Gay Marriages

[cheesemonster2005]

Gay Marriages in the Spotlight

 

I don't see what the fuss is all about? As a hetrosexual it makes no difference to me if someone chooses to marry someone of the same sex. I can understand if the church have a problem but that shouldn't stop people from marrying at a registry office with full legal recognition. I wouldn't marry in a church anyway because of their intolerable beliefs.

[germann]

I wouldn't marry in a church anyway because of their intolerable beliefs.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Stop listening to Radio Maryja

[Rog]

! go with Freud and his analysis of abnormal sexual behaviour, and homosexual sex is abnormal and perverted. It follows that homosexual people are de facto sex perverts.

 

It may now be permitted or at least (rightly) no longer illegal, but it certainly is abnormal.

 

Freud writes on the subject that perversion is “The pursuit of "abnormal" sexual objects without repression”.

 

Freud at one point lists five forms of perversion, which is to say five ways that an individual "differs from the normal" and so is perverted.

 

"First, by disregarding the barrier of species (the gulf between men and animals),

 

Secondly, by overstepping the social and inherent barrier against disgust. (crossing the ‘yeugh’ demarcation line.

 

Thirdly engaging in incest (the prohibition against seeking sexual satisfaction from near blood-relations).

 

Fourthly engaging in acts with members of one's own sex.

 

Fifthly the transferring of the part played by the genitals to other organs and areas of the body.”

 

He makes clear that a young child will not recognize any of these five points as abnormal—and only does so through the process of education.

 

For this reason, he calls children "polymorphously perverse"

 

Homosexuality is therefore a perversion. Homosexuals are sex perverts, the very idea of a homosexual marriage is ridiculous.

 

Should two sex perverts engaging in what society now has been obliged to accept decide to engage in a legal contract that has parallels to a proper marriage I see many advantages as long as all of the obligations associated with marriage are included up to bet refraining from the adoption of children.

 

What I personally would like to see introduced is a provision whereby two people, even blood relations such siblings can engage in a similar legal partnership in order to gain the averages offered to a married couple who are engaged in a permanent and binding union with the exclusion of adopting children.

 

In any case marriage as a description of a relationship should be reserved exclusively for the union between man and woman.

[WilDDog]

Doesn't worry me one way or the other. What people do with their own lives is up to them.

[Rog]

! go with Freud and his analysis of abnormal sexual behaviour, and homosexual sex is abnormal and perverted.  It follows that homosexual people are de facto sex perverts.

 

--- snip ---

 

In any case marriage as a description of a relationship should be reserved exclusively for the union between man and woman.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

I hope you're being subtle and I'm just not quite understanding your approach to irony.

 

Really, you're not actually serious, are you?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

100% serious.

 

When this subject has come up before I have adopted precisely the same attitude.

[cheesemonster2005]

Stop listening to Radio Maryja

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I try not to but it's on more frequencies than any other Szczecin station. At least I don't understand what they're talking about all the time.

[thebees]

I thought it was legal. My mate and her partner got married 6 or more years ago, that was in Manchester though, they are a bit more cosmo there, than what we are. like.

Rog - that is such a 'well bad' attitude mate, suppose you don't like 'blacks' either? Hitler died for you......I tolerate everyone I meet, makes for an easy life.

[ans]

According to Freud's rules, oral sex is perverted.

 

Sounds to me like Freud didn't have much luck with the ladies and was nothing more than a bitter twisted lonely man.

 

Also, the second is entirely arbitary. Sorry, you can't have a set of rules where something is open to interpretation.

[Lonan3]

Although I don't doubt the sincerity of his conclusions, I do have some suspicion about his reasoning.

I'm sure that Rog is very well aware that a great deal of Freud's 'research' was seriously flawed and that many of his 'conclusions' were drawn from his own prejudices and inadequacies.

Therefore, I think Rog is simply using Freud as a cover for his own views and that they are probably mainly derived from scripture and personal belief rather than science.

Having said all of that, I do agree that 'marriage' should be between a man and a woman, and that any other kind of legally binding relationship requires a different form of terminology.

I also agree that people who enter into such a partnership/relationship, provided that it is a legally binding one, ought to be able to enjoy the same benefits that accrue to a married couple.

When it comes to defining 'perversions' however, I would simply suggest that it is every bit as impossible to define as it is to define what is 'normal!'

[Gladys]

Surely, if you take away the religious dimension then the possibility of a civil partnership is more understandable and easier to swallow for many.

 

Having said that, nothing in marriage is God given; does He deal with inheritance, pensions, life assurance etc etc? These are all rights given by man. so if given by man to heterosexual committed couples, man can also choose to give them to homosexual committed couples, or for that matter to any other combination!

[chris]

Only on the Isle of Man could you still have people like Rog peddling their obnoxious views. You try and persuade people that your'e not stuck in a time warp and yet the moderators do remind him that such homophobic views are no longer tolerated.

[nipper]

A little off topic, but Private Eye offered the following article on the sunject :

 

[Rog]

Only on the Isle of Man could you still have people like Rog peddling their obnoxious views. You try and persuade people that your'e not stuck in a time warp and yet the moderators do remind him that such homophobic views are no longer tolerated.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

1) I'm an ex-pat Manxman not resident on the Island.

 

2) I'm not homophobic, I'm hetrophiliac aka normal.

 

3) Homosexuality is abnormal by definition. It is now permitted by society, but it remains abnormal. Permitting something should not be taken as approval.

 

4) Religion has nothing to do with my views.

[Lonan3]

4) Religion has nothing to do with my views.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

In that case, my apologies - no offence intended.

At the same time, I think it was somewhat unwise to quote from a source as unreliable as Freud.

[Amadeus]

1) I'm an ex-pat Manxman not resident on the Island.

 

2) I'm not homophobic, I'm hetrophiliac aka normal.

 

3) Homosexuality is abnormal by definition.  It is now permitted by society, but it remains abnormal.  Permitting something should not be taken as approval.

 

4) Religion has nothing to do with my views.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Apart from the questionable approach to back up one's opinion with Freud (aren't there any more modern psychologists around?), I think you will find that you are surrounded by perverts, Rog..

 

I just assume that you would see any kind of sexual fetish or "abnormal" preference (e.g. anything else than missionary for the purpose of conception, after getting married obviously) as being "perverted"

 

Let's ask the world:

 

Google hits on

 

Gay 41,000,000

Fetish 4,640,000

BDSM 2,190,000

Alternative Sex 11,900,000

 

Heterophiliac: 12 (ok, for heterophilia, it found 554...)

 

Seems you're surrounded and outnumbered...

 

And just out of interest:

 

heterophilia (adjective, heterophilic): [the condition in which love and lust are attached to those of the other sex.] A condition of being in which sexuoerotic arousal and facilitation or attainment of orgasm are responsive to, and dependent upon a partner of the other morphologic sex [from Greek, heteros other + -philia]. Synonym heteroerotic.