Your Questions About Morality And Law Uk

Donna asks…

Proof that homosexuals aren’t “evil” or wrong?

First off, I’m not gay. But I’m also not a bigoted self righteous prick who shoves my (subjective and debatable) religious beliefs at others. Ok if you’re one of those religious people who think “Oh gay people are the work of Satan and they’re going to hell!” then I ask that you listen to what I have to say to disprove your misconceptions.

Gross and unfortunate, but… the very fact that hermaphrodites exist proves that sexuality is flawed and not perfectly set in stone, black and white. Nothing in nature is. There are grey areas due to chemical and hormonal developments in certain individuals. Imbalances in levels of estrogen and testosterone affect the evolution of a fetus and can result in the birth of a homosexual person. Their body is genetically predisposed to that behavior as it comes naturally to them. A gay man’s emygdalla (part of his brain that processes emotional reactions based on the hormones and chemicals present in his body) is actually Smaller and less conjoined than “normal” brains in “normal moral people”… And a Hermaphrodite, someone with both genetalia and almost unavoidably, a very confused perfeption of their sexuality, is not evil either.

It just means they are different. So when a man or woman is attracted to the same sex then they are not evil, but are only responding to the body in which they have no choice but to live. Unless they kill themselves in response to hate from the bigoted people of the two traditional sexes.

Gay people are just people. Not some exclusive cult of sinful sex addicts defiling the earth with their evil presence- as so many brainwashed religious people are forced to believe they are. They’re very nice.

So STFU about gay people. Stop hating something that can’t be changed and doesn’t need to.

If God made hermaphrodites and gay people, is he flawed or mistaken? No. It’s part of his plan test our morality and how well we can accept others. This is just like the black civil rights movement. Embarrassing.

Pip answers:

Anglican leaders from around the world have clearly stated their opposition to the “victimisation or diminishment” of gays and lesbians, saying demonising and persecuting them was “totally against Christian charity and basic principles of pastoral care”.

“We say that no one should have to live in fear because of the bigotry of others.”

The mormons poured millions into forcing through prop 8 in CA: to ban gay marriage. In August 2010 the court held that to be unconstitutional. On 15 June 2011 the San Francisco court upheld that decision because it violates the constitutional rights of citizens. On 7 February 2012 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals struck the California law again finding that the California state constitution banning same-sex marriage violated principles of due process and equal protection under the law.

The court found that the ban violates equality laws to target a minority group and withdraw a right that it possessed, without a legitimate reason for doing so. Proposition 8 serves no purpose, and has no effect, other than to lessen the status and human dignity of gays and lesbians in California. The constitution simply does not allow for laws of this sort.

It is now awaiting the Supreme Court verdict which is expected to uphold the early court decision.

If that happens then gay marriage will become legal everywhere and that will be marriage and not civil partnership!

France has just legalised gay marriage and Spain has commenced legislating to do so!

In the UK The intolerance, bigotry and homophobia from Christians resulted in it being classed as a hate crime with severe sentences. It has led to the government framing legislation which if enacted will replace “Civil Partnership” with full marriage. Spain has just legalised gay marriage and France has commenced legislating to do so!

The loving god works in mysterious ways.

Michael asks…

Question for the UK (About ‘Chav’s’)?

Usually when people use the word ‘chav’ you don’t associate it with misunderstood people but rather troubled teens with bad attitudes and dislike for anything and everything.
My Encounter With Chav’s
Even though I live in probably the best place to live in the UK up North, I usually go to Hull (which is a lot better than is used to be) because my friends predominantly live there. We went to the park and as we headed back, there were chav’s walking towards us, about 10 of them. They didn’t move to aside on the path so me and my friend walked on the main road to get past, we tried not to pay attention to them, but they stop and started laughing at us so we walked faster to try and get were the majority of people shop. We managed that but as soon as we looked back the ganged up around us and punch me in the face once and my friend twice. There were people obviously shocked around us and only when the chav’s left they asked if we were okay, but you can tell they only asked that to clear there conscience about not helping us. There were lots of adults around us that could had helped us if they wanted but they chose not to. So obviously I get scared every-time someone who looks remotely chavy or acts in the manner of a chav.
So my question is; how can people justify acting in that way? And why do people feel the need to give up on life and hurt others? And my last question, Do you think we will always have ‘chav’s’?
Open up to debate and I would love to hear people’s answers.

Pip answers:

Sad thig is that too many people in the UK now have been given nothing in terms of parenting, education or morality, and the gang you dealt with in your post is the end result. For these people, gangs give them a sense of belonging and identity, something which may have been lacking from their parents (assuming that their parents were both a) present and b)actually gave a toss about their children). For them the gang is almost a replacement family, somewhere to belong. This has in more recent times become more of an issue as more traditional social groupings such as Scouts, Army cadets, church or sports teams have all but disappeared or lost their place in society, meaning that these children and teenagers are pretty much on their own. Even the traditional ‘everyone knows each other’ neighborhood has gone.

Something else to consider is schooling. Again, many of the children who grew up into the people you saw lack a decent education, or may even be illiterate, not even knowing how to write basic sentences. This is often a ‘vicious circle’ scenario as the parents of these children are often themselves poorly-educated and so will not take time to teach the alphabet, numbers, shapes, colours or other basic educational things before the child enters school, leaving them pretty much on a back foot even at the age of 5, and many don’t recover from this position often because their parents often place little emphasis on academics, and so the child picks up the attitude that school and exams don’t matter. By the time they’re teenagers, they’re pretty much unfit to do anything and the damage has been done unless there’s some sort of post-16 training available, which isn’t always the case.
This leads onto an additional problem which further escalates the problem- employment. Many of these young men/women will struggle to find work, particularly as the UK has moved further and further away from the days when people with no exams could find work to the point where even a degree is no guarantee of employment. This creates the problem of lives spent on benefits, or criminal activity.

So for them they’re misplaced from society, aloof from the rules which govern it, and so are loose cannons who essentially please themselves in criminality and causing pain to others. They simply don’t understand the rules of the law-abiding member of society, because those laws govern a world they neither understand nor feel they belong too.

As to your last question, there has always been an underbelly to every culture in every time of all history. Chavs will always exist, whether they’re called ‘chavs’ or some other name.

Richard asks…

Will it be surprising if the poor lady is now stoned to death???

Saudi justice officials say that the woman who was sentenced to prison and flogging after she was gang-raped has now
” confessed to having an extramarital affair !!! ”

Pip answers:

Sharia law shouldn’t be used because it’s not congruent with ethics or morality.

If the law states that it is OK to take a way the life of a woman for committing infidelity, we ought to discard the law.

Mark asks…

abortion question?

If a man and a woman have the egg fertilized in a lab and implanted in a donor woman to carry for them, is it her baby and can the donor have an abortion regardless of legal contract. Because I get the impression that it is a womans right that goes higher than law. That the baby in your womb is a possession that no man or woman can interfere with.
I am trying to balance the opinion that a lot of woman have. That it is their body and only they have the right to decide about it. Does anything change if the egg and sperm are from another person, is it still you body?
So possession is only if the egg is yours?

Pip answers:

As I see it a woman who enters into a contract to be a surrogate is making an informed choice to carry the pregnancy to it’s conclusion. In this case I wouldn’t see abortion as an option for her or for the couple she was carrying the child for.
I don’t know what the law would say on this subject but it would make sense for it to be included in any contract between the parties. I see the issue more as one of morality than legality.
The one exception to this would be if the life of the surrogate was in danger. In this case I believe she should have the right to an abortion.
I’m from the UK and there surrogates are volunteers, not paid as they often are in the USA.
I don’t believe payment for services rendered should be included in the decision.

In normal circumstances I am pro choice as I was a child in the era of backstreet abortions and would never want to see a return to those.

Lisa asks…

christians! gordon brown wants to scrap the blasphamy laws there in the UK to protect the views of christians?

do you agree he should do this?
correction: Blasphemy

Pip answers:

The Archbishop of Canterbury himself wants it repealed ostensibly because it covers only attacks against Christian and Church of England tenets. Blasphemy laws are fundamentally unsound because they discriminate against those who follow religioius tenets not covered by these laws. But beyond that, these laws are an insinuation into the proper and necessary separation between church and state. No organized religion has a right to legislate its brand of morality on the general public. History has shown that such incursions into the affairs of state have usually resulted in major catastrophe. Religion poisons again and again.

Powered by Yahoo! Answers

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Previous Post

Your Questions About Uk Banks

Next Post

Your Questions About Uk Banks Ranking