ttbn, I asked you in an earlier thread to explain to me what you think I am "bigotted" about. I got no reply.

Now you've popped up again making the same claim. Care to have a go this time, or are you just making noises? You know, like a wild animal?

Rhrosty, you should open a greengrocers and call it "Low Hanging Fruit".
Homophobic Nazis? That's the biggest load of bollocks this side of the insecticide showers and pedal powered head smashing machines.
The Nazis used paragraph 175 of the German penal code which had been on the books since the 1870's and arrested a few thousand homosexual child molesters, male prostitutes, thieves and drug addicts, it was a three strikes system with the third offence incurring a prison sentence of not more than five months. For a socialist regime the NSDAP were remarkably tolerant of homosexuals, after the war the East Germans wondered why there was such an increase in homosexuality among children born during the allied "terror bombing" of the 1940's and actually executed a few of their Gay prisoners so they could dissect their brains. Their theory was that the fetus was damaged by the hormones released by their mothers while they were under extreme stress and suffering from the effects of starvation, so while the Stasi viewed homosexuality as either a bourgeois perversion or the result of brain damage the National Socialists saw it as a simple matter of a zero tolerance policy toward homosexual criminality and asocial behaviour.

This quote from Theodore Dalrymple which popped up on my Facebook this morning just about sums up the state of play:

“In my study of communist societies, I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, not to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better. When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is…in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.”
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=7445

Craig Minns,
It seems that your definition of "bigot" is "anyone who believes what David does not believe and anyone who does not believe what David believes".
My definition of "bigot" is " anyone who thinks the same way as David thinks".

Although as an atheist I put religion in the same category as ideology, in fact all non- evidence based belief, I accept as correct the statement made by all ministers at wedding ceremonies I have attended that " Marriage is an institution established for the nurture and education of children".

History has shown that marriage so defined, i.e. institutionalised monogamy or the nuclear family is the basic building block which brings children to the maximum of their potential. The society built on that building block is the ONLY society which has, since the Enlightenment given rise to the inventions and innovation from steam engine right through to the internet.

No other society has, by such progress, given rise to the huge increase in humankind's productivity without which 90% of the world's population today would not exist for lack of the means to produce, transport and distribute the means to feed, clothe and shelter that population.

Expand the definition of marriage and how do you refuse the right of a Muslim to "marry" his second , third and fourth "wife"?

We could end up with a society based, like the most of the animal kingdom on the Alpha male with the powerful male in his harem and the rest looking for sexual experience in war or with mythical virgins in a mythical heaven. We see the chaos of such a society in the Middle East right now.

Gay couples have available the personal relationship legislation to regulate their financial dealings in the same way as is available to married couples under the traditional definition.
We are dealing here with only symbolism.

Gays want the legal system to acknowledge that there is no difference between homosexuals and heterosexuals.
In fact there is. If we were all homosexuals the species would die out.

Just accept that fact.

Phanto, yes your natural sexual orientation can be proved by which two of four sex centres are the active ones!

Two for blokes and the other two for ladies, located at the base and rear of the brain, in the Ganglia Obbligato, the site and control centre of all your entirely instinctive responses; including your God given (natural for you/anyone) sexual orientation!

Simply put mate, they're not like light switches that anyone, no matter how determined or diligent can voluntarily switch on or off as the fancy takes them; and or, as proposed by the homophobic community! [Basic anatomy!]

And we have instruments which can measure that activity, which produces tiny but measurable electrical signals; and indeed, if the gender appropriate ones, or some mix, are the ones firing! No ifs buts or maybes!

And it may be possible at some stage to burn out the inappropriately firing ones, given the external male/female physiography, with laser perfect pinpoint accuracy.

And no it's not just theory but reportedly has been successfully trailed in a vastly more medically advanced Scotland and decades ago?

Precisely located tiny wires conducting an overload electrical current into the Ganglia Obbligato, that's just strong enough to do just that and no more? [Or perhaps permanently burnout all four in the case of incurable recidivist sexual criminality?]

As I said and seem to need to reiterate, there is ample evidence out there, that homosexuality in all mammals; male and female, is part of nature or natural aberration! Ipso facto, end of story!

But only if your looking, without the blinkers or the blindfold! Ya?
Rhrosty.

Louise points to the real heart of the matter. She said:
"I do have concerns about the growing trend for parenting to be adult-focussed rather than child-focussed. It has taken many years for us to understand and acknowledge the long term outcomes of adoption separation and it will be many years before we will be able to assess the outcomes for children born through egg/sperm donation and surrogacy. However, to me it seems obvious that the outcomes in terms of genealogical bewilderment and lack of access to lineage will be very similar and I am very disappointed that the lessons of the past have not been learned."
The debate on this issue is not furthered by shouts of bigotry, nor by assumptions that the arguments for marriage being between a man and a woman are just based on religion.
Children need to grow up with a mother and a father, to know who they are, to benefit from the care of both genders, and to observe the care of each for the other. That this doesn't always happen in a man-woman marriage is no reason to change its nature

J.O.M, given your ability to quite massively revise history, I'm not sure your take on the gentle nature of Nazism holds very much water, anymore than your denial of the Holocaust? Or is any more gospel than the bible?

And cyanide showers killed just a little more than insects?

Or are you suggesting the victims of this extreme inhumanity were no more than mere insects; or the heinous practice, little more than just delousing?

And your knowledge of the inner thinking/attitudes of the Staci seems a little more intimate than that of the mere interested observer?

Pray enlighten us some more, with this seemingly intimate knowledge; handed on to you by a very near relative perhaps?
Rhrosty.