to agree with the red cross for sacking someone that protested about gay marriage

[pixie130]

I think I will donate to them in support of this action. The daily mail is outraged against this

how can you discriminate against peoples beliefs ...people believe what they believe you can't force them not to

Exactly ghosty. We seem to have this pantomime situation where people are now required to convincingly pretend to believe an acceptable range of things. I'm not sure it advances anything other than mass censorship. It doesn't win anyone round or show them why their ideas might be problematic. It just makes them feel beleaguered and promotes a feeling of martyrdom.

not sure I agree Arsenic - my mum is 69 and an active Christian - she fully supports gay marriage and gay Bishops and has done since I can remember - as do her Christian friends

The Bible doesn't even mention gay marriage - it has a lot to say about eating pork, sleeping with women on their periods and such but bugger all about gay people marrying

no they don't have to pretend they just have to voice them when it's appropriate and not at work - I have very strong political views but I don't spout them to my clients and work mates 24/7 because I am at work and it's not appropriate

CSLewis

Fluffy, campaigning against gay marriage does not necessarily make you homophobic.

Per se, objecting against gay marriage (regardless of ones 'reasons' for doing so) intrinsically places one firmly in the homophobe camp as it is a direct attack on gay rights and de facto equality. Would you write campaigning against people of colour marrying does not necessarily make you racist and expect others to just swallow it?

My son is happily engaged to his (male) partner and I'm pretty certain he would interpret someone overtly 'campaigning' against his civil rights on the grounds of his sexuality as homophobic...

Oh of course it isn't all Christians.

But there are plenty of seventy and eighty somethings who have attended church weekly for decades and been taught certain things since Sunday school (and plenty of what has been preached in churches is hard to justify from direct scripture).

Sometimes good people believe awful things. I'm never a fan of bludgeoning people into renouncing their beliefs by yelling at them. I get into the same row on the UKIP threads. It's a honey/vinegar argument I suppose.

no they don't have to pretend they just have to voice them when it's appropriate and not at work

Oh was he voicing it at work? I thought this was all about the daft demo he did outside of work and that his conduct when volunteering was fine.

Yes, if he was voicing it at work that is quite different.

Per se, campaigning against gay marriage (bloody sunday morning brainfog!)

fuzzy inciting violence is illegal, saying you don't like something is not, how do you think we became more tolerant without people speaking out against mainstream views, your extreme brand of censorship and intolerance is what stops a society evolving. What people say is not harmful and is allowed.
A March 2014 poll had 24% of the UK against gay marriage, so not such a niche view. What % of the population agreeing with a statement means that discussion on it is banned?

I think there may have been a misunderstanding of my earlier post. As I understand from the media, the man in question was demonstrating against a law, which had been, or was to be passed, and was not demonstrating against any group of people. I am sorry if I upset anyone earlier.

Munning some people see it as a theological point. I had this row with a chap who was more than happy with the existence of civil partnership (and had happily partnered gay relatives), but strongly believed that marriage was a sacrament for the begetting of children. No matter how much I pointed out to him all the gay couples who had children, he wouldn't accept it was the same thing. He was very religious. He was infuriating. But he wasn't homophobic. I'm as sure as I can be of that and it's the longest conversation i've had with someone of that viewpoint.

All seemed rather silly to me, but then it would because I'm an atheist.

was he voicing it at work

We're not sure. They suggested there was more to it and then said something like 'we would dismiss someone who was letting their beliefs interfere with doing their job'.

So really we can only talk about such cases in general.

Campaigning against gay marriage is not in itself a crime and shouldn't be.

Though I wouldn't want a guy who did marrying my son :)

Exactly granny; Gay marriage is happening. Protestors like this man seem rather like King Canute to me. It will all subside. History will march forward regardless.

Carol- that's just not true... Hate speech laws cover more than just inciting violence... Prosecutions have included someone leaving anti-religious cartoons in a Chapel which caused upset to the chaplain and a Christian evangelist protesting with a sign that among other things argued homosexuality should be stopped. This isn't my own brand of censorship which I've just made up. The law says this because nobody has the right to single out other groups of people and say offensive and upsetting things about them.

We're not sure. They suggested there was more to it and then said something like 'we would dismiss someone who was letting their beliefs interfere with doing their job'.

Thanks back. How irritating that it isn't clear.

ArsenicSoup, I'm sure you're right about culture shock. I was born after the war, but if you'd asked me when I was a teenager I'd have said gay people (wouldn't have used that word) were disgusting perverts.

No one had told me that exactly, but I'd picked up on it from the things they did say.

I got over it though and have no problem at all now. It's something to take into account though not an excuse as such. Lots of things have changed since then.

Arsenic I take your (well made) point but would still revert to the basic premise of how the person/people in the cross-hairs of that view are impacted by it and the pretty simple example of my son and HIS rights.

More to the point (in the context of this thread), my understanding is that this wasn't an individual who had his own beliefs but was happy to live cheek by jowl with others regardless of difference (THAT being the marker of a tolerant society) but to the contrary was overtly campaigning against the rights of others.

Erm sorry but voicing the opinion that gay marriage shouldn't be allowed is homophobic.

It is arguing that a minority group should be denied their legal right to have the same priveledge of marriage as the heterosexual majority.

To say that opposing gay marriage isn't homophobic is like saying opposing black people being allowed in the same bars as who're people isn't racist .

white people

I suspect it is the people who have had narrower, more sheltered lives who have hung on to outdated views Back. Not everybody has met a range of people, travelled or widened their horizons have they?

I suspect people like the Evangelical Alliance love it when there is uproar and shouts of bigotry. Better to ignore the minority and wait a decade or two

You know we try to draw a line between free speech and attacking people and it is difficult to write laws that spell it out. But I can't help thinking that everyone knows where the line is anyway.

I have a lot to say about religion, but only say it in discussions where it is relevant. I'd never go into a church or stop a Muslim in the street to tell them they were wrong.

I would never refuse to serve someone in a shop because they were different or had different opinions.

You just know the difference don't you.

"Better to ignore the minority and wait a decade or two"

I agree. We can demand people follow a new law right away, but if we change something basic then we shouldn't expect people's views to change overnight.

Couple of generations and there'll be no need for gay pride marches because no one will remember why it was a problem in the first place.

Munning and fluffy

I do see what you are saying. I suppose I see marriage as pretty baggage-laden thing itself and maybe that colours my view.

I'm also pretty impressed with the sheer speed at which progress has been made on gay rights in the last few years (long overdue). Two decades ago I was in sixth form and still at that age, under Section 28, only one staff member would covertly answer a couple of questions on gay issues. The possibility that gay people would ever be able to marry would have seemed like sci-fi to us then. But we've acheived it. No amount of impotent ranting undoes that.

It's not homophobic to be against gay marriage

Couple of generations and there'll be no need for gay pride marches because no one will remember why it was a problem in the first place.

I'm not sure whether to be or about that.

Maybe everyone could just have a party anyway. It will be like Guy Fawkes night with children having to be taught the original meaning.

Fwiw, I quietly support it and think anyone regardless of gender should be allowed to marry in a twosome.

My best friend is against it. He is gay. I will have to ask him why.