Poll: Gay/Lesbian marriage.

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by DBourne

Trev, I'm not trying to pick on your views at all, so please don't think I am.

But, with the quoted part above, does that not mean that honestly you couldn't care if they do get married?

So, if it means the world to them, and it doesn't have any effect (or affect, I never get the right use) on you, why not let them do it?

I couldn't care if they get married or not, marriage started out as a religious process to keep people together and of course exert the churches control over people.

Ultimately 'marriage' is just a piece of paper, homosexuals have for years (in Australia) been given all the legal privileges that go with 'marriage', so I don't know what all the stink is about, just let them get their bit of paper if it makes them happy and it will get it off my TV so far more important things can be reported on

Plus, our best friend is a Marriage Celebrant, so it will help her income no end

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by STINKY NINJA

I was a groomsman in our friends gay wedding commitment ceremony, I have no issues with it at all.

sorry I had to fix it for you, gay marriage is not yet legal in Australia, unless they were married overseas somewhere

[Fordman1]

No problems here, two good friends of the family are a gay couple (male), our new neighbours are a gay female couple.

They are great people and we wish them great happiness and hope that they can get legally married one day.

[Adamz Ghia]

So those who bang on about traditions and what ever else, I wonder how many of them stayed virgins up until their wedding night. And I'm sure you all got married in a church because that's the tradition.

Reading the entire thread, there is a constant theme that matches wider society where those who are for it or don't really care a much more passive and reasoned in their thinking. The majority of those against are radical, offensive, incoherent and plain nasty. To link it to paedophelia is so wrong on so many levels. To say two gay parents can't raise a child is simply unfounded, I notice they never produce evidence to back this up. Come to think of it they never produce evidence to back up any of their arguments.

It's as simple as this. It does not affect you.

[chevypower]

Adam, I disagree. People on both sides are just sharing their opinions, which has been encouraged. Just because some people's opinions are not aligned with yours, it doesn't make their opinions invalid, unreasoned, radical, offensive, incoherent, or plain nasty. I think we can do without the 'nasty' rhetoric though.

[superyob]

Originally Posted by Rodp

You'd need to define natural for me. I'd have thought natural is something that occurs in nature? That would definitely encompass homosexuality.

http://www.news-medical.net/news/200...sexuality.aspx

So does bestiality and paedophilia? Once again, you can't have it both ways...

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by superyob

So does bestiality and paedophilia? Once again, you can't have it both ways...

Well, err - that showed me(?) - can you show me how either of those relate to gay marriage?

You'd probably have to provide a basis for bestiality being something that occurs in nature as it's defined as human/animal relations, hence not something that could be shown happening beyond the human condition. We humans stick our private parts in some very odd places, that doesn't elevate lovemaking between a man and an exhaust system 'natural'.

Aside from that, both are generally prohibited by law (I guess depending on where you live and local age of consent) as neither beast, nor child are capable of giving legal consent.

[superyob]

Originally Posted by Adamz Ghia

So those who bang on about traditions and what ever else, I wonder how many of them stayed virgins up until their wedding night. And I'm sure you all got married in a church because that's the tradition.

Reading the entire thread, there is a constant theme that matches wider society where those who are for it or don't really care a much more passive and reasoned in their thinking. The majority of those against are radical, offensive, incoherent and plain nasty. To link it to paedophelia is so wrong on so many levels. To say two gay parents can't raise a child is simply unfounded, I notice they never produce evidence to back this up. Come to think of it they never produce evidence to back up any of their arguments.

It's as simple as this. It does not affect you.

Argument 1 – Having same sex parents robs the birth right of a child to have a mum and dad.
Argument 2 – Only one parent at the most can express any real loyalty to that child. The other must play lip service to this concept.
Argument 3 – Psychological/emotional damage to child. (seen first hand)
Argument 4 - Bullying by other children of that child
Argument 5 – documented, systematic abuse of child by ‘2 loving dads’
Argument 6 – Twisted/distorted values instilled in child
Argument 7- Most homos have been tampered with themselves and are damaged in some way (info from a conversation with a lesbian who was completing her diesel apprenticeship and had been assigned to work with me)
Argument 8 - Society is not a scripted sanitised version of that revolting show ‘Modern Family’. Society will pay the piper for the obscenity of gay ‘marriage’ and that affects us all…

[Rodp]

Yet, all bunk according to actual research.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-0...-finds/5574168

[EVL BOS]

I voted for it because speaking as a gay man I'm all for marriage equality, Why should I not have the same rights as my straight friends? Why can't I marry my partner of nearly 4 years? Just because I'm gay it doesn't change who I am, I didn't choose to be gay it's part of me and I was born gay. Who would choose to be subjected too verbal abuse, physical threats of violence and to be discrimated against all because they aren't attracted to the opposite sex.

In my family I'm lucky just on my mums side I'm 1 of 18 cousins and 5 of which are gay/lesbian, there's others out there who don't have such an accepting family as I do.

End of the day if two adults who are in a loving relationship want to get married why stop them?

[chamb0]

Originally Posted by Pis-ton broke

marriage has been around for thousands of years, one man and one woman, thats what marriage is.

Anthropologists don't agree that marriage has always exclusively been between only one man and one woman. Just over a decade ago the American Anthropological Association, the world's largest anthropological organisation, released this statement in response to President Bush calling for a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage:

"The results of more than a century of anthropological research on households, kinship relationships, and families, across cultures and through time, provide no support whatsoever for the view that either civilization or viable social orders depend upon marriage as an exclusively heterosexual institution. Rather, anthropological research supports the conclusion that a vast array of family types, including families built upon same-sex partnerships, can contribute to stable and humane societies.
The Executive Board of the American Anthropological Association strongly opposes a constitutional amendment limiting marriage to heterosexual couples."


http://www.americananthro.org/Connec...temNumber=2602

If you're at all interested in the history of it, you've got to consider that statement seriously.

Should marriage be able to change with the times as we see fit? Are we to serve marriage, or is it there to serve us? We think of marriage differently now than in the past. As a few examples:

- After the case of an Aboriginal woman being prevented from marrying a white man in 1959 went public and blew up, the Menzies govt eventually decided to erase discrimination against black/white marriages from law.

- Women didn't have the right to marry who they chose, free of laws surrounding divorce and contraception, well into the 20th century.

- Australian servicemen couldn't marry Japanese women in occupied Japan due to the White Australia policy.

- It was legal to rape your wife and commit domestic violence with virtual immunity until the 1970's when we began to re-think the power relationships between husband and wife.

- Australian federal legislation didn't define the sexes of who could marry until 2004, when PM Howard introduced legislation banning it during a fit of political manoeuvering.

So we've been quite capable of changing the definitions of marriage when it suited us.

Australian governments have a long history of social engineering by manipulating who ordinary people can marry in order to impose their ideals on what society should be, right back to the convict days. Making value judgements made on the 'naturalness' or otherwise of gay sex and wanting to enact laws on it sounds a little Talibanesque to me.

Australian citizens are all equal under the law, regardless of gender. With the glaring exception of marriage. Two consenting adults wanting marriage should have personal freedom of choice to marry and the government should be gender blind to it. Intrusive and discriminatory government interference in this reduces our freedoms.

For same sex couples with children already, we should be welcoming their decision to choose the stability of marriage with all the attendant benefits that will bring the kids. Those couples have kids already regardless of the marriage laws.

[superyob]

Originally Posted by Rodp

Yet, all bunk according to actual research.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-07-0...-finds/5574168

Good Lord, you present 'evidence' from the gay bc? That will be unbiased...

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by superyob

Good Lord, you present 'evidence' from the gay bc? That will be unbiased...

I guess it shows your propensity to learn and grow. The study was conducted by Melbourne University. That it was reported by the ABC is irrelevant.

Here, tell me what you think about the institutions that reported the same findings..?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...esearch-shows/

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2014/0...r-and-happier/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/ent...tion=australia

http://www.sciencealert.com/same-sex...d-happier-kids

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by superyob

Argument 1 – Having same sex parents robs the birth right of a child to have a mum and dad.
Argument 2 – Only one parent at the most can express any real loyalty to that child. The other must play lip service to this concept.
Argument 3 – Psychological/emotional damage to child. (seen first hand)
Argument 4 - Bullying by other children of that child
Argument 5 – documented, systematic abuse of child by ‘2 loving dads’
Argument 6 – Twisted/distorted values instilled in child
Argument 7- Most homos have been tampered with themselves and are damaged in some way (info from a conversation with a lesbian who was completing her diesel apprenticeship and had been assigned to work with me)
Argument 8 - Society is not a scripted sanitised version of that revolting show ‘Modern Family’. Society will pay the piper for the obscenity of gay ‘marriage’ and that affects us all…

u tell em m8

u left out the bit - where god created adam and eve

not adam and steve

yo shake yo redneck fist at clouds

[Sox]

Originally Posted by superyob

Argument 1 – Having same sex parents robs the birth right of a child to have a mum and dad.

True. But is there any evidence which shows this has any negative affect on the childs life?

Argument 2 – Only one parent at the most can express any real loyalty to that child. The other must play lip service to this concept.

How so?
The loyalty can be spread equally as in any male/female parents.

Argument 3 – Psychological/emotional damage to child. (seen first hand)

Yeh right, like none of that ever goes on in normal familys. I've seen that first hand.

Argument 4 - Bullying by other children of that child

Same answer as argument 3.

Argument 5 – documented, systematic abuse of child by ‘2 loving dads’

Same as argument 3, by 2 loving normal parents.

Argument 6 – Twisted/distorted values instilled in child

4 same answers in a row.

Argument 7- Most homos have been tampered with themselves and are damaged in some way (info from a conversation with a lesbian who was completing her diesel apprenticeship and had been assigned to work with me)

Make that 5.

Argument 8 - Society is not a scripted sanitised version of that revolting show ‘Modern Family’. Society will pay the piper for the obscenity of gay ‘marriage’ and that affects us all…

Wow, your arguments are very weak indeed.

[RANGEREST]

The way I see it is let them marry, who is it going to hurt?
If the churches don't like it, who cares? there's plenty of marriage celebrants around.
I know a few gay couples some have been to Hawaii to get married and others couldn't give a **** either way.

[FairmontGS]

Originally Posted by superyob

Good Lord, you present 'evidence' from the gay bc? That will be unbiased...

[Sox]

Originally Posted by pottery beige

u tell em m8

u left out the bit - where god created adam and eve

not adam and steve

yo shake yo redneck fist at clouds

What about Amanda and Eve...

[superyob]

Sox, my arguments will be weak to all who support gay 'marriage', just as your arguments are nonsensical to me.

But I would still have a beer with most of my ideological opposites and certainly don't wish harm on any of them. Same cannot be said about a supporter who can't wait for all us 'bigots' to die...

[Sox]

Originally Posted by superyob

Sox, my arguments will be weak to all who support gay 'marriage', just as your arguments are nonsensical to me.

Your arguments are weak as they apply to all of us, not just those you've discriminated against.
That's fact.
Only your first point may have some merit in some cases.

But I would still have a beer with most of my ideological opposites and certainly don't wish harm on any of them. Same cannot be said about a supporter who can't wait for all us 'bigots' to die...

That's great, but why do you then give a hoot whether the 2 gay guys or gals down the street want to tie the knot?
How will it affect you? Will you even know?

[Rodp]

Originally Posted by superyob

Sox, my arguments will be weak to all who support gay 'marriage', just as your arguments are nonsensical to me.

You don't seem to have an argument that can be supported by anything besides, 'I find it icky..'. That's fine. The thought of two men gettin' it on is near the bottom of the list of things I want to see before kicking the bucket. I think driving a Prius is icky, too. Why should my sensibilities dictate how others should live if their choices cause me no harm?

'Traditional marriage' isn't even close to what we call marriage today.

Gay marriage has been a part of some ancient civilizations.

Those societies that have accepted and embraced gay marriage haven't fallen into some cesspool of sin.

Several studies conclude that children brought up in same-sex families are happier and healthier.

But the funniest thing I find in this whole debate is that the gay population of Australia is a product of 'traditional marriage'.

[cs123]

Wow, nice job Dave starting this thread!

How about letting people live their own lives. You don't need to worry about your kids being corrupted, they can accept homosexuality... It's older people that have issues.

[Ford_The_Win]

Originally Posted by Pis-ton broke

the next thing gay people will wont to be "marriaged" in a church with the priests blessing.
it just goes against thousands of years of tradition, arr but that doesn,t matter does it.

So when Britney Spears got drunk in Vegas, married one of her roadies and divorced him four hours later, that's permissible because they were a man and woman?

[superyob]

Originally Posted by Sox

Your arguments are weak as they apply to all of us, not just those you've discriminated against.
That's fact.
Only your first point may have some merit in some cases.

That's great, but why do you then give a hoot whether the 2 gay guys or gals down the street want to tie the knot?
How will it affect you? Will you even know?

My arguments stand. It is the concept of marriage 'equality' that is built on a lie. Supporters choose to blind themselves to the obvious. That is fact...

By the way, why are supporters so scared of a plebiscite on the issue? Not sure how accurate these so called 'overwhelming majority in favour of' polls are???

[Franco Cozzo]

Originally Posted by superyob

My arguments stand. It is the concept of marriage 'equality' that is built on a lie. Supporters choose to blind themselves to the obvious. That is fact...

By the way, why are supporters so scared of a plebiscite on the issue? Not sure how accurate these so called 'overwhelming majority in favour of' polls are???

I'm not scared of it, put it toward a vote.

Lets break up from the monarchy while we're at the polls again too.

[Ford_The_Win]

Originally Posted by superyob

My arguments stand. It is the concept of marriage 'equality' that is built on a lie. Supporters choose to blind themselves to the obvious. That is fact...

By the way, why are supporters so scared of a plebiscite on the issue? Not sure how accurate these so called 'overwhelming majority in favour of' polls are???

Extremely conservative and Catholic Ireland (where abortion and condoms were illegal until well into the 1980s) recently held a national referendum on the issue of gay marriage. It was a considerable victory for the marriage equality movement with the final tally being something like 60% to 40%. You're fighting a losing battle superyob

[Trump]

Originally Posted by Sox

What about Amanda and Eve...

Not a bad movie actually, they even do some serious acting...

[FairmontGS]

Originally Posted by superyob

By the way, why are supporters so scared of a plebiscite on the issue? Not sure how accurate these so called 'overwhelming majority in favour of' polls are???

Who is scared - you guys would go down big-time. It's ah-Straaya, not the United Arab Emirates

[olfella]

Originally Posted by Big Damo

Lets break up from the monarchy while we're at the polls again too.

Stay on topic because there will be no republic from a forum I am in hahahaaa

[pottery beige]

Originally Posted by superyob

My arguments stand. It is the concept of marriage 'equality' that is built on a lie. Supporters choose to blind themselves to the obvious. That is fact...

By the way, why are supporters so scared of a plebiscite on the issue? Not sure how accurate these so called 'overwhelming majority in favour of' polls are???

dont panic m8

whether or not some random dudes decide to hook up in the possibility of marriage

100 doodles wont fly up your bum in celebration