Thursday, May 10, 2012

So, a lot more news recently. Hollande won the election, and hopes to pull France out of the financial whirlpool threatening the EU. US President Barack Obama has come out in favour of gay marriage - personally I don't agree with gay marriage. 'Marriage' is a christian term, and does not blanket the entire worlds meaning for 'union'. Gays and lesbians deserve the same rights, but not the same name. Marriage is christian - and christians don't believe in same sex relationships. It's important to protect both peoples rights in this argument.

Vladimir 'Bear-slayer' Putin has turned down his expected appearance at the G8 summit - instead sending the previous President Dmitri. He was his successor and predecessor. How strange.

Greece is trying another government - the third time so far since the crisis of their economy. Meanwhile the olympic torch is set to be lit there - who's paying the gas bill?


  1. But 'marriage' is no longer solely a Christian concept. Its adoption by the secular, 'godless' world means, to me, that its roots in the (widely wildly homophobic) Christian tradition are increasingly irrelevant.

    On your terms, atheists shouldn't be allowed to marry either.

    And perhaps that is a valid point. Perhaps marriage itself should be restricted only to those of faith, and all the rest of us can opt for a 'union' which would provide the same legal rights but which hasn't been written into the fairytales, yet. One question, though... What about the gay Christians?

  2. Well I'd argue that they need to seperate the terms based on religious grounds. Amalgamation of these terms has caused contention on differing views of these words, so why not split them into two different definitions and leave them be. I think unions between gays/lesbians etc are fine, but the terms need to be differentiated so as not to cause confusion.