Gay marriages are Un-African!

simple_simon

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2004
Messages
1,194
many things are un-african :

democracy
working for the interests of all
debate that does not end in violence
not stealing
 

Natas

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2006
Messages
2,309
many things are un-african :

democracy
working for the interests of all
debate that does not end in violence
not stealing

how about:

sending your comrades to jail for crimes they committed;
making politicians who ACTUALLY get found guilty serve real prison sentences;
 

kilo39

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
5,425
Hey Simon, guess who stole the land?
There was a time when I thought the whites stole the land. Then I spent a bit of time on wikipedia and discovered the blacks stole the land. Sometimes they stole the land together.

Catch a wakeup. NOW is all that counts.
 

Highflyer_GP

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 2, 2005
Messages
10,123
If you are born in a country, the land equally belongs to you as it does the next person. It's ridiculous to talk about land rights when the people who actually "stole" the land are long dead. You cannot make the latest generation of people pay for the previous generations failures and wrongdoings.

If this is the kind of logic that we use, then the question is how far back do we go? White man stole land from black man, black man stole land from the san, san stole land from gorilla, gorilla stole land from warthogs etc. Come on, how ridiculous is this? We could go all the way back into history to find out who the land really belonged to. But is it even worth the effort??
 

Nickste

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2003
Messages
1,083
As far as I know, gay marriage isn't only about the bringing together of two people, it also has financial implications. If two people are together, but not married, and one of them leaves money for the other in a will, this money is subject to hefty taxes, whereas if the two were married, the taxes would be much lower.

I'm not sure if I'm correct, but this is what I've heard.

Cheers, Nick
 

Bageloo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
1,800
If you are born in a country, the land equally belongs to you as it does the next person. It's ridiculous to talk about land rights when the people who actually "stole" the land are long dead. You cannot make the latest generation of people pay for the previous generations failures and wrongdoings.

If this is the kind of logic that we use, then the question is how far back do we go? White man stole land from black man, black man stole land from the san, san stole land from gorilla, gorilla stole land from warthogs etc. Come on, how ridiculous is this? We could go all the way back into history to find out who the land really belonged to. But is it even worth the effort??

the San ARE black ppl, and the land was institutionally stolen form blk ppl. remember the Black (or Natives) Land Act No. 27 of 1913. Blacks were no longer able to own, or even rent, land outside of designated reserves (which amounted to approximately 7% of South Africa's land. What happened to the other 93% of the land? Not only was it stolen from the blacks, they were prohibited by law from BUYING it back!

If you own a big piece of farmland, chances are your grandpa did not buy it. It must have been a handout from the government! You are not to blame, but the fact remains that the land was expropriated.
 

Highflyer_GP

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 2, 2005
Messages
10,123
Bageloo: actually the San and Khoi are the ancestors of modern day coloured people.

Anyway you're missing the point, how far back do we go in determining who the land really belongs to? If we did this then ultimately we'd come to the conclusion that all the land on earth ultimately belongs to single celled organisms. Why can't we as humans just get along with each other and leave the past to remain in the past?
 

Bageloo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
1,800
Bageloo: actually the San and Khoi are the ancestors of modern day coloured people.

Anyway you're missing the point, how far back do we go in determining who the land really belongs to? If we did this then ultimately we'd come to the conclusion that all the land on earth ultimately belongs to single celled organisms. Why can't we as humans just get along with each other and leave the past to remain in the past?

We can try but the problem is the past will always come back and bite us in the butt. As long as there is ppl in hopeless situations living side by side with affluent ppl, the result is crime and lawlessnes. This is by no means a justification of crime. But these criminals have got no hope in hell of earning an honest living. There are very few benevelont S Africans who have offered part of "their" land, expertise and opportuninity for the advancement of the poor. Instead, they are busy crying "victims of reverse racism". I saw the other day on TV, a group of Irish or Welsh ppl building houses for the shack dwellers of Cape Town. These people have voluntarily spent their money, time and energy in doing something about a hopeless situation at hand. Why can't more South Africans think like that, he?
 

kilo39

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
5,425
the San ARE black ppl, and the land was institutionally stolen form blk ppl. remember the Black (or Natives) Land Act No. 27 of 1913. Blacks were no longer able to own, or even rent, land outside of designated reserves (which amounted to approximately 7% of South Africa's land. What happened to the other 93% of the land? Not only was it stolen from the blacks, they were prohibited by law from BUYING it back!

I agree with you assessment of the 1913 Land Act. I disagree that the San are black people: they are their own indigenous group, nothing to do with black people (who stole the land off them, much as anybody stole anything off anybody.) (And not that they stole it rather the san retreated against the oncoming waves - of everybody.)

If you own a big piece of farmland, chances are your grandpa did not buy it. It must have been a handout from the government! You are not to blame, but the fact remains that the land was expropriated.

Agree.

Here is the original 1913 Land Act.

"nothing in any such law or in this Act shall be construed as restricting the number of natives who, as farm labourers, may reside on any farm in the Transvaal;"

For comparison I would like you to read this:

Nearly two years have elapsed since we last met in Conference -- two years crowded with events that have an important bearing on the future of South Africa, and especially on the Coloured races. Thanks, however, to the A.P.O. newspaper, every intelligent Coloured man is acquainted with those events, and there is no need for me to dwell in detail on any one of them. Nevertheless, a cursory enumeration will be desirable in order to answer certain questions I propose to submit to you: it will be further necessary to make a retrospect of the conditions that prevailed at the time when White South Africa, amid exuberant exultations, and a chorus of hosannahs, wildly welcomed the Act of Union as a beacon light, that would blaze down through ages of history, indicating the commencement of peace and prosperity for the land, and the birth of a new nation -- the foundation of a new nationalism.
[source]
 

kilo39

Executive Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2005
Messages
5,425
We can try but the problem is the past will always come back and bite us in the butt. As long as there is ppl in hopeless situations living side by side with affluent ppl, the result is crime and lawlessnes. This is by no means a justification of crime. But these criminals have got no hope in hell of earning an honest living. There are very few benevelont S Africans who have offered part of "their" land, expertise and opportuninity for the advancement of the poor. Instead, they are busy crying "victims of reverse racism". I saw the other day on TV, a group of Irish or Welsh ppl building houses for the shack dwellers of Cape Town. These people have voluntarily spent their money, time and energy in doing something about a hopeless situation at hand. Why can't more South Africans think like that, he?
The short simple answer is: the majority of south africans have just about enough going to get them by every day (enough time, enough money, a job.) These south africans have a government they believe should be doing: instead they're doing not. How is that our responsibility (when x number of councils suffer cronyism, corruption and budget underspend, or overspend: with no delivery to the communities.) (How is this our problem.) To top it all we pay tax: what do they do with the money??! The sa gub is certainly richer than the average taxpayer. Why don't they do something about it (instead of pointing fingers at us who are keeping them in wages, and all of the above, in the first place.)

Re the irish whatever: look at the profile (I assume.) Who are these people and how can they afford to be here?!
 

Bageloo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2006
Messages
1,800
The short simple answer is: the majority of south africans have just about enough going to get them by every day (enough time, enough money, a job.) These south africans have a government they believe should be doing: instead they're doing not. How is that our responsibility (when x number of councils suffer cronyism, corruption and budget underspend, or overspend: with no delivery to the communities.) (How is this our problem.) To top it all we pay tax: what do they do with the money??! The sa gub is certainly richer than the average taxpayer. Why don't they do something about it (instead of pointing fingers at us who are keeping them in wages, and all of the above, in the first place.)

Re the irish whatever: look at the profile (I assume.) Who are these people and how can they afford to be here?!

About the profile of the IRISH volunteers, here's the link.
http://www.southafrica.info/ess_info/sa_glance/social_delivery/niall-mellon.htm
Paying taxes is mandatory almost the world over, so no medal for you, sorry! Even the poorest person in this country pays tax. I was actually refering to instances where ppl do stuff out of the goodness of their hearts as well as the willingness to correct the wrongs of the past for the betterment of the future.
25% of South Africans are unemployed, that number could be halved if only the super rich ppl of this country could stop crying victim and instead get involved in some positive nation builiding initiatives. The real victims are the poor here.

The ANC government has failed dismally by intituting policies that favour big business and do precious little for the poor. Let me enlighten you on some of the ANC's failures...

In terms of income inequality, today South Africa ranks 116th out of 124 nations.

Average white household income has risen 15% since the end of apartheid.
Average black household income has fallen by 19%

The ANC gvt has failed to deliver on its promise in the Freedom Charter to redistribute 30% of the country’s agricultural land from 60,000 white farmers to blacks. Since apartheid ended, approximately 2% has been transferred.

In the last ten years of apartheid 737,000 people, mostly poor black farming families, were evicted from white-owned land. In the first decade of democracy, under ANC rule, 942,000 were evicted. While the ANC has brought in legislation to prevent evictions, it is neither resourced, nor enforced.

And this is how it all happened...
The ANC introduced GEAR, Growth, Emploment and Residstibution, as its new economic strategy.
Two years later, the United Nations Development Programme described GEAR as basically ‘no different’ from the economic strategy of the apartheid regime.

The other major ANC economic initiative is Black Economic Empowerment. Archbishop Tutu described it as ‘crony capitalism’ wherby the struggle aristocracy of the ANC receive appointments to the boards of major corporations. Macozoma, Sexwale, Ramaphosa , you get my drift?

All of this was meant to show you that we won't get anywhere, as long as we still look up to the jackasses in parliament to do what's right for the country. They are nothing but a bunch of self serving a**holes that don't give a **** about the country.
 

happygolucky

Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2006
Messages
18
I think same sex marriages are very wrong. I think our government is full of cr@p to allow this law. Its just wrong, man. I think our world is becoming a sick place to live in.
 

jontyB

Expert Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2006
Messages
2,101
I think same sex marriages are very wrong. I think our government is full of cr@p to allow this law. Its just wrong, man. I think our world is becoming a sick place to live in.
It may be wrong to you, but your implication that it is wrong and a root of evil is nothing more than bigotry.

The government is full of cr@p, I agree. However, this is not just a law, it is a liberally protected right enshrined in the South African constitution.
 

RichardP

Banned
Joined
Aug 29, 2005
Messages
1,742
the Bottom line is - The software developed called HARNIS and the population register system cant handle 2 males/females being married. And the system is so outdated it cant be changed. (If I remember correctly, the original authors were on a gravy ride milking the Govt - erm, I mean the tax payers)

Its allowed, just the Govt dont know how to enter it in the system... which means you cant get certificates for it.
 

TesterMan

Active Member
Joined
Dec 23, 2005
Messages
70
the Bottom line is - The software developed called HARNIS and the population register system cant handle 2 males/females being married. And the system is so outdated it cant be changed. (If I remember correctly, the original authors were on a gravy ride milking the Govt - erm, I mean the tax payers)

Its allowed, just the Govt dont know how to enter it in the system... which means you cant get certificates for it.

HANIS is the digitising of the ID book applications (fingerprints and photo), nothing to do with marriage certificates.
 
Top