Reader comments · Scottish Roman Catholic leader to speak for new gay marriage opposition group · PinkNews

Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.


Scottish Roman Catholic leader to speak for new gay marriage opposition group

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. When will they learn that the UK is not a theocracy and their beliefs have no place in law as faith in their sky daddy is not universal (and even christians cannot agree amongst themselves what their dogma actually is). And I notice that they have been spending cash on advertising space – how incredibly bloody christian of them. Malaria jabs cost a quid and save lives, but its better to spend money on oppressing people because some invisible talisman says so. Bloody fools.

    1. Katie Murphy- family ex cath 5 Dec 2011, 12:07am

      All they aredoing is trying to cover the endless molestation of children all over the world.

      Google [country namec] catholic church molestation”

      You should be horrified.

      BTW at least in the USA, its the same thing re the right wing evangelical.s Power goes to their head, and rape is the result

      In the USA the catholic church paid a couple million to the criminal justice school of New YOrk University to investigate the molestation.

      REsults – the rate of molestation was the same re gay and str8 priests. This from the first part of the report.

      A later expansion looked at trends, and found that as more gay priests entered the priesthood in the 70s and 80s, the over all rates of crimes against children went down.

      IMHO the reasons are easy to gues – the gay priests had fun with each other.

      The str8 priests had no other outlet and didnt want to or couldnt pay prostitutes.

      Once again the church has tried to balme others for its own horrible, and worse hidden crimes
      But once again

  2. Take a good look everyone. These religious bigots are the ones that made my generation suffer intolerable levels of homophobia, discrimination and injustice. Don’t let these nasty bigots do it to another generation.

    1. Well said Matt. I second that, the misery these people caused by their bigotry is immeasurable. Like many others of my and earlier generations I will never get the time back.

  3. When Ann Allen spouts prejudice as fact, she needs to be challenged. There is no push for polygamy in Canada, in fact anti polygamy laws were upheld as early as Wednesday this week in British Columbia. There is no heritage or history of polygamy in Scotland. She is holding up a bit of red meat for the bigot brigade and should be called out for it…

  4. “Cardinal O’Brien said: “As an institution, marriage long pre-dates the existence of any state or government. It was not created by government and should not be changed by them. ”

    Yes. And it also pre-dates your bloody religion so butt out.

    1. Do you have any evidence that marriage pre-dates religion? Please provide references… If so, this would be a FANTASTIC argument against these bigots!!

      Civil marriage has NOTHING to do with religion. Also, the state authorises a divorce.. not religion.

      1. I think Dave North meant it predates Christianity.

        1. Dave North 30 Nov 2011, 2:13pm



        That’s only same sex marriage, marriage itself is much older. Even if Christianity did come up with marriage (which it didn’t) his point would still be irrelevant, marriage is nothing more than a set of defined legal benefits granted by the state, religions have no say here whatsoever, especially because they pay no taxes.

        1. Absolutely agreed! It makes me furious when modern religions true to assert dominion over marriage. It is either intellectual dishonesty, ignorance or an outright lie. Now, if they happen to worship Venus/Aphrodite, or if they happen to worship Sumerian sun gods, then maybe they would have a point. Except, of course, those religions are extinct. Personally, I can’t wait for modern faiths to go the same way. I would direct the idiot in the frock to the artefact evidence of the Code of Ur-Nammu and Code of Hammurabi, which pre-date christianity by thousands of years, and which clearly show that the State issues laws regarding marriage.

      3. Paddyswurds 30 Nov 2011, 4:43pm

        Marriage absolutely certainly does predate the Abrahamic cults . Please have a think before jumping feet first. The wedding at Caana for instance predated the xtian cult which was only officially recognised and promoted by Roman Emperor Constantine circa 300 CE. The Egyptians had a marriage cermoney 3/4 thousand years before these cults raised their evil heads. Here in Ireland wedding cermonies were common thousands of years before the Abrahamic cults became known.

  5. so when he learns in history that same-sex couples got married will he acknowledge that or keep to his homnophobicv views? governments didn’t create marriage but nor did the religious

  6. The UK (whether as a nation or each nation within the nation) is not and never should be a theocracy …

    Marriage predates democratic government and Christian religion …

    There is significant anthropological and other evidence to demonstrate the existence of same sex relationship in a contractual/covenant manner for as long as much of the evidence of heterosexual partnership …

    The use of children in a debate on marriage is a red herring. If children are so important to marriage then the marriages on non-child bearing heterosexual couples should be annulled if you follow the logical progression of the argument. Children may occur in marriages but not necessarily and the absence of them whatever the format of the married couple is not a reason to devalue that marriage.

    The issue of polygamy in Canada is facetious and is not linked to LGBT issues. That comes from a religious group – the Mormons – and has been thrown out by a high court judge in Canada.

    1. Stu, you will be amazed at the excuses these religious nutters will bring up when it comes to banning heterosexual couples from marrying who choose not to or cannot procreate. They dismiss it or ignore it because deep down they have no rational response. What it boils down to is the the one man one woman nonsense and penile/vaginal intercourse red herring whether it produces offspring or not. They think religion owns civil marriage, but then they really don’t think do they? Someone should go after Ann Allen with impunity. What a liar, but then a lot of these so called christians are notorious for that. Last time I checked, lying or misrepresenting the facts aren’t in any way “christian”.

      1. @Robert

        I certainly wouldnt be surprised …

        Whether a committed relationship (married or not) has or does not have children (whether through choice or fertility issues or other reasons) does not and should not devalue those relationships. Nor should it exclude them from marriage.

        As for Ann Allen … her comments are ridiculous, inaccurate and blatantly untrue … She should be ashamed of herself …

        1. the church has a clear answer when presented with childless marriage with fertility issues scenario; keep praying

          1. and when the couple who marry choose not to have children …???

        2. technically, according to C Church, sex is only permitted within marriage and for procreation purposes only, sex for other reasons incl. pleasure is a sin, so a couple who marry and choose not to have children, simply cannot have sex, but nevertheless they are allowed to marry if they wish to do so

          1. Nawal Husnoo 30 Nov 2011, 10:17pm

            The aim of the Party was not merely to prevent men and women from forming loyalties which it might not be able to control. Its real, undeclared purpose was to remove all pleasure from the sexual act. Not love so much as eroticism was the enemy, inside marriage as well as outside it. All marriages between Party members had to be approved by a committee appointed for the purpose and – though the principle was never clearly stated – permission was always refused if the couple concerned gave the impression of being physically attracted to one another. The only recognized purpose of marriage was to beget children for the service of the Party.

    2. Katie Murphy- family ex cath 5 Dec 2011, 12:13am

      BTW as most know the MOrmons are bigots re gay and gay marriage. If you have a partner, your mormon family will show its love for its chidlren – by throwing you out of your family

      Religion is the curse of history. fairy tales from an age of ignorance and superstition but eg in the USA the catholic church of old Adolf, still not excommunciated, collects about $6 billion.

      While its pope was drafted and leaned his lessons well in the 3rd Reich’s army. In early 2009 he UNexcommunciated A bishop Williamson, who is a holocaust denier

      the popes excuse “i didnt know” Williamson is a leader of the extreme hard right opus dei which has 600,000 folllowers.

      as usual, its all about money. The lust for which drives some christians to worship the devil

  7. “As an institution, marriage long predates the existence of any state or government. It was not created by government and should not be changed by them….” By the same ‘logic’, perhaps a Government shouldn’t recognize marriage, either.

  8. They always have that look

    1. Maybe the crook he is holding is the clue.

    2. That smug, smiling yet vicious look

  9. Sad, desperate old men and women the lot of them. I look forward to the schadenfreude when their efforts fail and reason prevails.

  10. PeterinSydney 30 Nov 2011, 11:55am

    O’Brien would have to be one of the worst homophobe dinosaurs of the Catholic Church. He belongs back in some medieval cave well away from the modern world.

  11. ” …recognising the innumerable benefits which marriage brings to society they should act to protect and uphold it not attack or dismantle it.”

    Contrary to what these scaremongering Christofascist’s are saying, same sex couples do not deserve to be excluded from the innumerable benefits that marriage brings, same sex marriage does not attack nor dismantle marriage in any way at all.

    1. Anthony-B 2 Dec 2011, 1:38am

      You’re absolutely right, Pavlos. If these people think so much of marriage then surely the more people who can get married all the better for society, accorfing to their argument? So why continue to say gay people shouldn’t be allowed to get married? Even their own arguments don’t make any sense!

  12. Ann Allen, you silly cow!

    The “polygamy” issue in Canada has existed since 1946. And it involves a grand total of 1000 people, all descended from 6 men, radical Mormons. Out of a population of 30 million, that’s a pretty small group “challenging” the courts and law to recognize polygamy.

    It has nothing to do with marriage equality. It isn’t in any way related to marriage equality. The decision to extend marriage equality in no way has “bolstered the efforts” of the polygamists. And the court has consistently stated that marriage is “between two people”.


    If we follow your good friends in the Roman Catholic church…. the f***ing BIBLE!!!! condones polygamy. So let’s talk about marriage tradition, PLEASE, let’s!!

    Then we can point out the rabid hypocrisy of you “religious” folk.

    1. de Villiers 30 Nov 2011, 1:55pm

      And in any event, if polygamy being permitted was the democratic will then surely that is part of democracy?

    2. Well said! Whenever people use the phrase “traditional marriage” they tend to mean biblical, which is seething with polygamous relationships, women having to marry their rapist and other charming features.

  13. Alastair J, Mainland 30 Nov 2011, 12:04pm

    The people of Scotland would do well to remember the words of a certain Joseph Goebbels, “if you perpetrate a myth long enough and hard enough, eventually people begin to see it as fact!” creating fanciful fantasy out of history is sinister indeed when you think to what organisation Joseph Goebbels belonged to. Wake up Scotland, or were you ever known for Enlightenment at all.

  14. I’m confused as to why with so many pressing issues confronting us today in Scotland, the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland and the Church of Scotland have chosen to prioritise time, effort, and money on this particular issue.

    1. Tim Hopkins 30 Nov 2011, 4:59pm

      It’s worth noting that Ann Allen in no way speaks for the Church of Scotland – that’s the spin that the organisers of the anti-equality campaign are trying to put on it. 12 years ago she chaired their (now abolished) Board of Social Responsibility and campaigned against the repeal of section 28. Now she has no such position.

      In fact the anti-equality campaign partners are the Catholic Church (strictly, the Bishops Conference), the Christian Institute, CARE, the Evangelical Alliance, and Destiny Church. The usual suspects, basically.

      1. Anthony-B 2 Dec 2011, 1:21am

        According to this article, the Church of Scotland are against same-sex marriage.

  15. Well, scapegoating gays is always a convenient distraction from the churches’ child abuse scandals.

    1. They should have stayed with using goats – and not harming children.

  16. Dear God (so to speak), have they really nothing better to spend their time on? Are there really no more pressing issues at hand, like hushing up scandals?

  17. jamestoronto 30 Nov 2011, 12:31pm

    In spite of what you have read and/or heard from Ann Allen, believe me there is no “push” to legalise polygamy in Canada. This case has been going for years now; they are a small group of old men — about 3 or 4 who were kicked out of the Mormon church decades and came to Canada. Check your facts, Ann, before spouting off at the mouth.

    1. @Jamestoronto

      I went and read up on it to make sure I was not missing something …

      What made me laugh was Ann Allen tried to suggest in her comments that equal marriage was linked to the polygamy claims in Canada … this is untrue given that they are linked to the Mormon church, who are generally anti-LGBT …

      It has as much relevance as suggesting that because there is a campaign to release those imprisoned for homosexuality in Cameroon (largely supported by LGBT people) and that there is also a campaign to release some imprisoned in Cameroon for terrorism, that LGBT want terrorist prisoners released everywhere …. it is not a factual or realistic argument and her facetious and ignorant stance must be exposed.

      I did find the polygamy battle in Canada amusing (but sad) to read about …

    2. Do you have a reference for your statement? If so, please post. I would like to include it in my response to the government consultation on same sex marriage.

      1. Which statement?

  18. How involved has this disgusting, cultist bigot been in the cover-up of the industrial scale rape of children in catholic run institutions?

    He’s part of the catholic cult hierarchy, so it’s inevitable he was involved in the cover-up of child rape.

    I think he needs to be investigated.

    How a member of such an abusive, sick cult thinks he is qualified to speak on the issue of marriage beggars belief.

    1. Particularly coming from an institution that prevents its own priests from participating in marriage.

      1. For the sake of money, theology fail.

  19. “Cardinal O’Brien said: “As an institution, marriage long pre-dates the existence of any state or government. It was not created by government and should not be changed by them. ”

    O’Brien is an idiot. Someone should tell him that the government or state created CIVIL MARRIAGE, not some bloody religious cult. What a pity that the catholic emancipatinn act was ever passed.

    1. de Villiers 30 Nov 2011, 1:59pm

      > What a pity that the catholic emancipatinn act was ever passed.

      That comment is as bad as that of the Cardinal and shows that you are not committed to equal rights for all.

      1. But it’s ok for the roman cult to call for laws banning same-sex couples from marrying and spewing anti-gay venom giving those so inclined the impetus to go out and kill us? The roman cult is oppressive and evil. Where is their evidence that it harms hetero marriage, where are the facts to back it up? The emancipation act was one of the worst laws to have been passed in our country. This cult doesn’t deserve legitimacy given its almost 2 millenia old history of paedophilia, pederasty and misogyny as well as the annihilation of indigenous cultures in Latin America and subjugation, torture and execution of Jews in Spain for refusing to convert. How can anyone in their right mind defend such a disgusting, morally bankrupt and hypocritical cult?

        1. de Villiers 1 Dec 2011, 8:16am

          Why is that okay? I did not say that. What I said is that there should be equal human rights for all. Your message and its tone shows hate, intolerance and bigotry. It is on a par with the German far right.

  20. “At the heart of this debate however there is one perspective which seems to be completely lost or ignored, it is the point of view of the child. ”

    Indeed – it is so shameful that the catholic cult hierarchy when made aware of the industrial scale, rape of children over decades, by the catholic clergy, that O’Brien and his bigoted cohorts in the catholic culkt hierarchy completely ignored the rights of the children that were being raped by catholic priests.

    1. dAVID, paedophilia and pederasty in fact aren’t decades old within the roman cult. Its an almost 2 millenia old tradition. Ditto misogyny and abuse of women. The roman cult is morally bankrupt and has no business interfering in civil matters or laws of the land.

  21. burningworm 30 Nov 2011, 12:49pm

    ~I won’t preach to the converted.

    Strangely the advancement of this argument by the ordained sect of our society seems to ensure their eventual exit. I tend to have more of an issue with monolithic religions that read their books and behave within the humanist tradition (it ensures their survival).

    I hope those who come across these ads and arguments in their daily lives finds interesting ways to not only counter but to trump them.

    Buckets of glitter.
    Theological arguments – customary and uncustomary istead of the King James version of SHALL NOT.

    I wish you all well and hope you can face these types of arguments with imaginative zest.

  22. Peter & Michael 30 Nov 2011, 12:49pm

    No wonder there is much homophobia and kids getting bullied at school and commiting suicide by listening to these bigots in skirts, the church wants everything for itself. We cannot go back to burning witches, denying people equal treatment , etc, because the so called church says so! Our own children, grandchildren, great grandchild, have grown up with respect for other minorities, we have taken them to Pride events and they understand that some people may be different to them.

  23. Gay marriage predates Christianity by a huge margin. His point is moot.

  24. It depresses me that these people are so organised and efficient in their hate.

    However on a side note does anyone else think this man looks like the devil with a child catching stick?

    1. I think they are called crooks, yes, both of them.

  25. Miguel Sanchez 30 Nov 2011, 2:54pm

    Fine, the Catholic Church is totally against homosexuality. Tell me something I don’t know. That’s why I don’t attend mass.

    The Catholics need to BUTT THE HELL OUT of civil partnerships. If other churches wish to have ceremonies for same sex couples, that’s their right.

    Here in the states, hetero’s can get married by a Justice of the Peace and it’s just as legal and binding as if held in a church.

    I think it’s time to move on.

  26. Religious bigots unite to protest against gay marriage in Scotland

    ” The group said the proposals would have wider implications for society, and could discourage heterosexuals from getting married.”

    Ridiculous speculative scaremongering anybody? are there no depths these anti-gay “Christian” bigots and liars won’t stoop to.

  27. Art Pearson 30 Nov 2011, 3:11pm

    Well, what were we all expecting? The church of Rome is dedicated to opposing any and all GLBT rights and especially the right to marry.

  28. … dave camoron and his gang are sending copies of bibles to every single school in the country …
    Gay Tories —> Duhhhhh

  29. “It is the right of the churches to oppose same-sex marriage but it has to be done in a respectful manner.”

    Yes, be ignorant, but in a ‘respectful manner’. Can they even hear themselves? :/ Just ban religious and media exemption from LGBT legislation. There cannot be a two tier system of so-called ‘respect’. They are still allowed to treat us like criminals, when we haven’t broken a single law. It’s unbelievable, it really is. They are dinosaurs.

  30. The usual stuff – vague, emotive, question-begging and straw-man arguments. Move along, nothing to see here.

  31. Dave North 30 Nov 2011, 4:44pm

    I love this bit from this goon.

    “There is no doubt that as a society we have become blase about the importance of marriage as a stabilising influence and less inclined to prize it as a very, very worthwhile institution.”

    THAT being the case then why DENY it to gay couples?

    1. Katie Murphy- family ex cath 5 Dec 2011, 12:16am

      they rile up and get their followers all scared and hateful. And in return the follower give these scamsters more money.

      An interesting note I saw re catholic bishops – a set of their clothing costs about 20,000 Euros.

      Didnt Jesus go around in rags? These people simply worship money and power, and each feeds the other.

  32. As a Catholic and proud to be….i really wish they would not stand on there high horse when it comes to homosexuality….i know plenty of Gay catholic priests…they need to get there own boat in order with sexual abuse before they keep diverting to the gay issue all the time….live you life guys…god loves us too….after all he made us….HAPPY CHRISTMAS…XX

  33. Paddyswurds 30 Nov 2011, 4:55pm

    O’Brien……”At the heart of this debate however there is one perspective which seems to be completely lost or ignored, it is the point of view of the child”. It is a great pity that the Catholic church isn’t always so concerned about the views of the child or even the welfare of the child.
    Where was this bigoted dinosaur when his felllow clerics were raping little children behind the altar or any other opportune location where they could corner them and carry out their vile paedophilia and sadism on them. This excuse for a man of faith shouldd go away and hide somewhere his shame will not be evident for all to scorn.

  34. “All children deserve to begin life with a mother and father, the evidence in favour of the stability and well being which this provides is overwhelming and unequivocal.”
    cardinal would be surprised to find out that there has been proper research done on gay families
    “Lesbian and Gay Parents and Their Children: Research on the Family Life Cycle” by Abbie E. Goldberg

    1. He knows this perfectly well, unless he lives on a desert island without radio or telly, which he doesn’t. These shamans are as good at repeating lies as politicians. It reassures their followers and bamboozles people who don’t bother to find out for themselves.

  35. On the day of their big launch their website has receved “NO” hits!

  36. The so-called “state of marriage” was invented by MAN! There is not one reference to the word “marriage” itself in the Hebrew Bible (or Old Testament). It was a business arrangement between a girl’s father and A. N. Other within the community – a transfer of his “property” from himself to A. N. Other person. There is absolutely no religious evidence for the state of marriage as we know it today. It was very conveniently “hijacked” by religious organisations in order to control women and to ensure the proliferation of the human race (go forth and multiply) as many as possible!

    The real essence of a marriage or a union is the commitment of each person to one other person – (in some traditions more than one person).

    Each of us is expected to respect people of other religious traditions and of none – the opposite must therefore apply – they must respect us and our views, whether we are of a religious tradition or of none at all.

  37. It has been attitudes such as these in the Catholic church which caused me to take until I am almost 70 to “come out” at all! I was expected to “conform to the norm” and do the right thing (whatever that meant). I’ve done my bit for the continuation of the human race.

    Now it’s my turn to be “me” – I am who and what I am!

  38. These people have a lot of money to fight gays, this is why gays need to fight even harder to win their Freedoms,

  39. Was this photo taken at a sheep dog trial…?

  40. When are the rallies for marriage equaluty taking place?

  41. I have already stated my support for maintaining traditional marriage (including the views of Cardinal O’Brien) and for not redefining marriage, which is what would need to happen if same sex unions were to be recognised.

    But what I really wanted to say is how impressed I am by the fairness of the Pink News reporting on the subject. Well done and thank you!

    1. JohnB, civil marriage has no religious component and was invented by the state. There is no mandate to procreate and there is nothing about same-sex civil marriage which redefines religious marriages. If O’Brien really believes in traditional marriage for the purpose of procreation, then he should support barring hetero couples who choose not to or cannot procreate as well as ban divorce. Religion does NOT own civil marriage, never has, never will. It is the property of the state not the roman cult or any other.

      1. Robert: Obviously I can speak for Cardinal O’Brien. If I were to use the prayer book (1662) as a guide this is one reason; the other two is good of society and companionship. I realise civil marriage and religious marriage is not the same although I doubt over time if such a distinction will be realised by many.

      2. errata: can should be can’t

    2. Traditional marriage will not suddenly be eliminated by the introduction of same sex marriage equality, I don’t understand what awful thing you think is going to happen to opposite sex couples, they will still want to marry and they will still be able to marry exactly as they do now after marriage equality is introduced.

      1. You are right of course Pavlos. Traditional marriage will not suddenly be eliminated and I understand your point that mixed sex couples who marry ought not be affected.

        My understanding is that (traditional) marriage is an institution ordained by God and we are not at liberty to change this. Of course society may wish to ignore this but it will be at a cost.

        1. “My understanding is that (traditional) marriage is an institution ordained by God and we are not at liberty to change this.”

          My understanding is that (traditional) witch burning is an institution ordained by God and we are not at liberty to change this.

          My understanding is that (traditional) marriage is an institution ordained by God and we are not at liberty to allow mixed race marriages.

          My understanding is that (traditional) slavery is an institution ordained by God and we are not at liberty to to change this.

          See how people afraid of change use the term “traditional” out of context, and how stupid it is to assume a man made “institution” is “god ordained” (an imaginary entity of which there is no proof)?

          1. Your three undertsandings are incorrect.

            You know v.well what I mean when I use the term “traditional”. As for who ordained it, marriage was ordained by God before man got to ordain anything.

          2. “Your three undertsandings are incorrect.”

            Really? They all happened at the hands of Christians believing its was the “will of god”. YOu need to brush up on your own history.

            “marriage was ordained by God before man got to ordain anything.”

            Says who? You? LOL! And do not say the bible, that’s a ridiculous answer, given the bible also supports incest, slavery and other bizarre contradictions.

  42. I would like to say that perhaps PN should start promoting some of the gay org’s campaings



    Urge House of Lords to back Civil Partnerships on Religious Premises in face of opposition from Conservative Peers

    I think some of these campaigns would benefit a bit of airplay from the gay press !!!!

  43. Why do they care about civil marriage? Nobody is forcing them to accept gays… If this is what Christians think, then I have lost all faiith in these bullies… Time to ban religious from the public domain, just like Spain..

  44. Do these Catholic leaders and other evangelicals contribute anything positive to society at all?
    They aid and abet the torture and rape of children in their care and protect the perpetrators who abuse them.
    They are against women’s right to regulate their own reproductive capacity.
    They relentlessly wage war on LGBT rights while simultaneously trying to stigmatise us and use us as scapegoats for just about everything imaginable.
    Why don’t they get themselves proper jobs and pay their taxes like everyone else and stop being a drain on the community rather than wasting time and money as they attempt to destroy people’s lives.
    Sinead O’Connor was getting close to the truth when she said the Catholic Church was now infested by devil’s.

    1. “Do these Catholic leaders and other evangelicals contribute anything positive to society at all?”

      loads and loads actually.

  45. We have a programme running here in Australia from the UK called one born every minute which shows an extremely diverse group of British women giving birth. Most of them it seems are unmarried. This is the reality in Britain, you don’t have to be married to give birth to a child. This development hasn’t anything to do with gays.

    In any case in the UK gays have children , it’s legal and actually in some cases it’s encouraged.

    Having children/bringing them up does not equate to man and woman in marriage. To teach this is to exclude children who aren’t in this type of family, to make them second class children, inferior to those in married families…

    Far better to teach children of loving stable caring parent(s) whoever those parent(s) are..

    1. Lovely.

  46. As for the link to gay marriage/rights/unions and polygamy then most countries that have polygamy are staunchly homophobic

    It’s a far stretch of the imagination to think that polygamy is a result of gay relationships!!!!!

  47. Why are they bringing children into it?
    Same sex couples can already adopt or foster children abandoned by straight couples.

    Why is it these religious bigots always need to distort the issues? Is it because none of their arguments actually stack up so they keep needing to jump from one unrelated topic to another?

    1. Some Same sex couplea already come with partners with children etc, etc… We are married in all but name, the arguments from the opposing side were lost when CPs were introduced in 2005 and gay couples were given all the same rights/obligations etc as married couples., press, the govt etc call us married, they can’t give married couples further rights/benefits without given them to us. THERE ARE NO arguments against gay marriage in the UK. It’s a simple legal change of just giving us the legal definition of marriage.

    2. Katie Murphy- family ex cath 5 Dec 2011, 12:24am

      theyre are really trying to bring up the molestation problem.

      the report to the bishops by New YOrk University said

      1; initial report – the rate of molestation was the same re gay and str8 priests

      2l the later final part looked at trends. It said that as more gay priests entered the priesthood, the rate of molestation went down.

      IMHO its because the gays were having their fun with each other. For the str8 priests, they had no opportunities except the alter boys. BTW about 20% of the victims of the endless hidden molestation of children were girls.

      No wonder the church’s history is so sordid – A thousand year dark ages of zero progress. Finally ended with the anything but holy inquisition. Anyone who dared oppose the church’s “teachings” ended up tortured and burned at the stake.

      Also the xtian crusades against the muslims – 10s of millions murdered. BTW there werent any real non catholic christians. It was the vatican of long ago that gave us 9-11 and the subway bombings etc

  48. Big Jessie O’Brien says, ‘…one perspective which seems to be completely lost or ignored, it is the point of view of the child.’

    I am still laughing at the idea that the Catholic Church cares about children.

    These old queens really must think everyone is stupid.

  49. “Cardinal O’Brien said: “As an institution, marriage long predates the existence of any state or government. It was not created by government and should not be changed by them. ”

    Marriage predates Chrstianity also. I find it ironic that they themselves changed it and now bleat that it shouldn’t be changed.

    ““All children deserve to begin life with a mother and father, the evidence in favour of the stability and well being which this provides is overwhelming and unequivocal.””

    So what about single parent families? Many men and women do a great job as single parents (I’m an example) and surely it’s more important to love a child (regardless of parental gender or sexual preference).

    And when I say “love” a child. I don’t mean in the catholic sense and fiddle with them into the middle of next week.

    1. “As a former teacher I am concerned that children are going to be taught that same sex partnerships and traditional marriage are the same, which they are not. If the redefining of marriage goes ahead it will have far reaching consequences and as far as I can see none of them are positive.”

      As a former teacher you should be ashamed of yourself and your professional credentials if you fail to understand that difference simpy exists. Did you not teach certain children because of their religious, ethnic or social background? Did you believe that you were being persecutede for not providing the job and service you should have done..after all that does seem to be a common argument amongst many bigoted chrstians whom hide behind god.

  50. Since I am NOT a member of either the Roman Catholic Church or the Church of Scotland why should I bother about what these institutions say – if they wish to oppose marriage equality then let them speak to their own members and keep their interfering noses out of the business of those who have nothing to do with their cults!

  51. JJ Marie Gufreda 6 Dec 2011, 2:13am

    Perhaps the Bishops can answer this question – I am transgender. I was male when I was married in the Catholic church. I have since transitioned to female. I have been married to the same woman for 34 years. Is it better to break up a Catholic and legal marriage of over 30 years, or to allow a same-sex marriage. Who will protect our children and grandchildren from the self-appointed judges trying to hurt my marriage?

  52. David ikenna 12 Dec 2011, 2:19pm

    Cardina bigot O’brien was right, ‘marriage predates any state or government…’ well as the case may be it predates religion and more so, the Catholic church. If an unproductive union(bringing forth children) is revolted against, then the so called union between priests and God should be revolted against, since its ironically childless. Mrs Ann, i very much understand you are as confused as your catholic arch allies. I think since she can blame gay marriage for a religious uprising in canada, she can blame gays for the earthquakes in haiti, Tsunami in Japan, wide spread hunger in Africa. Rubbish. Am very sure that soon i shall look at their dèfeated bigoted old faces, with a large laugh at thier stupid ignorance.

  53. Jock S. Trap 15 Dec 2011, 12:46pm

    Let them. The more they rant the more they look ridulous and people will move on from them and come to support us.

    Bigots tend to only have a limited shelf life.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.