I'm against gay marriage*

Post Reply New Topic

I think this whole thread is a joke. The OP sure got me and then I realized he was joking and it was his intention to mislead people thinking he was a homophone or against gay marriages rather than being against all marriages.

Well, it might make you a bit quixotic. Let's see, in the United States, it is very likely that the U.S. Supreme Court will determine that the logic presented in various federal district and circuit court opinions which have affirmed the Fourteenth Amendment requires that states must provide marriage to same-sex couples. If the justices wished to do otherwise, they wouldn't have waited this long to review the matter while simultaneously denying review in those cases that have affirmed marriage equality.

You are from the United Kingdom where cousin Queenie signed her Royal Assent for the equal marriages act. And, your avatar suggests membership with UKIP, the U.K. Independence Party which stated recently that it "will not repeal the legislation, as it would be grossly unfair and unethical to 'un-marry' loving couples or restrict further marriages, but we will not require churches to marry same-sex couples. We will also extend the legal concept of 'reasonable accommodation' to give protection in law to those expressing a religious conscience in the workplace on this issue."

The party's support of same-sex marriages already performed isn't the headline as much as its support of 'reasonable accommodation' of those expressing a religious conscience against the marriages in the workplace. Would those who support the marriages enjoy the same protection? Would business owners or their employees be protected from discriminating openly in the workplace? Would a workplace include those within government offices and allow tax-paid workers to ignore the expectations of certain of their tax-paying constituents? The U.K. government would certainly have prohibitions of these sort.

The 'reasonable accommodation' provision sounds very similar to the law that was proposed by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints regarding Utah's attempt to thread the needle legally. Unlike the LDS proposal, however, it appears that the UKIP idea goes further, and, by doing so, risks being determined by U.K. courts to be a step too far by becoming the "license to discriminate" that Utah aptly avoided.

Still, I believe that U.K. laws allow for religious protections for those who embrace their religion as well as those who avoid all religions. Wouldn't that satisfy the UKIP idea without risking further humiliation as a political party (one whose other ideas I support generally)?

But, back to your OP question: You may do what you choose to do within the laws of your community, of course. Just don't waste too much time tilting at the same windmill. Like all of us, you have a life to live.

Remember to check dates... Tequila posted this before the Equal Marriage Act was signed, also when UKIP were officially against the legislation.

I knew it was a old thread.

To those saying UKIP is against gay marriage, let me tell you that Nigel Farage isn't against it. Mr. Farage is against the government regulation of marriage and more recently he has voiced that a UKIP stance on it after the French model would be likely. For your information, in France, civil partnerships allow gays to marry too and get the same benefits as heterosexual couples.

Me, too. It is just that this topic was baby-bumped and the dynamics of the matter have changed significantly. I thought it would be important to note the change.

You hate gay people?