-
Posts
-
But as i said before jen, there are still other options, and i don’t see why a gay couple would want to go to a church to get married where they apparently aren’t welcome to do so going on the current policy. They could look at alternative religions or if they want to stick with the religion they have chosen then they must accept what the rules are, i might want to take my dogs to a particular b and b because there is none in the vicinity i could opt for instead, but i still wouldn’t force the issue, i would make different arrangements, a tent maybe. We all have options. it’s been said Holland allow said marriages so the option are there for them if it means that much to them. But in truthfulness how many are that devout that it really is the end of the world to not have this ceremony in a church. As i keep harping on about its how they love each other and indeed their personal faith from within that’s important. I’m quite sure god won’t think any less of them if they live their lives with all the good things we associate with him.
This debate aside, i for one am convinced they will give in to the pressure eventually anyway, for fear of being accused of not including a minority, their thoughts feelings, ideals will have to be quashed, of that i’m sure.
A good thing ? … Maybe, maybe not, anyway i’m going to apply to join the free masons now, if that doesnt work i wanna be a monk, i don’t like the nuns habits :lol:@(f)politics? wrote:
@panda12 wrote:
Poli, you said the “straight white Christians of this country are gradually being pushed into extinction.”
Do you have facts to back that up?
Asians have been present in this country since the 17th century with records showing black people having been here since as early as the 12th century.
It’s rather ignorant of people to think this country is a white man’s country. It may be predominantly so but black and asian people have been here for a long, long time. Ironically, guess who bought a lot of the black ppl here? Slave owners.
I think I said it on another thread but British ppl or English ppl aren’t exclusively white, you know. Just because a person has black or brown skin doesn’t mean they can’t possibly have been born in this country. :roll:
Panda thank you for proving my point, i clearly stated it wasnt a racist rant and skin colour has nothing to do with it being british, as you have also stated different colour skinned people have been here for generations, my point being, the fact i as a straight white christian chose to say something regarding our history, culture and traditions being maintained, whether they were bought about by asian or any other colour is irrelevant, but u have chosen to see that as a affront to coloured people, hence my meaning about freedoms of speech, someone white as i did speaks out and its assumed bigotry or racist.british culture is british culture whatever the skin colour of someone. And i for one oppose the need to feel obliged to change that for other cultures, whether they be white black or any tone inbetween, makes no difference at all.
I haven’t proved your point at all and you are choosing to twist my words.
@(f)politics? wrote:
[this isn’t a racist comment btw, but i for one don’t agree with our supposed freedoms, the only people that have freedoms are the ones that want to change everything to suit regardless of old traditions and cultures, we try to hold onto these things as well as move forward, but people want more than that they want it altered and changed to suit the needs of different races and cultures. Those that don’t wish to lose our original faiths and cultures are actually the victims as their free speech is very much held in check, for the very fear of being called racist or bigots, the straight white Christians(dare i say that ) of this country are gradually being pushed into extinction so out with the dinosaurs…
You used the term “straight white Christians” and in the context of your post you are inferring that the old traditions of this country are purely, white, hetrosexual and Christian.
No mention in your post of the straight black or brown Christians that have lived and been born in this country for generations.
You chose to bring skin colour into your arguement – for what purpose?
…….but this doesn’t have a lot to do with cliques and cliches :-s
@tinks wrote:
…….but this doesn’t have a lot to do with cliques and cliches :-s
I tinks this and the gay marriage thread got inadvertently “merged.” I suppose the C of E could be seen as a clique.
it was in response to your lengthy reply regarding the skin colour of british, i chose white christian straight because if i was of a different skin colour and debating this you would never had made the post u made. Someone with different skin colour to white dont get the same gagging, as white people do, because of the fear of racism thrown back at them. So thats why i made the straight white christian comment, because they are more and more being given less and less free speech, people with other coloured skin in my opinion are far less jumped on for such comments, which is why i said you proved my point and read what i had said as being racist,when it actually had nothing to do with skin colour, apart from the fact the white skin colour seem to have less free speech, hence your reply about asian and black generation history and so forth, retort, you assumed that was what i meant.
And to summarise on this subject too..
No i’m not keen on cliques@(f)politics? wrote:
it was in response to your lengthy reply regarding the skin colour of british, i chose white christian straight because if i was of a different skin colour and debating this you would never had made the post u made. Someone with different skin colour to white dont get the same gagging, as white people do, because of the fear of racism thrown back at them. So thats why i made the straight white christian comment, because they are more and more being given less and less free speech, people with other coloured skin in my opinion are far less jumped on for such comments, which is why i said you proved my point and read what i had said as being racist,when it actually had nothing to do with skin colour, apart from the fact the white skin colour seem to have less free speech, hence your reply about asian and black generation history and so forth, retort, you assumed that was what i meant.
What lengthy reply regarding skin colour of British? I didn’t mention skin colour, unless I’m mistaken, you did and I responded to it.
i mentioned skin colour as a group of people i feel have less free speech, you reply was in the sense my mentioning this was in some way of a racist nature, like i said it proved my point, had i mentioned a category of people for example over 30 housewives, your reply in length about the skin colour of british wouldnt have come into it, as you assumed i was being racist about non white people. But the over 30’s housewife category isn’t the category i feel has less free speech the category i mention do.
anyway as i said i’ve given my side to this debate, some will disagree some may agree which is the delight behind such debate, but it’s blown itself out now i think, been done, i agree to disagree on some of the points made :D@(f)politics? wrote:
it was in response to your lengthy reply regarding the skin colour of british, i chose white christian straight because if i was of a different skin colour and debating this you would never had made the post u made. Someone with different skin colour to white dont get the same gagging, as white people do, because of the fear of racism thrown back at them. So thats why i made the straight white christian comment, because they are more and more being given less and less free speech, people with other coloured skin in my opinion are far less jumped on for such comments, which is why i said you proved my point and read what i had said as being racist,when it actually had nothing to do with skin colour, apart from the fact the white skin colour seem to have less free speech, hence your reply about asian and black generation history and so forth, retort, you assumed that was what i meant.
Wow! I never said your post was racist! You obviously think it was as you had to put in the caveat, “this isn’t a racist comment btw…” before you wrote it!
All I pointed out is this country has not for generations, if ever, been exclusively white.
@(f)politics? wrote:
i mentioned skin colour as a group of people i feel have less free speech, you reply was in the sense my mentioning this was in some way of a racist nature, like i said it proved my point, had i mentioned a category of people for example over 30 housewives, your reply in length about the skin colour of british wouldnt have come into it, as you assumed i was being racist about non white people. But the over 30’s housewife category isn’t the category i feel has less free speech the category i mention do.
anyway as i said i’ve given my side to this debate, some will disagree some may agree which is the delight behind such debate, but it’s blown itself out now i think, been done, i agree to disagree on some of the points made :DYou mean you’re playing your get out of jail free card. :roll:
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!