We are a discussion forum dedicated to the towns of Accrington, Oswaldtwistle and the surrounding areas, sometimes referred to as Hyndburn! We are a friendly bunch please feel free to browse or read on for more info. You are currently viewing our site as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, photos, play in the community arcade and use our blog section. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please, join our community today!
View Poll Results: Is Same Sex Marriage a step to far?
Agree?
11
28.21%
Disagree?
7
17.95%
Live and let live?
8
20.51%
Stick to Civil Partnerships?
14
35.90%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 39. You may not vote on this poll
Are you serious! We should govern our behaviour according to a dictionary! And here's me thinking that governing one's behaviour according to the Bible and the Koran was stupid enough. You have taken it down a few notches to a whole new level of dumbness.
You've taken the words out of my mouth Eric, given the dictionary was written ages ago, its time the definition was change to bring it into the twenty first century instead of leaving it in the dark ages
Are you serious! We should govern our behaviour according to a dictionary! And here's me thinking that governing one's behaviour according to the Bible and the Koran was stupid enough. You have taken it down a few notches to a whole new level of dumbness.
I am serious about understanding what marriage is , and the dictionary is just one aid to help our understanding .
"We should govern our behaviour according to a dictionary " . Your words , never mine , and not my opinion .
I am serious about understanding what marriage is , and the dictionary is just one aid to help our understanding .
"We should govern our behaviour according to a dictionary " . Your words , never mine , and not my opinion .
If it's not your opinion, why did you bring up the idea: "dictionary as dogma", the final word? Bible, Koran, Torah ... I can understand. But the dictionary! Think of what could happen. It's bad enough that JWs show up on my doorstep. What next? Hordes of lexicographers, peddling their version of the dictionary.
I can see why some folks oppose gay marriage. I can see governments not wishing to allow it for economic and political reasons. But there have to be stronger arguments than definitions of words.
I also think it's insulting to the intelligence of posters on here to quote the dictionary. I'm sure most of us have a fair idea of what the word "marriage" means.
"Words are but the signs of ideas" ... or so the great lexicographer Samuel Johnson said. And ideas do change.
I think I've had my say on this topic. Time to grab my snow shovel and enjoy this first day of Spring.
The English language is a living, breathing entity - words drop into disuse, new words appear, and the meaning of some words change. Dictionaries simply reflect this. In time, dictionaries will reflect this new change.
It boils down to this - people should be allowed to get married in the way they want, to whom they want, and, if they have religion in their lives, with that in the ceremony. In other words, gay people should have equality with everyone else. It's their choice and it does no harm to anyone else - and that's not political correctness, it's just common sense.
This thread at the moment has 24 pages and has been going for over a year. I don't know if anyone has quoted the Bible verbatim but some people have said they do not approve of single sex marriages because the Bible forbids them. That to me is the crux of the whole issue.
Google "Bible forbids single sex marriage" and pick the bones out of what you find. I'm not that interested in a 2000+ year old tome that has very little relevance to today's society.
Post #338 seems to fit the bill ... and the reductio ad absurdam (it's in the dictionary) at the end of your post doesn't help your argument one darned bit.
Anyway, enough of this ... shovelling is done ... dictionary is put away ... and I'm outa here.
Post #338 seems to fit the bill ... and the reductio ad absurdam (it's in the dictionary) at the end of your post doesn't help your argument one darned bit.
Anyway, enough of this ... shovelling is done ... dictionary is put away ... and I'm outa here.