprise! Typical comment from the church. These pre historic attitudes are exactly why church parish numbers are in decline - get your head out of your @rse! Then again these old stone building formally known as the 'house of god' will make great gay bars. Cor Blimey
  • Score: -2

8:44pm Tue 25 Mar 14

ThisYear says...

LinfordsLunchbox wrote:
No its not. its like keeping things the way they have been for 2000 years and as described in the holy bible. I dont get why homosexuals feel they should be able to go against such a straight-foward part of the bible in a church and somehow expect the churches blessing. Its like me telling i dont have to take my muddy shoes off when i walk into your house because david cameron says so
The 'holy bible' LOL..Hypocrite!
[quote][p][bold]LinfordsLunchbox[/bold] wrote: No its not. its like keeping things the way they have been for 2000 years and as described in the holy bible. I dont get why homosexuals feel they should be able to go against such a straight-foward part of the bible in a church and somehow expect the churches blessing. Its like me telling i dont have to take my muddy shoes off when i walk into your house because david cameron says so[/p][/quote]The 'holy bible' LOL..Hypocrite! ThisYear
  • Score: 0

8:47pm Tue 25 Mar 14

ThisYear says...

LinfordsLunchbox wrote:
Im not against civil partnerships, good for them, im not against gay people adopting, i wouldnt care if my neighbour, doctor, dentist was gay, i have had gay friends in the past, lost contact with them now as you do with old friends but i am a christian and object to the term "marriage" being used for a same-sex union, why does homosexuality trump religeon? If there was a hen party in my local bar i wouldnt demand to be allowed to join and call them sexist for objecting
"i have had gay friends in the past, lost contact with them"

Oh my giddy aunt/uncle

The equivalent " I'm not a racist, I had a black friend"

Lost contact or are they avoiding you?

I know what I believe is the case
[quote][p][bold]LinfordsLunchbox[/bold] wrote: Im not against civil partnerships, good for them, im not against gay people adopting, i wouldnt care if my neighbour, doctor, dentist was gay, i have had gay friends in the past, lost contact with them now as you do with old friends but i am a christian and object to the term "marriage" being used for a same-sex union, why does homosexuality trump religeon? If there was a hen party in my local bar i wouldnt demand to be allowed to join and call them sexist for objecting[/p][/quote]"i have had gay friends in the past, lost contact with them" Oh my giddy aunt/uncle The equivalent " I'm not a racist, I had a black friend" Lost contact or are they avoiding you? I know what I believe is the case ThisYear
  • Score: -1

8:49pm Tue 25 Mar 14

ThisYear says...

Kim Gandy wrote:
LinfordsLunchbox wrote:
Who is saying they cant have a life of happiness? I havent heard anybody say that.
Exactly... and these priests and vicars are entitled to their opinions too.

All these lefties get bent out of shape when anybody says the burka should be banned and get hugely defensive of any "religion" or cult that came from outside this country, some even defend their right to carry on with such horrors as female genital mutilation and marriage to minors but when just one person disagrees with marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman and they come screaming out of the woodwork, hand wringing and shouting accusations, labelling people with "isms".

So it's OK to indulge in vile mutilations on young females and force them to wear restrictive garments and to be second class citizens but not OK if you disagree with gay marriage?

It's pathetic.

It is possible to have friends who are gay but not agree with gay marriage. I know gays who don't agree with gay marriage. I know second and third generation Jamaicans who have very strong views on immigration.

The assumption, on the part of the loony left, is that anyone who disagrees with them is a "bigot", "racist", "sexist", "homophobe".

The selfsame people spout about freedom of choice and expression but then immediately jump on anybody who dares breathe a word of dissension at any new legislation, ideology or religion.

People are perfectly within their rights to oppose things they don't believe in. And they should be entitled to express it freely. Why is there one set of rules for incoming ethnicities or ideologies and another for people who have been brought up a certain way or who are resolute believers in a particular religion?

Personally I am against all types of religious oppression. However, that said, I don't see this as oppression; this is just a matter of differing opinions and interpretations. Nobody is saying people cannot be happy or denying them any right.

Nobody needs a piece of paper to confirm they are a couple these days. And it's absurd to blather on about being denied "rights" or happiness.

And why should it be any different for a Christian? Why should they be persecuted and labelled with ludicrous "isms" just because they dare to speak out? Why are these lefties not making huge and loud objections to FGM? Or are they saying it's OK because it's "cultural" and then denying another different cultural custom in the next breath?

I suggest it's the other way around, it's the Left that are discriminatory, racist, sexist and all the rest because they refuse to acknowledge that the majority of people are opposed to their particular ludicrous ideologies and rampant political correctness for its own sake.

I hear it all the time, people saying "well I think...... but I'm not allowed to say so, am I?"

My answer to that is "yes you are". We are ALL entitled to an opinion and do not have to belong to a particular ethnic minority or sexual preference. And if somebody is offended, that's tough. I'm constantly offended by the things I see and hear every day - I'm not allowed an opinion without somebody jumping on it. Hard cheese. I will still say it anyway.

The MAJority are still allowed to have opinions too, without being lambasted by the yoghurt knitters, tree huggers and other assorted loons that are now rife in our society.

By far my most detested group are white, middle class lefty loons who find offence at the slightest thing and who are self appointed moral guardians of society.

They cause more trouble than anybody else.
Welcome to a 'Kimism' ie a deranged rant!
[quote][p][bold]Kim Gandy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LinfordsLunchbox[/bold] wrote: Who is saying they cant have a life of happiness? I havent heard anybody say that.[/p][/quote]Exactly... and these priests and vicars are entitled to their opinions too. All these lefties get bent out of shape when anybody says the burka should be banned and get hugely defensive of any "religion" or cult that came from outside this country, some even defend their right to carry on with such horrors as female genital mutilation and marriage to minors but when just one person disagrees with marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman and they come screaming out of the woodwork, hand wringing and shouting accusations, labelling people with "isms". So it's OK to indulge in vile mutilations on young females and force them to wear restrictive garments and to be second class citizens but not OK if you disagree with gay marriage? It's pathetic. It is possible to have friends who are gay but not agree with gay marriage. I know gays who don't agree with gay marriage. I know second and third generation Jamaicans who have very strong views on immigration. The assumption, on the part of the loony left, is that anyone who disagrees with them is a "bigot", "racist", "sexist", "homophobe". The selfsame people spout about freedom of choice and expression but then immediately jump on anybody who dares breathe a word of dissension at any new legislation, ideology or religion. People are perfectly within their rights to oppose things they don't believe in. And they should be entitled to express it freely. Why is there one set of rules for incoming ethnicities or ideologies and another for people who have been brought up a certain way or who are resolute believers in a particular religion? Personally I am against all types of religious oppression. However, that said, I don't see this as oppression; this is just a matter of differing opinions and interpretations. Nobody is saying people cannot be happy or denying them any right. Nobody needs a piece of paper to confirm they are a couple these days. And it's absurd to blather on about being denied "rights" or happiness. And why should it be any different for a Christian? Why should they be persecuted and labelled with ludicrous "isms" just because they dare to speak out? Why are these lefties not making huge and loud objections to FGM? Or are they saying it's OK because it's "cultural" and then denying another different cultural custom in the next breath? I suggest it's the other way around, it's the Left that are discriminatory, racist, sexist and all the rest because they refuse to acknowledge that the majority of people are opposed to their particular ludicrous ideologies and rampant political correctness for its own sake. I hear it all the time, people saying "well I think...... but I'm not allowed to say so, am I?" My answer to that is "yes you are". We are ALL entitled to an opinion and do not have to belong to a particular ethnic minority or sexual preference. And if somebody is offended, that's tough. I'm constantly offended by the things I see and hear every day - I'm not allowed an opinion without somebody jumping on it. Hard cheese. I will still say it anyway. The MAJority are still allowed to have opinions too, without being lambasted by the yoghurt knitters, tree huggers and other assorted loons that are now rife in our society. By far my most detested group are white, middle class lefty loons who find offence at the slightest thing and who are self appointed moral guardians of society. They cause more trouble than anybody else.[/p][/quote]Welcome to a 'Kimism' ie a deranged rant! ThisYear
  • Score: -2

8:59pm Tue 25 Mar 14

ThisYear says...

DogsMessInLeigh wrote:
ravnos wrote:
The 2 most hyopcritical things in the world - religion & poloticians.
Is a polotician someone who works with polo mints.?
Hey Dogs mess...while you are highlighting spelling mistakes can you say whether a question mark should follow a full stop?
[quote][p][bold]DogsMessInLeigh[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ravnos[/bold] wrote: The 2 most hyopcritical things in the world - religion & poloticians.[/p][/quote]Is a polotician someone who works with polo mints.?[/p][/quote]Hey Dogs mess...while you are highlighting spelling mistakes can you say whether a question mark should follow a full stop? ThisYear
  • Score: 3

9:03pm Tue 25 Mar 14

ThisYear says...

profondo asbo wrote:
it's the thin end of the wedge. what will it be next - legalisng the union of men and donkeys?
Tories and Ukip would be in favour of that Im sure..
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: it's the thin end of the wedge. what will it be next - legalisng the union of men and donkeys?[/p][/quote]Tories and Ukip would be in favour of that Im sure.. ThisYear
  • Score: 1

9:52pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Kursaal76 says...

can't see why it matters that 2 gay people who love each other can't get married. if you don't like it don't watch. I am gay but I will not get married in a church because I am not religious and do not believe in the bible. if you read the bible you will realise how stupid some of the stuff is. like this verse.

(Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)
If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
your god sounds like a lovely chap doesn't he?

Only reason i will get married is to make sure that when i die my partner still has a roof over his head and to have a future without me. if i die and we are not married he will get nothing.
can't see why it matters that 2 gay people who love each other can't get married. if you don't like it don't watch. I am gay but I will not get married in a church because I am not religious and do not believe in the bible. if you read the bible you will realise how stupid some of the stuff is. like this verse. (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT) If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. your god sounds like a lovely chap doesn't he? Only reason i will get married is to make sure that when i die my partner still has a roof over his head and to have a future without me. if i die and we are not married he will get nothing. Kursaal76
  • Score: -1

10:01pm Tue 25 Mar 14

LinfordsLunchbox says...

Kursaal76 wrote:
can't see why it matters that 2 gay people who love each other can't get married. if you don't like it don't watch. I am gay but I will not get married in a church because I am not religious and do not believe in the bible. if you read the bible you will realise how stupid some of the stuff is. like this verse.

(Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)
If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
your god sounds like a lovely chap doesn't he?

Only reason i will get married is to make sure that when i die my partner still has a roof over his head and to have a future without me. if i die and we are not married he will get nothing.
Theres theses things called wills mate
[quote][p][bold]Kursaal76[/bold] wrote: can't see why it matters that 2 gay people who love each other can't get married. if you don't like it don't watch. I am gay but I will not get married in a church because I am not religious and do not believe in the bible. if you read the bible you will realise how stupid some of the stuff is. like this verse. (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT) If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. your god sounds like a lovely chap doesn't he? Only reason i will get married is to make sure that when i die my partner still has a roof over his head and to have a future without me. if i die and we are not married he will get nothing.[/p][/quote]Theres theses things called wills mate LinfordsLunchbox
  • Score: -1

10:10pm Tue 25 Mar 14

John T Pharro says...

maddriver wrote:
'All these lefties get bent out of shape when anybody says the burka should be banned and get hugely defensive of any "religion" or cult that came from outside this country, some even defend their right to carry on with such horrors as female genital mutilation and marriage to minors but when just one person disagrees with marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman and they come screaming out of the woodwork, hand wringing and shouting accusations, labelling people with "isms".

So it's OK to indulge in vile mutilations on young females and force them to wear restrictive garments and to be second class citizens but not OK if you disagree with gay marriage?'

I can't see how the support of gay marriage equates someone with being a supporter of FGM, minors marrying and wearing of burkas. In the course of my travels I come across a lot of liberal thinking people, but I have never met anyone who agrees with these things. Perhaps you ought to understand that opposition to gay marriage because of religious beliefs is not a major political decision but a personal decision based on those beliefs.
Even handed post which only the extreem ends of both views will disagree.
[quote][p][bold]maddriver[/bold] wrote: 'All these lefties get bent out of shape when anybody says the burka should be banned and get hugely defensive of any "religion" or cult that came from outside this country, some even defend their right to carry on with such horrors as female genital mutilation and marriage to minors but when just one person disagrees with marriage between a man and a man or a woman and a woman and they come screaming out of the woodwork, hand wringing and shouting accusations, labelling people with "isms". So it's OK to indulge in vile mutilations on young females and force them to wear restrictive garments and to be second class citizens but not OK if you disagree with gay marriage?' I can't see how the support of gay marriage equates someone with being a supporter of FGM, minors marrying and wearing of burkas. In the course of my travels I come across a lot of liberal thinking people, but I have never met anyone who agrees with these things. Perhaps you ought to understand that opposition to gay marriage because of religious beliefs is not a major political decision but a personal decision based on those beliefs.[/p][/quote]Even handed post which only the extreem ends of both views will disagree. John T Pharro
  • Score: 0

10:14pm Tue 25 Mar 14

John T Pharro says...

LinfordsLunchbox wrote:
Kursaal76 wrote:
can't see why it matters that 2 gay people who love each other can't get married. if you don't like it don't watch. I am gay but I will not get married in a church because I am not religious and do not believe in the bible. if you read the bible you will realise how stupid some of the stuff is. like this verse.

(Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)
If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
your god sounds like a lovely chap doesn't he?

Only reason i will get married is to make sure that when i die my partner still has a roof over his head and to have a future without me. if i die and we are not married he will get nothing.
Theres theses things called wills mate
Correct and also wills can prevent a married person automatically inheriting.
[quote][p][bold]LinfordsLunchbox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kursaal76[/bold] wrote: can't see why it matters that 2 gay people who love each other can't get married. if you don't like it don't watch. I am gay but I will not get married in a church because I am not religious and do not believe in the bible. if you read the bible you will realise how stupid some of the stuff is. like this verse. (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT) If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. your god sounds like a lovely chap doesn't he? Only reason i will get married is to make sure that when i die my partner still has a roof over his head and to have a future without me. if i die and we are not married he will get nothing.[/p][/quote]Theres theses things called wills mate[/p][/quote]Correct and also wills can prevent a married person automatically inheriting. John T Pharro
  • Score: 0

10:18pm Tue 25 Mar 14

profondo asbo says...

what a sad state of affairs. a newspaper that is completely intimidated by one individual. yet another legitimate thread shut down for no good reason. it's high time the echo grew a pair and called that individual out on his bs and ludicrous threats that don't add up to dog mess (in dale farm).
what a sad state of affairs. a newspaper that is completely intimidated by one individual. yet another legitimate thread shut down for no good reason. it's high time the echo grew a pair and called that individual out on his bs and ludicrous threats that don't add up to dog mess (in dale farm). profondo asbo
  • Score: -1

10:24pm Tue 25 Mar 14

Kursaal76 says...

John T Pharro wrote:
LinfordsLunchbox wrote:
Kursaal76 wrote:
can't see why it matters that 2 gay people who love each other can't get married. if you don't like it don't watch. I am gay but I will not get married in a church because I am not religious and do not believe in the bible. if you read the bible you will realise how stupid some of the stuff is. like this verse.

(Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)
If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.
your god sounds like a lovely chap doesn't he?

Only reason i will get married is to make sure that when i die my partner still has a roof over his head and to have a future without me. if i die and we are not married he will get nothing.
Theres theses things called wills mate
Correct and also wills can prevent a married person automatically inheriting.
Problem solved no more marriages and just have wills then. good thing is gay people can now get married and bigots are not going to win.
[quote][p][bold]John T Pharro[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]LinfordsLunchbox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Kursaal76[/bold] wrote: can't see why it matters that 2 gay people who love each other can't get married. if you don't like it don't watch. I am gay but I will not get married in a church because I am not religious and do not believe in the bible. if you read the bible you will realise how stupid some of the stuff is. like this verse. (Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT) If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her. your god sounds like a lovely chap doesn't he? Only reason i will get married is to make sure that when i die my partner still has a roof over his head and to have a future without me. if i die and we are not married he will get nothing.[/p][/quote]Theres theses things called wills mate[/p][/quote]Correct and also wills can prevent a married person automatically inheriting.[/p][/quote]Problem solved no more marriages and just have wills then. good thing is gay people can now get married and bigots are not going to win. Kursaal76
  • Score: 0

11:02pm Tue 25 Mar 14

ThisYear says...

profondo asbo wrote:
what a sad state of affairs. a newspaper that is completely intimidated by one individual. yet another legitimate thread shut down for no good reason. it's high time the echo grew a pair and called that individual out on his bs and ludicrous threats that don't add up to dog mess (in dale farm).
abso...you seem to be slipping...you assume your assumptions are correct..catch onto yourself my man!

Have you tried another forum that might cater to your type of 'legitimate' threads

I could recommend one or two for you..

What on earth does a private caravan park have to do with same sex marriages?

More water with it perhaps?
[quote][p][bold]profondo asbo[/bold] wrote: what a sad state of affairs. a newspaper that is completely intimidated by one individual. yet another legitimate thread shut down for no good reason. it's high time the echo grew a pair and called that individual out on his bs and ludicrous threats that don't add up to dog mess (in dale farm).[/p][/quote]abso...you seem to be slipping...you assume your assumptions are correct..catch onto yourself my man! Have you tried another forum that might cater to your type of 'legitimate' threads I could recommend one or two for you.. What on earth does a private caravan park have to do with same sex marriages? More water with it perhaps? ThisYear
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree