Recent content by Psudopod

That's not what he's saying though. He's not saying men or women are prevented from marrying, he's saying person A is prevented from marrying person B on the basis of gender. There is no reason for this, where as preventing person A from marrying person B on the basis that B is too young to...

Internally, things were much better under labour than the previous Tory administration, up until the finacial crisis at least. Don't get me wrong, it was still pretty poor, but better by a tiny margin is still better. Our foreign policy including illegal wars in that period was pretty shocking...

Why should those of us who are not Christian or Jewish care? Why should Christian or Jewish law automatically be British civil law?

What are the equivalents for hetrosexuals? Also bear in mind that the stigma of homosexuality has only recently started fading. It's hard to maintain a long term relationship when people abuse you in the street for merely holding hands. A study in the journal AIDS, eh? Where has this...

While more data is useful, the important is statistically significance. Are you saying the significance is too small in these studies. If so, please show your calculations. What p value do you reach? What is level of detail is missing. Please be specific. Adultary and murder cause harm to...

It's sex that happens between humans. Nothing in human about it. 2 points for you. 1 - you do know that every type of sex gay people have, straight people do too? Anal, oral, with toys, mutual mastibation, whipped cream and candle wax, it all happens between a man and a woman just as often...

It's just marriage. SSM is just a lable used when talking about the subject. Opposite sex couples cannot enter civil partnerships, as the law is proposed at the moment. It's something I hope the Lords will fix, but I doubt it. Maybe not where you live, but it does over here.

Popular mandate can drive discussion, it is not the only thing. Implemation is the measured way of doing it if the govenment can justify the implimentation of the popular mandate. Yes, my moral limits (when talking about relationships) are bounded by consent. What else should it be bounded...

1 - the rule is for everyone, not restricted on an arbitrary basis; 2- society does not want children, particularly young children to witness sex acts. So no, it doesn't stand up.

Nobody is making that claim.

Why? I see no reason to connect the two. I'm not aware of any country that has legalised same sex marriage and public sex acts, so it seems most people don't connect them either.

You haven't really listened to what I said. Popular mandate is not the only thing, but governments are there to reprisent the people so should pay attention to public opinion. This can be to show why public opinion is wrong, of course. But it should listen. It doesn't really demonstrate...

Because there is nothing inherently harmful that can be demonstrated in it. You might believe it will send you to hell, but most people don't and it is certainly not something that can be demonstrated. If your job is incompatible with your lifestyle you have to make a choice. This goes for...

I miss-typed at instead of and. The rest of it is perfectly clear. Lets take this apart bit by bit shall we? No, I don't believe in mob rule. But I believe if something has popular support it should be examined and dealt with based on evidence. For example, if people want a return to capital...

There's always someone who diverts from the discussion and hand and brings up the "what about these?" cases. Somehow the slippery slope always starts at same sex marriage, even though that was initiated by opposite sex marriage. The main issue is there is no public support and push for these...