The case against gay marriage...

[Mr Snap]

I'm against it because I may have to witness Elton John's wedding (which will certainly be a crime against good taste).

What other mind numbing horrors do PHers fear from gay marriage?

[muffinmenace]

Mr Snap said:

What other mind numbing horrors do PHers fear from gay marriage?

That I might actually give enough of a damn to get worked up over it.

[vixen1700]

Couldn't give a toss to be fair.

[Art0ir]

Non issue. Get it over and done with and move on.

[hornet]

Mr Snap said:

I'm against it because I may have to witness Elton John's wedding

I doubt you'd get an invitation in all honesty.

[Mr Snap]

vixen1700 said:

Couldn't give a toss to be fair.

Is that a flouncy gay toss or a proper manly toss?

[Darren156]

I fear that two people who are in love will be happy so I am definitely against it.

[Mr Snap]

hornet said:

Mr Snap said:

I'm against it because I may have to witness Elton John's wedding

I doubt you'd get an invitation in all honesty.

I'm going in protest against all the faux leopardskin print that'll be unnecessarily murdered.

[Bullett]

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/gay-peo...

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Norman Tebbit has said it's dangerous because it coincides with scrapping automatic male succession to the throne.

So, he says, we could get a lesbian queen who marries her girlfriend and then they have a baby via an anonymous sperm donor who then becomes the monarch upon her mother's death.

And that folks, is the best he come up with!!!

I have a solution Norman.....fk off and die! Then you won't have to witness such an event.

[odyssey2200]

Art0ir said:

Non issue. Get it over and done with and move on.

^^^ This

Far more important things that the Gov't should be sorting.

[Mr Snap]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Norman Tebbit has said it's dangerous because it coincides with scrapping automatic male succession to the throne.

So, he says, we could get a lesbian queen who marries her girlfriend and then they have a baby via an anonymous sperm donor who then becomes the monarch upon her mother's death.

And that folks, is the best he come up with!!!

I have a solution Norman.....fk off and die! Then you won't have to witness such an event.

You mean we'll have to drop the royal orb and sceptre from the coronation and replace it with the royal turkey baster?

Shocking!

[Engineer1]

There isn't one. And the fact that it pisses off a load of loony fundamentalist types means it is a Win Win.

[kowalski655]

Oh the humanity!

[Mr Snap]

Engineer1 said:

There isn't one. And the fact that it pisses off a load of loony fundamentalist types means it is a Win Win.

What on earth is a Win Win? Is it some sort of gay code?

Is it something unpleasant that will lastingly undermine the flower of our nation's manhood?

[chrisw666]

It's a financial winner, the number of weddings sold will increase and that means more jobs and profit for the private sector with the bonus of extra income for public sector registry offices.

As nothing bad will happen, but some people will be happy and some will be financially better off why are we even allowing people who want to wail about traditional values to decide on anything that affects the country?

[Mr Snap]

chrisw666 said:

It's a financial winner, the number of weddings sold will increase and that means more jobs and profit for the private sector with the bonus of extra income for public sector registry offices.

As nothing bad will happen, but some people will be happy and some will be financially better off why are we even allowing people who want to wail about traditional values to decide on anything that affects the country?

Those are advantages.

This is an angry thread for annoyed people.
Please keep any deeply unsettling nice thoughts to yourself.

[anonymous-user]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

... or married. Or in a civil partnership. Just who cares?

[scenario8]

odyssey2200 said:

^^^ This

Far more important things that the Gov't should be sorting.

You see I view it from the alternative angle. For most people this really shouldn't be of any real interest. For a minority of citizens (the homosexual community - not that there is a single unified community, of course, but you get the point) the issue is very important. As an extension of equality rights legislation in my view this shouldn't need to take up much government time. A minority of conservative and/or religious people are very upset about the concept and appear to be making an issue out of it while a chunk of conservative (mostly Conservative) politicians are allowing the changes to take up more parliamentary time than should be necessary.

In my view sensible changes could and should be made fairly swiftly and we can all get on with our lives (mostly unaffected), and the government can get back to spending time drafting legislation on other topics.

[SpudLink]

Darren156 said:

I fear that two people who are in love will be happy so I am definitely against it.

Marriage will put a stop to that.