Politics

[Colorado Gull]

I've never seen a thread on this forum that's close to politics, maybe there's a reason for that I'm not sure, but what's everyone's opinion on commons in favour of gay marriage?

I personally am very into politics. Yes I'm only 16 years of age, but I'm a Young Independance member for the UK Independance Party (UKIP) and will hopefully soon be in the process in starting up the Young Independance for Devon with the YI Devon chairman. Anyway, that's me and politics, but going back to the subject, what's your opinion on gay marriage?

I'll give my opinion, I oppose the idea of same sex marriage. The point of marriage is to procreate, we've had many fantastic significant scientific advances in the recent times, but nothing that say a man and a man of two women can make a baby. Someone at my school said to me 'well what about a couple who can't conceive?' My answer to that is/was, yes it's very sad that some couples cannot have children naturally, but the fact of the matter is, the only way to have children naturally is though a man and a woman, which is the point of marriage. I do not oppose civil partnerships, it should be seen as a privilege in this country that homosexuals have this. I also do not oppose gay adoption. Sadly many couples do not treat children right, if a home for a child is better and safer with two homosexuals in a civil partnership, then that is the better option. The thing I do not agree with, is the marriage side.

Discuss?

[Scott Brehaut]

As a hetrosexual man I have the freedom to marry whomever I want (although obviously she would have to agree etc, but you get my drift). Why then should a gay man or woman not have that same right?

I quote from Mike Freer, a Conservative Minister:

"I am a member of this Parliament. I sit alongside you in committees, in the bars and in the tea rooms. I queue alongside you in the division lobbies. But when it comes to marriage, why are you asking me to stand apart and to join a separate queue? I ask my colleagues: if I am equal in this House, give me every opportunity to be equal.

"I ask my married colleagues - did you get married for legal protections? Did you go down on one knee and say 'Darling, please give me the protections marriage affords us?' Of course you didn't. My civil partnership was our way of saying to my friends and my family this is who I love, this is who I am, this is who I wish to spend the rest of my life with. I am not asking for special treatment. I am simply asking for equal treatment."

Or this, from David Lammy, a Labour Minister:

"It is the end of an organic journey from criminality to equality for the gay community that began over a half century ago. This change is right, this change is necessary and the time is now.

"There are still those who say this is all unnecessary. Why do we need gay marriage when we already have civil partnership, they say. They are the same - separate but equal - they claim. Let me speak frankly - separate but equal is a fraud. Separate but equal is the language that tried to push Rosa Parks to the back of the bus. Separate but equal is the motif that determined that black and white people could not possibly drink from the same water fountain, eat at the same table or use the same toilets. It is an excerpt from the phrasebook of the segregationist and the racists. This is not separate but equal it is separate and discriminated, separate and oppressed, separate and brow beaten, separate and subjugated. Separate is not equal so let us be rid of it."

Finally, Nick Herbert a Conservative Minister:

"If marriage hadn't been re-defined in 1836, there wouldn't be any civil marriages; if it hadn't been re-defined in 1949, under 16-year-olds would still be able to get married; if it hadn't been re-defined in 1969, we wouldn't have today's divorce laws - and all of these changes were opposed. I know that the signal we send today about whether the law fully recognises the place of gay people in our society will really matter. Above all, I think of two people, faithful and loving, who simply want their commitment to be recognised, as it is for straight couples, and that in the end is what this bill is about."

Sums it up for me.

Also totally agree with the insertion into the bill regarding churches, and the fact that they don't have to marry gay and lesbian men and women. As much as it is the right of G&L's to marry whomever they want, we should not as a country be seen to force any religious movement to marry anybody that they don't wish to.

[AustrianAndyGull]

Very mature post Danny and it's most welcome to debate something else other than what are our favourite TV programmes.

First of all, i too am keen on politics but being 20 years older than you mate i've been around the block a few times now and experienced politics in most aspects of everyday life and gradually my trust in anyone in power has been eroded and now it doesn't exist. I don't trust the police, i don't trust the council, i don't trust teachers, i don't trust doctors and i struggle to trust most people in positions of power because society has changed immeasurably since i was growing up and now perks, money, status and power are more important to some people than having to make a morally correct decision. These people have to earn my trust and shouldn't automatically assume it, there may be a better way than my extreme one but if you never question and think people in power are somehow perfect and couldn't do anything wrong or criminal then you need to open your eyes a bit IMO. Obviously there's no need for paranoia which is what i make it sound like, just have your wits about you sometimes thats all.

Anyway, i digress. In short i don't actually agree with marriage between a man and a woman. I have a 4 year old daughter and the only reasons why we will stay together and see it through is because of us NOT because of a bit of paper and a nice ceremony and party. It takes 2 strong willed committed people for a relationship to survive and not a certificate. I'm not married, never have been and never will be but so long as my daughter has a mum and dad and my partner has me and vice versa then we don't need to.

I do think that the homosexual community go overboard in truth, i mean if i was gay and i could enter into a civil partnership with another bloke and have the rights of a married couple then there is no need for a marriage IMO BUT if they want Gay Marriage to become legal and recognised then i haven't got a problem with that.

I also agree with you about gay and lesbian couples being allowed to adopt. I used to be against this a good few years ago but having seen some of the complete wasters knocking out kids left right and centre all over the country then i say a child in desperate need of a stable loving home should have one regardless.

The thing about politics Danny ( from a bitter and twisted 30 something ) is do what is right for the people you represent even if it means you'll probably fail. Keep your morals and principles and thats all you can do to be true to yourself. If you want to get on board the gravy train and feather your own nest then you have to do what others tell you to do and if you don't agree with it but carry on the ride then you cannot be a decent and honourable politician nor man.

Good post mate! Maybe we should have a politics thread for the burning issues of the day?

[AustrianAndyGull]

Also, i'm not religious. Well, i believe in something but that something is evolution and not anything Godly. So i have no issues either way from a religious perspective in gay marriage.

[stevegull]

I appear to take a fairly different stance to Andy on politics in general. Probably as I am looking at it from the naive age of 19.

I obviously don't trust every politician straight away (I'm not naive enough for that!) but I actually tend to assume there isn't some 'power conspiracy' on the go and everyone is undercutting deals and being evil little weasels. I try and reason these things out and consider the facts.

For example, Nick Clegg has become a hate figure for many in this coalition as people claim he lacks 'backbone' and has welched out on many lib lem manifesto promises. I don't think the public are getting the message though that as the Liberal Democrats didn't win the election then it is impossible for them to get all their election promises into legislation. He's doing what he has to. A coalition is built on compromise and this is exactly what the conservatives and the lib dems are doing. I'm not saying it's going fantastically well (far from it) but it does really make my blood boil when Miliband goes after Cameron and Clegg on these types of things.

Speaking of Miliband, I am really struggling to see his appeal. Let me get one thing straight, I will vote for the party that seems to agree with my ideologies and the party I think can deliver good things to the country. I really don't 'get' why some people say "I've voted labour all my life and will do so until I die". I find that kind of statement extremely puzzling. Vote for the party you think aligns with you most and the party you trust. Policies and ideas of a party change over time; how can this voter be certain he will vote for them forever, regardless of what crackpot policies the party you support comes up with in the future. Politics can't really work if you've got huge sections of voters who refuse to budge their vote. There could be the perfect representative for you just across the hall but you would continue to vote for only one party because "that's what Dad did.

Back to Miliband, I don't think he's really learnt how to be in opposition in parliament yet. You can't just shout down EVERY idea the coalition comes up with. There must be SOMETHING you can agree on, or even just debate on to try and make amendments to certain bills. Labour has voted against EVERY spending cut (so someone said on PMQs). How is that even possible? It's f*cking clear we need to save some money somewhere. Labour need to come up with some of their own ideas to even start to convince me they're worth my vote. At present, they appear to me to be the equivilent of a little baby saying 'no' to things that are passed to them by their mother but refuses to actually tell mummy what he wants.

I realise from reading this you may think I'm one of those people with their blue-tinted conservative specs on but I assure you I always intend to see every situation as a 'floating voter' so that I am not skewed to favour one party. I don't know who I'll vote for in the next election, Labour very well may impress me with their manifesto or the Lib Dems may once again jump to life.

As for gay marriage, I'm afraid I'm one of those who doesn't really know why the whole debate is so important. I don't see this as a turning point for equality. Same sex couples already had the same legal rights, now they are desperate to be able to term it a 'marriage'. I'm not overly fussed if they do but I'm not sure why it matters that much.

It will be interesting to see how this acts on religious organisations.

Good to see you're also into it all Danny. It's hard to find many young people who are happy to discuss politics. I also think Nigel Farage comes across very well in his interviews. It will also be interesting to see how UKIP's support grows coming up to the next election.

[cambgull]

Oooh, a nice political debate!

During the last election, I decided to vote UKIP they are the party who I most agree with. Unfortunately, in my local constituancy we had no UKIP representation and voted Lib Dem instead. In reality, I voted for the best of bad bunches. I don't really trust any politicians and have no faith in any of them to live up to promises.

Labour and Conserative, in recent times, have nearly always failed and it is down to the idiots who are mentioned above, the ones who blindly follow a party without understanding the intentions of the leaders they intend to elect. I recently spoke to a lady in her 50s who proclaimed to be a staunch supporter of Labour and when I asked her of her views on Milliband, she responded with "Who's Ed Milliband?". She didn't even know who she was voting for!

It is people like this who cause the flaw in our democratic system, her vote is worth as much as mine yet for all she knows she could be voting for the party that wants to enforce one TB riddled Badger per household! And then to top that off, your vote is not worth one vote, but worth one vote compared to the last election. Your voted party might get the most votes, but still not get into power. It's just wrong!

[AustrianAndyGull]

I appear to take a fairly different stance to Andy on politics in general. Probably as I am looking at it from the naive age of 19.

I obviously don't trust every politician straight away (I'm not naive enough for that!) but I actually tend to assume there isn't some 'power conspiracy' on the go and everyone is undercutting deals and being evil little weasels. I try and reason these things out and consider the facts.

For example, Nick Clegg has become a hate figure for many in this coalition as people claim he lacks 'backbone' and has welched out on many lib lem manifesto promises. I don't think the public are getting the message though that as the Liberal Democrats didn't win the election then it is impossible for them to get all their election promises into legislation. He's doing what he has to. A coalition is built on compromise and this is exactly what the conservatives and the lib dems are doing. I'm not saying it's going fantastically well (far from it) but it does really make my blood boil when Miliband goes after Cameron and Clegg on these types of things.

Speaking of Miliband, I am really struggling to see his appeal. Let me get one thing straight, I will vote for the party that seems to agree with my ideologies and the party I think can deliver good things to the country. I really don't 'get' why some people say "I've voted labour all my life and will do so until I die". I find that kind of statement extremely puzzling. Vote for the party you think aligns with you most and the party you trust. Policies and ideas of a party change over time; how can this voter be certain he will vote for them forever, regardless of what crackpot policies the party you support comes up with in the future. Politics can't really work if you've got huge sections of voters who refuse to budge their vote. There could be the perfect representative for you just across the hall but you would continue to vote for only one party because "that's what Dad did.

Back to Miliband, I don't think he's really learnt how to be in opposition in parliament yet. You can't just shout down EVERY idea the coalition comes up with. There must be SOMETHING you can agree on, or even just debate on to try and make amendments to certain bills. Labour has voted against EVERY spending cut (so someone said on PMQs). How is that even possible? It's f*cking clear we need to save some money somewhere. Labour need to come up with some of their own ideas to even start to convince me they're worth my vote. At present, they appear to me to be the equivilent of a little baby saying 'no' to things that are passed to them by their mother but refuses to actually tell mummy what he wants.

I realise from reading this you may think I'm one of those people with their blue-tinted conservative specs on but I assure you I always intend to see every situation as a 'floating voter' so that I am not skewed to favour one party. I don't know who I'll vote for in the next election, Labour very well may impress me with their manifesto or the Lib Dems may once again jump to life.

As for gay marriage, I'm afraid I'm one of those who doesn't really know why the whole debate is so important. I don't see this as a turning point for equality. Same sex couples already had the same legal rights, now they are desperate to be able to term it a 'marriage'. I'm not overly fussed if they do but I'm not sure why it matters that much.

It will be interesting to see how this acts on religious organisations.

Good to see you're also into it all Danny. It's hard to find many young people who are happy to discuss politics. I also think Nigel Farage comes across very well in his interviews. It will also be interesting to see how UKIP's support grows coming up to the next election.

My parents ( dad has passed away now sadly ) are/were the same Steve. Vote Labour because that's what their parents did and their parents before that and their friends and their pet budgie. Also because they lived in working class areas it was the done thing.I told my parents that this displayed a lack of intelligence and a blinkered view of what is really going on. Went down well that! :~D I broke that trend voting conservative when i was a bit younger and then crossing to the Greens and now i generally vote Greens but only because i'd feel TOTALLY apathetic if i didn't vote at all.

All politics is a vicious circle of one party saying things voters want to hear to get in power then once they're in there they don't do the things they said they were going to meanwhile blaming the previous government for the mess. They get voted out and the new party who have done the same and said the things voters want to hear get in and so on and so on. Voting IMO is pointless for my life personally. Just let the idiots think they are running the country and meanwhile the rest of us who actually DO run it, ie the taxpayers, charities etc will get on with our lives despite them.

I'm all for independant parties coming through but how can you believe them? Clegg has been turned into a sideshow and let down many people in Sheffield despite his new appraoch and for the people stuff. I just vote Greens because i'm into alternative stuff, environment, countryside and things. They'll never get elected in a million years but i've voted for who i am proud to vote for and for people i believe are genuinely telling me the truth. The rest can go and f*ck themselves in a mass orgy payed by taxpayers for all i care, probably doing it now as we speak. Charlatans!

By the way, although i am interested in countryside issues, i abhorr fox hunting and it's one thing labour got right. It's nothing against the people who live in the countryside and i'm not in any way wanting to change their unique lifestyles but there is just no place in todays society for seeing animals being ripped apart for enjoyment and pleasure. It's cruel and barbaric. I am against many modern farming methods but at the very least the purpose of their destruction is for meat production and for consumers to eat. There is no purpose or gain in seeing a wild animal getting hunted down and torn apart by a pack of dogs. None at all. If the conservatives reinstate this then why not do the same with cockfighting, dogfighting and all the other underground barbaric activities that go on but are illegal in a society with 'normal' people running it.

[chunkygull]

this is the third time i have written this, twice i have lost it.
i am 37 years old and when i was younger i didnt take any notice of politics but as you get older you realise how much politics affects you, so now i take a lot of interest. i, like andy similarly said earlier have grown to mistrust and dislike all forms and figures of authority and power, especially politicians. life makes you cynical.

i feel some enter politics with the best will in the world and genuinely want to help people and make a difference. after a while they all become corrupt, desparate to cling onto their power and do everything for monetary and material gain. bunch of shysters. i agree about the point that a lot of people will only vote for one political party all their lives and thats the end of it.that does my head in. its like down here in torbay its only tory or lib dem that get a look in.labour or anyone else dont stand a chance, yet a lot of places up north people would rather pluck their eyeballs out than vote anything other labour.

nigel farage the ukip guy was on question time the other week and he was very good, he made a few others on the panel including the tory party chairman look silly. he came accross the best and had the biggest applause from the audience. it would be interesting if the british public opened their eyes properly to politics and made informed choices.

Gay Marriage: it is hard to believe it was only in 1967 homosexuality was made legal.before that you could be banged up (and not in a good way) for being gay. we have come a long way in our views, outlook and tolerance. which is a good thing. we should all be comfortable enough in ourselves not to give a monkeys about what others are doing. i am a hetrosexual male with a wife and child and i have no problem with homosexuals, each to their own or whatever floats your boat.

i am a big fan of queen the rock group, freddie mercury especially, i have a canvas portrait in my lounge of freddie with queen and have pictures of queen up in my spare room. i also on occasion listen to the likes of elton john and george michael.i am definitely not homophobic but however i do have views on some gay peoples conduct.

some gay men flaunt it and camp it up, they let us know what they are by their personality and behaviour just like tv's alan carr or graham norton. theres nothing wrong with that, i quite like them. i have met a few gay men similar, no problems with them. it is those that go on about being gay constantly or feel everyone must know and all gays must "come out", its militant gays i dont understand.

you dont get hetrosexual men or women going around declaring "im straight" constantly so everyone has to know. if hetrosexuals behaved like that or went on "straight pride" marches we would be called homophobic. i do not like it when i see two same sex people in public kissing and fondling each other , but then again i dont like it when i see a man and a woman doing the same thing either ( get a room). holding hands or arms around each other is fine for everyone.

A few years ago when homosexual couples were allowed to have a civil service to declare a civil union which allowed them to be a legal partnership with rights and told everyone they loved each other and were together was a massive positive step. weddings in church and married in the eyes of "GOD" however should be the choice of the church. it should be nothing to do with politicians, it is the churches right to marry or not marry who they choose. the churches stance on homosexuality is clear, the bible and other religious versions state a man shall not lay with another man. a priest/vicar/reverend/minister can refuse to marry a man and a woman if they feel they are not actively religious enough or for other reasons they see fit.

how many couples who want to get married are regular attendees to sunday service for a long time before or after they decide to get married? if the church do not want to marry two men or two women or a man and a woman then that is their choice. there are too many people who want to get married in church that dont have a religious bone in their body or any such beliefs.its usually only "because it would be nice on their big day to have a church wedding". politicians should stay out of it.

i am not personally religious, i believe in some things but "GOD" is a bit far fetched really.like i said life makes you cynical. if the church says no to gay marriage i respect that, if they change their mind and say yes im cool with that also.

GREAT THREAD BY THE WAY.

[AustrianAndyGull]

That's a really good post chunky, it's a bloody good job you didn't put an 's' on the end of 'queen' otherwise you'd have said you're a big fan of Queens! . Very apt for the subject area ( in a no way meant to be derogatory way though :~D ),

I agree totally with everything mate, especially the gay 'i'm gay and have to make sure everyone knows about it' types. If you're gay, you're gay, it's fine so shut up, sit down and get on with your life, everyone else is. Gets on my moobs that one.

Also the kissing in public thing. I reckon it's because we are similar ages chunky and have a kid that we see kissing and affection as a bit ott now between man and woman i mean. (Probably as i haven't done it myself for about 20 years! ). It's worse if you're on the train and you have to contend with two types of 'luvvies'. The teenage ones who just kiss, talk about justin bieber, kiss again, say how incredible each is, kiss, talk about Rylan, kiss.....................MY GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! At this point i'm considering alighting at Barnsley even though i know i'll probably become instantly depressed when i step off the train. But then you have to contend with the well heeled, well dressed professional couple doing the same!!

In terms of gay men and lesbian women kissing in public, i can't say i've ever seen it. Up here they'd probably get their heads stoved in if i'm honest. In fact i reckon BBC have missed a trick there, they could have made a real life documentary called 'homos in hull' and followed two couples of the citys gay and lesbian community as they walk round necking with each other. It would have been a real eye opener, as would the paramedic who came to their aid.

I've got to admit if i see 2 blokes kissing i feel physically bilious, like i've just eaten a full tub of peanut butter. Two women is fine but i reckon it's because we are blokes. It wouldn't surprise me if straight women found lesbians kissing more repulsive than gay men.

Anyway chunky , good post mate and no offence but if you could just break up your post into paragraphs so it's not one big massive chunk of text in future that would be great for us all. It just makes it a bit difficult to read.

I know myself that it can be forgotten as you can get carried away typing.

[chunkygull]

="austrianandygull"

I agree totally with everything mate, especially the gay 'i'm gay and have to make sure everyone knows about it' types. If you're gay, you're gay, it's fine so shut up, sit down and get on with your life, everyone else is. Gets on my moobs that one.

have edited post with regards to paragraphs, i see what you mean andy i started off doing paragraphs then went into rant mode.
as for the above quote, that is exactly what i was trying to say. all the time some gay people go on about "coming out" or they force others out, and the phrases like "i just want everyone to know who i am," "everyone should know what you are," "i just want to be comfortable and people accept me for who i am ".
everyone will be more accepting without it being shoved down their throat. i dont mind anybody, i accept everyone for who they are. similar to the above quote - live your life, get along and get on with it. each to their own, whatever flicks your switch.

[stevegull]

Andy I'm quite aware that it's somewhat more of a 'generational' thing when people claim that one party will always have their unwavouring support. My Grandmother always voted conservative and wouldn't have ever voted for anything else.

It's not about 'intelligence' I don't think. It was just that in 'olden' times parties tried to paint you as a 'traitor' if you changed support and I'm sure many vindictive campaigns were set about where they just soiled the image of any other party.

People are wise to that kind of thing now and I just wish more of the voting public would just open their mind to vote for who actually has a manifesto that they agree with and support. It would be very interesting to see how the votes would spread then. The trouble is the 2/3 main parties will always try and paint a picture that suggests you have to vote for one of them, or no one else. They suggest if you don't vote for the 'big three' then your vote is wasted.

Danny, if you don't mind me asking, are you hoping to get into politics in the future? Do you dream endlessly of becoming an MP? Or, dare I say, a PM?

[Colorado Gull]

Terrific! Educational replies to a political topic! I am a little bit of a nerd when it comes to politics, I throughly enjoy it and political debates.

I support and am a member of UKIP for many reasons, but a big reason is, they are the only party away from the 'big three' who say anything different! UKIP are the only change, the only different voice, the only right wing political party who has any sense.

As for gay marriage, I've given my opinion, but it's completely ridiculous that this is the main topic in politics. The economy? Unemployment? Our membership on the European Union? An EU referendum? All much more important than the debate on gay marriage.

Think I'm going to start a 'Politics thread' after the success of this one!

Stevegull, I don't dream endlessly of becoming an MP, nor the PM haha! However, when I am over 18, I will be interested in standing as a candidate for UKIP and see where it goes from there!

[Colorado Gull]

From the success of the 'Gay marriage' thread, I've decided to start up a political thread for people to give their views on certain topics that they have an interest in, have an opinion on or have been in the news recently.

Happy debating!

TOPICS MERGED!

[chunkygull]

ukip in the most recent polls have been ahead of the lib dems putting them in 3rd place and they are growing. are they now classed as one of the big 3.

[stevegull]

ukip in the most recent polls have been ahead of the lib dems putting them in 3rd place and they are growing. are they now classed as one of the big 3.

No, not yet. But there's a big opportunity.

You've got to remember how fickle some of these polls appear to be. Popularity changes very quickly. Remember in the run-up to the last election when Clegg's approval rating rocketed after the first TV debate. He looked as if his party might get 'second' place or possibly challenge for themselves. He peaked too early and the Liberal Democrats actually ended up losing seats in parliament.

Farage comes across very well, something we all seem to agree on, but he has to keep momentum up with further media appearances and policy ideas in order to cement 3rd place. The leap to the top two, however, is much harder to bridge.

I'd also think that if there was an election now that UKIP would probably perform fairly well in the South West, possibly gaining a couple of seats, but I'm not sure their appeal has reached too far 'up country' yet.