• Best of luck to the class of 2024 for their HSC exams. You got this!
    Let us know your thoughts on the HSC exams here
  • YOU can help the next generation of students in the community!
    Share your trial papers and notes on our Notes & Resources page
MedVision ad

Homosexuality in Australia (3 Viewers)

What do you think of homosexuality in Australia?

  • Yes, i strongly support it.

    Votes: 674 48.5%
  • I somewhat support it.

    Votes: 201 14.5%
  • No opinion

    Votes: 182 13.1%
  • I do not support it.

    Votes: 334 24.0%

  • Total voters
    1,391

ilikebeeef

Active Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
1,198
Location
Hoboland and Procrastinationland
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2010
Biology =/= history.
I was saying that we as fallible humans invented the Bible.

Prove it was written by some random power-crazed egomaniac all in one go. Then get an historian to agree with you.

GO!
I did not say that one person wrote it.

But anyways, read the Bible. Clearly "some random power-crazed egomaniac" is prevalent throughout, whether his presence is explicit or implicit. Christians tend to name him God.
 

Name_Taken

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
846
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
Most of society realises homosexuality is regarded as a normal thing nowadays.
For the kazillionth-trillionth time, this demonstrates nothing.

I think the problem is religious people think our government runs on the basis of religious groundings. In the past, yes, most governments did, but we are approaching a new age and a new ideology of acceptance in our society.
Lol democracy means that the government passes laws based on what the people want. It just so happens that many people are in fact religious, and the proportion of the population who holds such views is entitled to some extent see this translated into law.

Its a reflection on the moral position of a large proportion of society (not necessarily the majority always) which is being reflected here, not the fact that they are religious. It doesn't matter where you get your morals from in that sense, you could have decided them yourself, from your parents/friends or from the Bible.

New ideology rofl... Don't make the mistake of assuming that you or our generation are somehow stepping into new ground with this promotion of homosexuality and various other sins. It's all been done before. Sin is nothing new buddy and you are not the first to think it is ok.

People are starting to realise commen sense is better than a dictational book.
Common sense tells you that gay is ok? Plox explain...

God bless homos.
+ 1
 

Name_Taken

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
846
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
How did we invent a set of universal rights for ourselves? We just did. Necessity is the mother of all invention.
But human rights are not essential at all...

We got alone fine as a species before them.

Why are they necessary? (Seriously question, can you explain from like a biological/scientific point of view?).
 

BlackDragon

Active Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2005
Messages
1,534
Location
Under The Tree
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
Most of society realises homosexuality is regarded as a normal thing nowadays
For the kazillionth-trillionth time, this demonstrates nothing.
Lol democracy means that the government passes laws based on what the people want. It just so happens that many people are in fact religious, and the proportion of the population who holds such views is entitled to some extent see this translated into law.
With one hand you are using democracy in your argument and with the other you are denying others' ability to use the same argument. And the idea that if people want it to happen then it would have happened by now is non-sensical if you agree that most of society accepts homosexuality. Which you seem to, but then say that it means nothing. If all things that people wanted to happen were already in place then why would we need a legislature? Because the institutionalisation of societal belief is lagging pehaps? Just because people want something doesn't mean it has happened yet. This is really a truism.
 
Last edited:

ilikebeeef

Active Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
1,198
Location
Hoboland and Procrastinationland
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2010
But human rights are not essential at all...

We got alone fine as a species before them.
Define "fine".

Why are they necessary? (Seriously question, can you explain from like a biological/scientific point of view?).
It helps us to easily identify if someone has been violated. Then we can take action if appropriate.
 

Name_Taken

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
846
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
With one hand you are using democracy in your argument and with the other you are denying others' ability to use the same argument. And the idea that if people want it to happen then it would have happened by now is non-sensical if you agree that most of society accepts homosexuality. Which you seem to, but then say that it means nothing. If all things that people wanted to happen were already in place then why would we need a legislature? Because the institutionalisation of societal belief is lagging pehaps? Just because people want something doesn't mean it has happened yet. This is really a truism.
Ok, let me explain. What I meant was by "it means nothing" is that just because a motion is popular it isn't necessarily right (I oppose homosexuality on a moral level, which is on a separate plane to the democratically decided laws of this country). I act within the law, and I expect others to as well, but the law doesn't perfectly reflect what is right or wrong (it can't since morals differ between people), simply because something is legal doesn't make it good or right etc.

Hence just because most people think homosexuality is a-ok, doesn't make it so. However if most people thing same-sex "marriage" should be legal, then I'm not going to subvert democracy in order to prevent it, but it doesn't make it right or give reasons as to why I should find it acceptable.
 

ilikebeeef

Active Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
1,198
Location
Hoboland and Procrastinationland
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2010
because most people think homosexuality is a-ok, doesn't make it so. However if most people thing same-sex "marriage" should be legal, then I'm not going to subvert democracy in order to prevent it, but it doesn't make it right or give reasons as to why I should find it acceptable.
Why do you find homosexuality unacceptable?
 

Name_Taken

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
846
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
Define "fine".
Humans are no better than any other animal (correct me if you think otherwise), as animals we survived. Sure we had high death rates and poor living conditions overall but thats entirely irrelevant, as animals we continued to reproduce and were part of the food chain and natural cycle.

If such an existence is good enough for every other animal, why have we suddenly taken it upon ourselves that we deserve better? Throwing out just about every natural cycle and disrupting the harmonic existence of like just about every ecosystem in the meantime?

It helps us to easily identify if someone has been violated. Then we can take action if appropriate.
Lol... But thats the thing, I do care if something happens to others in my species, even those I will probably never meet or have anything to do with (eg. people dying in Africa). Why do I? Why should I?

Sure some other animals may display some degree of loyalty to their family pack or species etc, but its nothing like the innate compassion most humans experience towards each other.
 
Last edited:

BlackDragon

Active Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2005
Messages
1,534
Location
Under The Tree
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
Ok, let me explain. What I meant was by "it means nothing" is that just because a motion is popular it isn't necessarily right (I oppose homosexuality on a moral level, which is on a separate plane to the democratically decided laws of this country). I act within the law, and I expect others to as well, but the law doesn't perfectly reflect what is right or wrong (it can't since morals differ between people), simply because something is legal doesn't make it good or right etc.

Hence just because most people think homosexuality is a-ok, doesn't make it so. However if most people thing same-sex "marriage" should be legal, then I'm not going to subvert democracy in order to prevent it, but it doesn't make it right or give reasons as to why I should find it acceptable.
If you argue this then you can never argue with the idea that lots of people don't think it is okay without being self-contradictory. And you have done this alot. 'If enough people thought it should be changed it would be changed already!'. This makes no sense. You can't argue that you are fine with democratic process acting against your beliefs and then say that this process is a reaason that homosexual marriage shouldn't be legislated. But you seem to drop arguments when refuted and pick them up at later time when convenient. And lol, how could people act outside the law with regards to homosexual marriage? They can't get married without it being legally binding.
 
Last edited:

ilikebeeef

Active Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2009
Messages
1,198
Location
Hoboland and Procrastinationland
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
2010
Define "fine".

Humans are no better than any other animal (correct me if you think otherwise), as animals we survived. Sure we had high death rates and poor living conditions overall but thats entirely irrelevant, as animals we continued to reproduce and were part of the food chain and natural cycle.
Haha, are you sure about that? The whole point of technology and inventions is to improve our quality of life (with the exception of war materials).

If such an existence is good enough for every other animal, why have we suddenly taken it upon ourselves that we deserve better? Throwing out just about every natural cycle and disrupting the harmonic existence of like just about every ecosystem in the meantime?
Because we are animals who want the best for us. Our controlling behaviour eliminates predators, increasing our chances of survival.

Lol... But thats the thing, I do care if something happens to others in my species, even those I will probably never meet or have anything to do with (eg. people dying in Africa). Why do I? Why should I?

Sure some other animals may display some degree of loyalty to their family pack or species etc, but its nothing like the innate compassion most humans experience towards each other.
There you go, you've just answered your own question. :)
 

Name_Taken

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
846
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
If you argue this then you can never argue with the idea that lots of people don't think it is okay without being self-contradictory.
I never said that because plenty of other people think that it is wrong, that that is in fact why it is. The reason why it is wrong is that it is morally repugnant behavior, which has nothing to do with the amount of people who happen to agree with me that it is wrong.

And you have done this alot. 'If enough people thought it should be changed it would be changed already!'.
If it is the case where the vast majority of the population agree with something but it has yet been introduced that would reflect more as a failure of the democratic system. However usually as part of democracy there is a long period where different sides lobby the government before a decision is made (especially for things like this, where frankly it is not particularly urgent and is politically very sensitive).

This makes no sense. You can't argue that you are fine with democratic process acting against your beliefs and then say that this process is a reaason that homosexual marriage shouldn't be legislated.
I never said that... I believe it is wrong because, morally is it. It has nothing to do with the number of people who agree or disagree with my position.

Just because a motion is popular doesn't make it right or wrong, it just makes it popular.

Democratically speaking, the most people on one side means that the motion should be passed or rejected as befits w/e the situation, however I'm saying that the opinion of society means very little to me regarding my stance on this issue, because my position is based on morals. I am not really concerned if it everyone agrees or disagrees with me. Im not opposing this law out of my own self interests, but because I believe it should be opposed for what it is, the promotion of immoral behavior in society.

And lol, how could people act outside the law with regards to homosexual marriage? They can't get married without it being legally binding.
That was just generally speaking, not specifically relating to gay marriage/homosexuality or anything specific at all.
 

BlackDragon

Active Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2005
Messages
1,534
Location
Under The Tree
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
I never said that because plenty of other people think that it is wrong, that that is in fact why it is. The reason why it is wrong is that it is morally repugnant behavior, which has nothing to do with the amount of people who happen to agree with me that it is wrong.


I never said that... I believe it is wrong because, morally is it. It has nothing to do with the number of people who agree or disagree with my position.
Lol, you have often cited the amount of people that are religious and the idea of the democratic process as evidence that proves homosexual marriage is wrong and should not be instated. Moreover, it is only morally wrong according to your morals and that of your little book. Are we secular or not?
 
Last edited:

Name_Taken

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
846
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
Lol, you have often cited the amount of people that are religious and the idea of the democratic process as evidence that proves homosexual marriage is wrong and should not be instated.
Not true.

I have stated the number of religious people in Australia to demonstrate to those who believe that only a negligible percentage of the population actually opposes same-sex marriage.

Moreover, it is only morally wrong according to your morals and that of your little book. Are we secular or not?
Yes we are... What does this demonstrate? Are you suggesting that because someone's morals are to an extent religiously inspired that they should have no say in the democratic process? Where someone gets there morals is irrelevant, everyone with an opinion deserves the right to express it.

I never proposed that the should replace our secular laws with those of the Bible or any other religion...

People are allowed to be gay, people are allowed to have gay sex. People are allowed to be open about their homosexuality and celebrate their relationships.

Marriage is not required for people to partake in homosexual activities or to live with a significant other. Marriage means a union between one man and women. Should gays have their own little union, legally equal in all ways to heterosexual marriage, yes, of course, if society deems they deserve it, but marriage remains what is it. Gay marriage is an oxymoron.
 

Tangent

Member
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
523
Location
My World
Gender
Male
HSC
2010
Humans are no better than any other animal (correct me if you think otherwise), as animals we survived. Sure we had high death rates and poor living conditions overall but thats entirely irrelevant, as animals we continued to reproduce and were part of the food chain and natural cycle.
Though we do strive always to create better living environments and promote a 'better' or more comfortable life for all. If you only measure the differences in survival and foodchain, then you miss out all the other differences that come with being a human compared to another animal. We are still a part of the food chain, just further up the top.

If such an existence is good enough for every other animal, why have we suddenly taken it upon ourselves that we deserve better? Throwing out just about every natural cycle and disrupting the harmonic existence of like just about every ecosystem in the meantime?
Why do you doubt that what we are doing is out of the natural cycle? We look at our environment and utilise it, just like every other animal. Its just that we are more intelligent, and use tools to a greater extent to any other animal.
We stuff our ecosystems because we have evolved too well. Think of an ocean ecosystem. If there is too much nitrogen in the water, algae blooms appear. The algae eat up all the oxygen and suffocate the rest of the ecosystem. Its all a part of a balance. We as humans have overturned this balance as well.

Though this is irrelevant, as you are only focusing on humans as a race, not the individual's wellbeing. 'Fine' might mean that it is possible to survive, but then is it an equal existence? Are there people who take advantage of other people? So I dont think the humans doing 'fine' without human rights was a good thing.

Lol... But thats the thing, I do care if something happens to others in my species, even those I will probably never meet or have anything to do with (eg. people dying in Africa). Why do I? Why should I?

Sure some other animals may display some degree of loyalty to their family pack or species etc, but its nothing like the innate compassion most humans experience towards each other.
"Nothing like"? You contradicted yourself in that paragraph, where first you said that other animals display loyalty, surely it is something like what humans display for each other, even though it wouldnt be to that degree.

Then comes the question to whether compassion is innate. I'm not going to pretend i know the answer to that, but we cant just assume that anything is innate. There is a possibility, but there really is no way to know (yet).

If compassion was innate, then why do the atrocities that have happened in the past/are happening today happen?

If compassion was innate, why do you you feel the way you do towards homosexuals?
Could you please just try something for me? Put all your religious beliefs aside, have a completely open mind. Put yourself in the shoes of a homosexual. Think about what it is like to be an outsider, think of the trials you now have to go through, think about the fear that stalks you where ever you go, think about how much what people say hurts you-like homosexuality is unnatural, or that you are unnatural, or they dont like you because you are homosexual.

You only get as much out of that as you allow yourself, though i hope it did affect you in some way.
 

BlackDragon

Active Member
Joined
Oct 30, 2005
Messages
1,534
Location
Under The Tree
Gender
Male
HSC
2006
Not true.

I have stated the number of religious people in Australia to demonstrate to those who believe that only a negligible percentage of the population actually opposes same-sex marriage.



Yes we are... What does this demonstrate? Are you suggesting that because someone's morals are to an extent religiously inspired that they should have no say in the democratic process? Where someone gets there morals is irrelevant, everyone with an opinion deserves the right to express it.

I never proposed that the should replace our secular laws with those of the Bible or any other religion...

People are allowed to be gay, people are allowed to have gay sex. People are allowed to be open about their homosexuality and celebrate their relationships.

Marriage is not required for people to partake in homosexual activities or to live with a significant other. Marriage means a union between one man and women. Should gays have their own little union, legally equal in all ways to heterosexual marriage, yes, of course, if society deems they deserve it, but marriage remains what is it. Gay marriage is an oxymoron.
A secular society means that all ideas have equal footing whether religious or not, but the are arguing that the bible should be the authority on the definition of marriage. If you were really for relativism then you would be fine with marriage being defined as whatever people want it to be. If you really thought your views only pertained to yourself and that the majority decision was fine then you would not oppose the idea that the majority will redefine it as whatever they want. If you were really for democratic relativism you would realise that christian view on marriage is has nothing really to do with it in the sense that it is defined by the times and the people of the times.
 
Last edited:

NewiJapper

Active Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2009
Messages
1,010
Location
Newcastle
Gender
Male
HSC
2010
Name_Taken said:
Common sense tells you that gay is ok? Plox explain...
Well, being one myself, it kind of comes naturally to accept it otherwise I would be officially the world's worst hipocrite...

When referring to commen sense I mean a human's instinct to accept someone for who they are and not be discriminatory.
 

SeCKSiiMiNh

i'm a fireball in bed
Joined
Mar 6, 2008
Messages
2,618
Location
island of screaming orgasms
Gender
Male
HSC
2009
I LOVE the chasers; I wrote a complaint when they took it down! It was such a funny. funny show..
lol ming back on the same day as name_taken??! something going on between you two? ;)

imagine if name_taken was a closeted homosexual...oh my god it would SO comprimise his arguments.
 

Name_Taken

Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2009
Messages
846
Gender
Male
HSC
2011
If you were really for relativism then you would be fine with marriage being defined as whatever people want it to be. If you really thought your views only pertained to yourself and that the majority decision was fine then you would not oppose the idea that the majority will redefine it as whatever they want. If you were really for democratic relativism you would realise that christian view on marriage is has nothing really to do with it in the sense that it is defined by the times and the people of the times.
Thats like saying if you are really for democratic relativism, if society pushed to legalise murder (example) then you would be more than happy to (majority permitting) accept the changing of the definition of murder to killing someone without reason - where having a reason acquits you from committing an offense...

Everyone has limits. Mine are stricter than yours, at least regarding marriage (I assume, I won't pretend to know how you see everything)...

And no, to me, marriage is a holy sacrament. Catholics view marriage (perhaps) as more important than most other Christian denominations. I have nothing wrong with gays being happy in society (still a sin tho -.-) and having relationships recognised by the law as legally equal to heterosexual marriage.

However as Obama put it; "you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig". Marriage is a union between one man and women, nothing else qualifies.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 3)

Top