Dunno how often this happens but Cardinal Keith O'Brien has called for a referendum about gay marriage in Scotland. Shouldn't it be part of (I know we don't really have one) whatever comes closest to a constitution to ignore people without democratic mandates calling for democratic processes? Particularly when the group in question is calling for money to be raised in order to lobby opinion? What a ****. I don't get the two extremes of the equal marriage debate. O'Brien should stick to stuff that affects his own "flock". I'm sure most gay people don't want to force places of worship to marry them, anyhow - meaning the "what if" stuff about churches being forced to carry out ceremonies is a load of pish. Why get married somewhere where they disapprove of you? Surely, nobody's actually bothered about equal marriage - who gives a **** and who gives a **** about turning up to vote about something that doesn't concern you? A referendum vote would have a disproportionate turnout of bigots who strongly oppose this while the reasonable folk will be worrying about other ****. In short, he should shut the **** up and show some Christian charity towards his fellow man. ...or just **** off altogether. Where does it stop? Should a Muslim or Jewish leader be able to call for a referendum on the sales of pigmeat? That would just be silly. But it's no sillier than this **** bumping his gums about the rights of people he shouldn't have any influence over.
If the laws on gay marriage affect the Catholic Church he has every right If he is a registered voter he has every right But really....does anyone have a right to tell anyone what to do? No I would only argue if they were enforcing gay marriage upon the Catholic Church.....otherwise so what
What sort of badly written law on this would affect him or the church, though? He's reportedly already got £100,000 for lobbying purposes raised to force a referendum on something that really doesn't concern him. No-one would question religions that oppose equal marriage not having to do ceremonies. You wouldn't force a synagogue to carry out a methodist wedding, for example. I don't see the difference in this. To most people, this is a non-issue at best and, at worst, a question of fairness. He only represents quite a small minority in Scotland - he shouldn't have a platform even to spout his ****e much less lead calls for a referendum.
He thinks he is trying to save souls....so if he is right and he is doing Gods work then I hope I vote
Yes, he does - No-one is more indoctrinated than the indoctrinators etc and I find no fault with him expressing his opinions based on his creed. He has no democratic power, whatsoever, and should have none. I'd imagine that his reaction to enforcing another religion's dogma onto him would be pretty severe (I gave the somewhat extreme example of enforcing kosher/halal by a mandatory process). Democratically, he has no right to exert any influence over non-RCs. I know he thinks he's doing what's best but so did Anders Breivik (extreme example, again). Religions should realise that they can't tell people outside of their faith what to do - I'm pretty sure that would transgress the European Human Rights Convention. Like I said, it's not a subject I'm mega-vocal on (equal marriage) - however, I am vocal on theocratic sects imposing their will on those outside their faith group. I've banged on in the past about unelected Anglican Bishops in the House of Lords voting on laws. I see no difference in this.
Yeah, can't argue with that....but no country is truly democratic....the Red Top rags are an example of policy makers who are unelected too
****s and lezzers do not have the right to get married, let alone have kids. I know I speak for the majority here.
The auld **** needs to wind his neck in here. He's making the Catholic Church look outdated and homophobic. Religious views get far too big a forum these days and per head of population a far bigger voice than than those that they represent. What gives a man that knows nothing of relationships the right to deny those that wish to marry? You don't like it, then don't do it in your chapels. You have the right not to under the current plans. They simply cannot tell those that aren't Catholic what to do.
You're quite right. The Catholic church should stick to child buggeration and the transmittal of sexually transmitted diseases and the promotion of huge families that cannot be fed. No need to add **** and lezzer hating into the broth.
It's funny that the Cathoilc Church has such a stance on gays when it is probably housing more gays per head of population than the real world. Then your non Gay Priests who have secret child somewhere. Hypocrites!
The Catholic Church, the DUP, the Orange Order (sort of, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-18827235) and stupid inward looking backwards people everywhere unite to poke their noses into other people's lives and tell them they are not allowed to get married
How about you don't be sticking your penis in another chaps bottom and then mind your own ****ing business.
It's no-one else's rightful business what you do with your body, including who you shag, care for or marry yourself to. Male, female, tranny ( ) or bloody hermaphrodite. Referenda are mob rule at its calculated worst.
All this rage Michael. Premature baldiness can be treated you know. I am perfectly entitled to my opinion. And some of my best friends are turd burglars.
A ladyboy put me in an ambulance after I almost chopped my thumb off in Bangkok - god bless the gays.
