 |
| |
|
LETTER
Gay marriage = human rights
13/09/2006 11:24 - (SA)
Dear Editor,
I would like all the sympathisers of Errol Naidoo, representative of the fundamentalist Christian "For Marriage Alliance" - which is planning a series of protest marches against the constitutional court ruling that the government respect its constitutional obligations and treat all South African citizens equally - to consider the following:
People who participate in these marches are only proving that they're fundamentalist imbeciles, as absolutely nobody is forcing religious institutions to change their ancient, patriarchal definitions of marriage and practices surrounding marriage.
The issue is about bringing laws in line with the Constitution and ensuring equality and justice for all. I repeat, this has absolutely nothing to do with being religious at all, as human rights are already enshrined in our Constitution.
If anything, thinking Christians should be outraged that we still have laws that defy our Constitution. These zealots are abusing the freedoms granted by the Constitution to incite and ferment intolerance and hatred.
By giving in to fundamentalist demands, and going ahead with the "separate but equal" Civil Unions Bill, the government will be stepping ever further into the rot that has come to characterise our political leadership.
R Sewpersad
Klein Dassenberg
See Health24's Gay and Lesbian forum.
Write to us and win
Send a letter to the editor
Disclaimer: News24 encourages freedom of speech and the expression of diverse views. The views of users published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24.
- News24
|
 |
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
fundamentalism in SA
13/09/2006 11:35
SA should have no space for fundamentalism. Respect for minority rights is what truly defines a democracy. Given our history churches have a moral obligation to preach tolerance and bring us together rather than drive wedges between communities. They also have a duty not to erode human rights guaranteed in our constitution, but rather to enhance them. - Rahul Reyes |
|
|
| |
Marriage = man + woman
13/09/2006 12:01
The problem with this law is that the very definition of marriage is that of a man and a woman...
Now as much as I might not approve of homosexuality, we have to accept it, but calling it a marriage is a strong misappropriation of what a marriage is... Yes let's make their relationships legally binding, by all means, but don't call it a marriage, because it's not.
Marriage is derived from the Bible... Why not follow what it says... - sandelk |
|
|
| |
gay rights
13/09/2006 12:06
The constitution allows for people to march against gay marriages. Yet these same people only want the constitution to suit them. There is a 50% divorce rate in SA among heterosexual marriages. Religous bigotry has caused too much pain in the past (Apartheid, colonialism etc). We want to move on and two people of the same sex getting married is not going to rip through our moral fibre. Things like crime, corruption and greed is doing that job just fine.
Thanks
JM Jones - JM Jones |
|
|
| |
Law + Religion = Water + Oil
13/09/2006 12:34
Why can't people realise that there is a difference between the legal and religious definitions of marriage. The have nothing to do with each other because religion does not pronounce the laws the country is run by - the constitution does. If we don't want to use the word "marriage" outside of a religious context, then marriage must be abolished for all under law, and everyone must have civil unions. Simple as that. - Josh |
|
|
| |
Marriage - definition
13/09/2006 12:40
I think Marriage as word should be kept, for homosexual couples. Its binding and it a contract signed between two couples. If it is derived from the so named Bible, why do you still get heterosexual couples cheating or even having same sex partners whislt married?? - Q |
|
|
| |
Marriage, Sin and God.
13/09/2006 12:43
My Bible says love your neighbour, regardless of what he pratices, it also says that Homosexuality in any form is Sin against God. So whether we like or not, a constitution that allows and encourages Sin is against God. So who do you follow God or man. As for me and my family we will follow God Joshua 29. - Steve |
|
|
| |
Marriage
13/09/2006 12:46
What next I ask - 2 men and a woman; 3 men; 3 women; 2 men, a dog and their oat! Marriage is ordained between a man and a woman - anything else is a horrible mess. - Mark |
|
|
| |
2 a dog and their goat
13/09/2006 12:57
I wonder under which bubble the poster Mark is living. For his information, polygamy has been practised since time immemorial and is currently practised all over the world. And he can rest assured that until animals have the same rights as humans, they will not be able to enter into marriage contracts. What an idiot! - Mark's Nemesis |
|
|
| |
Why homosexual marriage?
13/09/2006 12:57
My problem with the same-sex marriages is in the agenda that was announced at the international gay conference at London in 1999. It was stated that homosexuals are not after marriage, but after the destruction of marriage.
If you allow same-sex marriage, then marriage is redefined. If you allow same-sex, why not poligamy? why not a man that marries his (grand)daughter/dog/computer?
Marriage will become meaningless and hence destroyed. THAT is what Christians are kicking against - Carl Kirstein |
|
|
| |
Carl Kirstein, get a life
13/09/2006 13:30
If we gays are against marriage, why are we fighting for marriage rights? Marriages were being performed before the bible was written and hence had no religious connotations. - Michelle |
|
|
| |
|
|
| This comments facility is now closed. |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
