Turkish

You keep saying logical answers, where? I haven't seen any, all I keep seeing is people banging on about choices. No logical explanation of why gay people would want the blessing of an organisation that disproves of them. No explanation as to why gay people can't celebrate civil partnerships as a great thing for homosexuality. No explanation as to who is pushing for this legislation, gays or people deciding this for them. I won't repeat myself again because you've been unable to answer all day and just resort to sneering comments and patronising so I doubt that this is going to change now. Of course the irony being you're against religion and against marriage so not really sure why you are involving yourself in this discussion anyone. One might think you were just a liberal bandwagon jumper.

I've put forward the argument that why don't gay people celebrate civil partnerships as being their thing, see it as a great thing for homosexuality, why not celebrate being different? You seem to be suggesting it might be bad thing. Why does everyone have to be the same? Why not be proud of what you are? That is my arguement. If they want to be married so they can be like everyone else then fine, let them, but why do they need the approval or claim to be part of an organisation which may not approve it even forbids them? We are constantly told religion is bigotted and out of dated why would people of a modern all embracing society want the approval and blessing of such a terrible thing? Do gay people even actually want it? Serious question, or is it other people thinking they want it? And Prehaps all of you in favour of homosexuals being married in churches could give us your views on Islam a religion which openly forbids it.

I wonder if Dodd and Cortese will have a 'chat' this week?

In Islam homosexuality is forbidden. Why would two blokes who claim to practise Islam firstly, be gay and secondly want the approval of the religIon that forbids them?

Unfortuantely despite the increasing patronising nature of your reply BTF you have also failed to address any of my point. However no doubt the first gay couple that are refused marriage in a religious building will create the usual uproar from people like yourself. Yet they are just exercising their right to freedom of worship are they not?

Some church's, not all churches. What about the one that do? What about if some religions don't want gays to marry in their churches? should they be forced to do so? What about Islam, where homosexuals are forbidden? How is it going to go down with them that they HAVE to allow gays to get married in their mosques if they want to.

Prehaps you could paraphrase them then as I'm struggling to see anyone come up with any decent and logical reason why a gay person would want the blessing of or be a part of an organisation that disapproves of them. I'm also struggling to see where anyone has come up with an examples of where it's proven that civil partnerships have been consider a lesser relationship than a marriage, other than your bizarre one about not being able to get a divorce based on adultery, which I disproved anuway.nO one has said who is pushing for this legislation, of it's gay people or people deciding for them they want it. And the now most recent point that in our all encompassing modern society actually we don't have religious freedom at all, because people can only practise the parts that th modern society aprroves of, by default we cannot approve if Islam as homosexuality is forbidden.

It answers none of my points. But I wouldn't expect you to understand.

So actually we don't have religious freedom in this country so isn't a modern all inclusive society a all. Good luck explain it to the Muslims.

Logical answers? I'm yet to see any logical answers to any of my questions. Why would gay people want the blessing of an organisation that disproves of them? Why would gay people associate as a member of a group whose fundamental doctrines are against the way they chose to live their lives? Why would gay people stay as part of a group that does not approve of their practises? I'm still waiting for people to come up with examples of where it has been said that a civil relationship is less of a relationship than a straight marriage and if its the gays themselves that want this legislation or is it other people deciding for them that they want it. All I keep hearing is that it's so they've got choice. Well fine let them be married but why do they need the approval of a church that they clearly don't follow the teachings of and is opposed to their morality. Lets hear the logical answers to those points because so far our liberal genius have drawn a blank.

Luckily we can amend out squad in only 22 days time. Jonno quick can play in a number of positions. With his pace he can whizz up and down that left flank.

Please dont "correct" my posts BTF, it's very patronising.

Oh dear, so now people start to get patronising........ If the church doesn't approve of them and their relationship then dont they have the to refuse to allow them to marry in church?

I ddin't say we shouldn't. I dont understand why gay people would want a marriage blessed by a religion that doesn't approve of them and they dont follow properly.

What has that got to do with it?

Would it though? You said just now civil partnerships are a slightly diluted version of marriage, quite how im not sure apart from teh technicality around the legal wordings and how you can get divorced, why people entering a marriage or civil partnership would be worrying about how they get divorced is beyond me, but hey ho. Why cant gay people celebrate civil partnerships? I dont see many straight people wanting to go to gay pride for example, its a gay thing and it's treated as being a celebration of homosexuality, why not do the same with civil partnerships? And still no one can come up with examples as to who views them as a lesser relationship. I'm also yet to see anyone come up with the answer as to who is pushing for all this. Is it gay people? Is it the government or is it the church?

He wants a slightly dilitued version of marriage, not the real thing. Isn't it about choice? at least that's what you said it was 10 minutes ago. Why shouldn't he have the right to this?

WHat about the right of straight people to choose to have a civil partnership rather than a marriage? Is there a difference? Why shouldn't they be allowed this? And it is difficult because i'm really struggling to understand why anyone of whatever sexual orientation would want the blessing of an organisation that doesn't approve of them and claim to be part of an organisation that they dont follow properly. I'm not anti gay marriage as i've said above, it's the insistance of the blessing of the church i find odd.

Ironic you ask me answer without asking a question as that is what you keep doing. Obviously one of the key things that matter when you decide to get married/enter a civil partnership are the slight differences there are in legal terms!!! That's a great arguement! The argument for different types of relationship is about perspective. I'm yet to see anyone come up with any examples of why a civil partnership is less of a relationship than a marriage. Why dont gay people embrace civil partnerships as their thing? Why dont they be proud they can have civil relationships and straight people cant?

What about the symbolism of civil partnerships. Aren't they effectively a homosexual marriage? Straight people cant have one. Why dont gay people say how fantastic is that they have something straight people cant have?

So the church didn't approve. So why would a gay couple want the blessing of a religion they didn't follow properly and didn't approve of them?

And neither do straight people. Straight people cant have a right to a civil partnership. What advantages do gay couples have from getting married rather than being in a civil partnership, other than if they were to split up later due to one of them cheating it's classed as unreasonable behaviour rather than adultery of course. Why dont gay people celebrate civil partnerships as being exclusive to them? Why do they need to be married?

and I still want to know who views civil partnerships as lesser relationships. Other than some bizarre technicality on the wording allowed to use in law no one has come up with any examples of who does or why they are.

What if you want a civil partnership? Surely you would agree straight people should be permitted this if they want?

What if a straight couple want a civil partnership? How do they go about it? WHat are their choices?