Discussion of religion in the context of LGBTQ+ rights is only allowed in the LGBTQ+ Rights and Religion Thread
.
Discussion of religion in any other context is off topic in all of the "LGBTQ+ rights..." threads.
Attempting to bait others into bringing up religion is also not allowed.
Edited by Mrph1 on Dec 1st 2023 at 6:51:29 PM
My theo teacher has used the slipper slope fallacy when arguing that gay marriage would lead to beatsiality. I'm not sure where he got that information. Sme obscure bill? in- Germany maybe? Idk. But beatsiality is already legal in Denmark. Of course the two don't have any correlation I think
edited 23rd May '13 4:20:10 AM by Xopher001
Re:Slippery Slope Fallacy: I'm just old enough to remember people saying that if we recognise gay unions that the gay people would eventually start acting like they have the right to get married like a 'normal couple. So broken clocks and that.
edited 23rd May '13 4:50:18 AM by joeyjojo
hashtagsarestupidHopey, can't the commons force though the bill via passing it a total of three times? That's what was done with fox hunting, which incidentally was also a free vote. Do we know the opinion of the Lords on the bill? Depending on how progressive some of the Lords are it might pass.
As for the Lords in general, I like the idea, but it needs reform. Remove the remaining hereditary peers, remove the Lords Spiritual, bring down the average age, and make it so it's more than a dumping ground for annoying members.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranRE:Slippery Slope Fallacy: Whenever people say that gay marriage will lead to polygamy, my response is that I hope so. For bestiality and pedophilia... Well, people should look up what "informed consent" means.
![]()
Um... we do
. It's just that sodding huge (and parts of it are just that old), we haven't put it into a single document. <shrugs>
Unlike many countries, we haven't actually had much of a break or radical overhaul in government for almost 1000 years where a single bit of paper was thought an improvement to go for to condense the whole lot down.
Hell, we've still got the Anglo-Saxon foundations underneath the whole lot (possibly becoming peat)...
Tee-hee.
edited 23rd May '13 9:02:39 AM by Euodiachloris
Don't go No True Scotsman on the Brits, they have a constitution. It's just a special snowflake.
edited 23rd May '13 10:01:25 AM by QuestionMarc
Katsura, it's the oldest living constitution still going. And, that it is still going screams volumes. Thank you ever so much for not having noticed.
We're proud of our overgrown hedgerow, thank you very much. You can keep your shrubs, everybody else (most of which have been grown from cuttings of ours — if you bother to look).
Ours may outweigh yours, but... just you try uprooting it or killing it off. Come on, if you think you're hard enough.
edited 23rd May '13 10:28:57 AM by Euodiachloris
Not passing the Bill would be a mistake, though: the Lords know the Commons don't need much excuse to push for further Lords reform. <_< (Myself, I'm a bit leery of more Party involvement in the Lords, to be honest — having non-aligned specialists able to block the Commons can be a boon as well as a bust.)
This could prove the very excuse, if they try blocking it.
Annoying though the potential block is... too often, the Lords has been a vital check on Commons' stupidities. <_< Like it or lump it, the feedback has uses.
edited 23rd May '13 10:37:04 AM by Euodiachloris
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
It still works better than a lot of codified ones. We Brits are very good and building complex, insane and downright broken institutions that someone manage to work reasonable well most of the time.
![]()
![]()
Are you saying that we don't get to demand a shrubbery?
![]()
I'm pretty sure they still had to force it though, it might have something to do with it being a free vote.
That's why I don't think the Lords Spiritual will participate in the vote, there are lots of people just waiting for an excuses to remove them from the Lords. As for Lords reform, I agree that specialists are nice, as is having people above party politics. It's just finding the right balance.
edited 23rd May '13 10:39:49 AM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran

Well, that's the thing. There's really nothing the Government could do to force the Lords to submit to the will of the House (and thus, the Government).
All we can do is hope that the Lords realise, "wait, shit. We're going to frustrate the will of the people by blocking this Bill. Better not pull any shit."
edited 23rd May '13 4:06:23 AM by INHOPELESSGUY