Biefstukfriet, I told you so

I'll accept your humiliation. I'll have a beer on it

I'd only sell my soul to the devil for an assured, everlasting residence in Heaven. Not for anything less.

I have to withdraw from any possible new game in the near future, I'm afraid. I just have too much to do.

The team from 1988, naturally. Who gives a damn about their names, that's what wikipedia is for!

anyway:
    Devon Harris, a Lieutenant in the Second Battalion, Jamaican Army
    Dudley Stokes, a captain from the JDF Air Wing
    Michael White, a private in the National Reserves &
    Samuel Clayton, a railway engineer

He's probably in the USA. It's the only country where they can still bear him..

A nation with no democratic tradition tends to struggle. It's a historic law (look at the Weimar republic).
And most countries were ruled by moderately progressive but brutal dictators. It's quite usual to have a swing in the opposite direction after that. It'll all straighten out well, normally.
Tunesia is doing really well. Lybia hasn't broke down in regional conflicts and is slowly making progress. Egypt is more worrying as the military hasn't stepped down yet and there are still protests by the more progressive people. Syria, unfortunatly is a total disaster. I fear our generation will have a lot to answer for towards the next generation.. 1 thing is clear: the UN's security council doesn't work well with the current system of permanent members and should be reformed..

Spock, alright, you make fun of several linguistic errors. This is my POV in a nutshell:

- Denying "marriage" to same-sex couples cause of religious reasons is a sham for homophobia. Either you chose to follow the bible all of the time or not at all. As the first option isn't picked (or even possible), you lose all ground to prohibit same sex marriages on religious grounds.
==> An example of not following the bible is Timotheus famous statement about women instucting men.

- Denying same sex marriage because of it being "unnatural" is bollocks as well. The term "unnatural" in itself is very undefined and can embody anything you want, but none of the definitions is going to be consistent. Biological procreation, the definition you gave to "unnatural" doesn't work. It would make all marriages that remain childless annulled/invalid, wether that was a deliberate choice of the couple or not.
Also, it has to be said that having children does not equal a functional family.

"So long as the state is doling out tax benefits, I don't see what's wrong with them doing it to reward the productive endeavor of heterosexual marriage. Heterosexual marriage servers a function that homosexual unions do not."

Please inform me on how a heterosexual relationship is by default more succesful/productive than a homosexual one?

On the matter of religion though, I stated before that religious aspects are bollocks, but I refer to my earlier posts for that, except for 1 point: I thought western society had advanced to the point where we all agreed that religion is a personal matter and that it shouldn't interfere with state matters. The state is secular.

It's worth fighting for - although in a non-violent way - as naming it differently is a clear sign of hidden discrimination. It says: "hey, we disapprove of you and your lifestyle, but we have to remain tolerant towards you". In a way it's the same as the segregation rules before Rosa Parks: You're all on the same bus, but a minority has to sit in an area that's reserved for its them.

You have no choice in those distinctions, Einstein, yet you actively choose to deny a certain group the same as others by naming it differently. The will to deny them that makes all the difference. It ultimatly shows you don't approve of it.

"Why can't there be a religious and a non-religious version of marriage? Both being equal under the law. I really do not understand what the big deal is."

Exactly my point. The government has to be secular and has no right to deny marriage towards gay people. Religions are a whole different matter. I can have peace for the moment with them deciding for their own, as they cling on to outdated ideas anyway. They'll (and have to) come around too, but it'll take a lot longer for them..

Einstein, your "triggers" do not suffice to explain homosexuality among humans. Not even among all other species either, as RD clearly proved.

Anyway, I stressed that homosexuality occurs in nature. The reasons for it are unimportant as I only aimed to discard the argument of it being "unnatural". If we'd go along with your reasoning - wich I find too oversimplifying and narrow to apply rigorously - , one could even say that homosexuality is hardwired into the survival strategy of numberous species. Therefore the "unnatural" argument would be utterly invalid.

I'm sure we can all agree that human (homo)sexuality is far more complex than those three biologicly based triggers could ever explain - and biologic consequences are the only reason for Bacchus to call a homsexual relationship "unnatural". If we accept that, the concept of "(un)natural" doesn't suffice to describe it whatsoever,  and that argument has to be regarded as invalid.

"Why the name marriage since it causes conflict? Why not take a fully equivalent title and walk away with full rights?"

Cause that would be bigotry and an unequal treatment of equal citizens: "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others" surely rings a bell.

"Whow... You sound like a Eurocrat's wetdream. If only everyone had such a weak sense of national identity."

Nationalism is just a victorious artificial image of an identity. Historicly, they're all false. But yes, I'm in favour of more Europe, if constructed fairly and intelligently. Not a popular thing to say in these days of economic and monetary problems. but it's exactly those silly, outdated notion we call nationalism that got (and keeps) us in this mess in the first place.

Don't get me wrong though, I do cheer for my country's team in the World cup, when it's really a nation against another nation. But the Olympics aren't about that. Also, I don't get sad when my country's team loses. I enjoy the beauty of another's victory equally as much.

BTW: Belgium will obliterate The Netherlands on the 15th.