Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Harve

Gay marriage bill passed in Scotland

Recommended Posts

A recent survey found that only 1.5% of the UK is gay (of course this only counts people who have said they are but the true figure can't be massively higher) and 93.5% said straight. What does that tell you? gay issues are not an issue that needs to be taken seriously tbh. I live in Manchester but I don't know any gay people at all yet I have quite a few friends and big extended family. 

 

Without looking into your figures... that's near on a million people UK-wide. For comparison, that's not far off 1/4 of the Scottish electorate.

 

But yes, it's small in % terms.

 

However, if we looked back say over the past 100 years and calculated how much parliamentary time and money had been spent on equality rights for same sex couples I imagine it would be a fair bit less than 1.5% of the budget. No taxation without representation...

 

As I said in previous posts, more a formality correcting equality laws.

Edited by scottish skier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some very good friends of mine are gay/lesbian and I fully support them, really feel the need for laws etc to be passed is a waste of time, two people choose, let them!  I hate the fact they should be seen different.  Just my view it may seem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We don't need any, all you hear is racist this or homophobic that or islamaphobic this, it's making people into little knee knocking softies. I don't like carrots so does that make me carrotophobic? Posted Image

So that's a 'no' then.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You must have missed the gay pride parade in Manchester last year. I still feel homophobia is an issue in Britain.

 

Homophobia still rife in UK, survey claims
 
Many expect to face discrimination and feel that social attitudes lag behind parliament
 

 

 

Homophobia will always go on, always has done, as long as there's different people then people will judge, It will never be stamped out completely no matter what is in place to prevent it.

 

Without looking into your figures... that's near on a million people UK-wide. For comparison, that's not far off 1/4 of the Scottish electorate.

 

But yes, it's small in % terms.

 

However, if we looked back say over the past 100 years and calculated how much parliamentary time and money had been spent on equality rights for same sex couples I imagine it would be a fair bit less than 1.5% of the budget. No taxation without representation...

 

As I said in previous posts, more a formality correcting equality laws.

 

Well yes 100 years ago it would of been £0 but the past 10 years probably millions given the huge "equality and diversity" campaign's for people in the public sector and kids at school (very wrong, they shouldn't know about sex but gay issues is shoved down their throats.)

So that's a 'no' then.

 

You don't need any, just talk to any normal person on the street who is fed up with the country and where the priorities seem to be.

Edited by Gaz1985

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some very good friends of mine are gay/lesbian and I fully support them, really feel the need for laws etc to be passed is a waste of time, two people choose, let them!  I hate the fact they should be seen different.  Just my view it may seem.

 

I agree with you Jax but sometimes I'm afraid laws have to be passed to override societies moral judgements based on some antiquainted dogma. It's within my lifetime that  consenting acts between male homosexuals was a criminal offense and a great man was hounded to death because of it.

Edited by knocker
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You don't need any, just talk to any normal person on the street who is fed up with the country and where the priorities seem to be.

 

Normal????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you Jax but sometimes I'm afraid laws have to be passed to override societies moral judgements based on some antiquainted dogma. It's within my lifetime that  consenting acts between male homosexuals was a criminal offense and a great man was hounded to death because of it.

and having to pass them laws shows just how far short we have been and how far we still have to go in this acceptance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Normal????

 

Indeed - it's becoming a rare commodity these days. There aint much queerer than folk.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

YAY! That's brilliant. Now lets wait for some homophobic bigoted 'Christian' to blame that result for the storms. :) Er....while they eat their shell fish, and whilst Wearing their mixed fibres.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not the first time we've heard Gaz's argument from the swivel-eyed brigade. They used it in Westminster, as though you could solve high energy prices by talking about them in parliament, or passing imaginary laws. It's just a smokescreen because they won't come out & say what they really mean, for fear of injury from a hail of thrown soft furnishing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You don't need any, just talk to any normal person on the street who is fed up with the country and where the priorities seem to be.

But you didn't say that. You said that more important issues get dragged on for years before going to a vote whereas PC issues get pushed through quickly due to "inexhaustible resources". A claim like that requires more than anecdotal evidence. Anyway, as others have pointed out voting on gay marriage doesn't mean other issues aren't being addressed at the same time.

 

By the way saying that homophobia will always exist isn't justification to ignore it. Like all bad things it will never completely go away (there's always someone) but we should still try to minimise it as much as possible.

Edited by AderynCoch

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But you didn't say that. You said that more important issues get dragged on for years before going to a vote whereas PC issues get pushed through quickly due to "inexhaustible resources". A claim like that requires more than anecdotal evidence. Anyway, as others have pointed out voting on gay marriage doesn't mean other issues aren't being addressed at the same time.

 

By the way saying that homophobia will always exist isn't justification to ignore it. Like all bad things it will never completely go away (there's always someone) but we can still try to minimise it as much as possible.

 

We hear it on the news often, and now it's filtered on here so that's enough evidence........ministers ignore peoples energy concerns along with a whole host of concerns that effect us all daily so gay issues and homophobia can be put much further back as these only effect a small portion of society.

 

Not the first time we've heard Gaz's argument from the swivel-eyed brigade. They used it in Westminster, as though you could solve high energy prices by talking about them in parliament, or passing imaginary laws. It's just a smokescreen because they won't come out & say what they really mean, for fear of injury from a hail of thrown soft furnishing!

 

It won't be the last either I can assure you loony lefties Posted Image the PM and queen as head of state has the power to do nearly anything with laws, but the fact is these heating issues don't effect them so they won't budge.

Edited by Gaz1985

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Queen has no powers to do anything concrete politically whatsoever! The PM doesn't either, as far as Scotland is concerned, having devolved all that sort of stuff to Edinburgh.

Edited by Crepuscular Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Queen has no powers to do anything concrete politically whatsoever!

 

Duhhhhhh she can "dissolve parliament" if she wishes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with you Jax but sometimes I'm afraid laws have to be passed to override societies moral judgements based on some antiquainted dogma. It's within my lifetime that  consenting acts between male homosexuals was a criminal offense and a great man was hounded to death because of it.

 

Spot on. I fully support the removal of laws and attitudes based solely on the teachings of some ancient book :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spot on. I fully support the removal of laws and attitudes based solely on the teachings of some ancient book :)

But that would be basing laws on your opinions and the modern teachings of live and let live, which has really done us proud over the years. Edited by Sceptical Inquirer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spot on. I fully support the removal of laws and attitudes based solely on the teachings of some ancient book Posted Image

 

I'm not a fan of religion either, but there's other communities that would disagree most especially muslims, you see that's the problem here in the UK we have many different communities who pull some people one way and some another. Too much of a mix going on with hands tied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Duhhhhhh she can "dissolve parliament" if she wishes.

Oh, as if that would happen if she weren't asked by the PM to do so. The last time any monarch did was in 1835; the last time a government fell through the monarch not giving the royal assent and by default forcing the government to resign was 1704.

 

In any case, the Fixed-Term Parliament Act of 2011 removed her right to dissolve Parliament entirely. However, she can prorogue (suspend) it. 

 

Duhhhhhhh.

Edited by Crepuscular Ray

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, as if that would happen if she weren't asked by the PM to do so. The last time any monarch did was in 1835; the last time a government fell through the monarch not giving the royal assent and by default forcing the government to resign was 1704.

 

In any case, the Fixed-Term Parliament Act of 2011 removed her right to dissolve Parliament entirely. However, she can prorogue (suspend) it. 

 

Duhhhhhhh.

 

Who's to say that won't happen again? and there you go....so afterall she does have an influence politically......and not as you put it........."no powers to do anything concrete politically whatsoever!"

It's not called "Her Majesty's government" for nothing ya know Posted Image 

Edited by Gaz1985

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But she can't force the government in London or the Assembly in Scotland to do anything, such as fund the NHS properly, raise the minimum wage or arrange their activities according to the priorities of right-wing bigots, homophobes, left-wing ideologues or anyone else, which was the point of my post. The events of the 17th century made sure that no monarch could let their own wishes override those of parliament.

 

The "Her Majesty's Government" thing is entirely a matter of tradition, as she's not one to interfere. She can make her opinion known, but Prime Ministers are entirely at liberty to ignore it.

Edited by Crepuscular Ray
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But she can't force the government in London or the Assembly in Scotland to do anything, such as fund the NHS properly, raise the minimum wage or arrange their activities according to the priorities of right-wing bigots, left-wing ideologues or anyone else, which was the point of my post. The events of the 17th century made sure that no monarch could let their own wishes override those of parliament.

 

If push comes to shove she can do anything if things get out of control but again she won't as these issues will never effect her, and afterall it is HER government not Cameron's - she has probably more protection than the PM too and she is the head of state, a higher accolade than PM. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She can't. That's the whole point of the 2011 Act.

 

affect, not effect.

 

But again as you said she can prorogue (suspend) it. Which if you have looked that up it means she can effectively stop Parliament when she wants, so she does have a political influence and not "none whatsoever" like you said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I have looked it up, as I'm sure you did in an effort to find a way of proving me wrong.

 

From the House of Lords website: "The prorogation of Parliament, which brings a session to an end, is a prerogative act of the Crown. By current practice Parliament is prorogued by Commissioners acting in the Sovereign's name." She would authorise it on advice from the Privy Council.

 

Anyway, this is now severely off topic, the wind is – unexpectedly – dying down and it's time for bed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We hear it on the news often, and now it's filtered on here so that's enough evidence........ministers ignore peoples energy concerns along with a whole host of concerns that effect us all daily so gay issues and homophobia can be put much further back as these only effect a small portion of society.

It really isn't.

 

I give up.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...