Ban on Gay Marriage (3 Viewers)

[Generator]

We could also say the same thing about the UN's Declaration of Human Rights, as it is only a declaration.

I just find it hard to believe that you are all so optimistic in believing that 'contemporary' Australia has moved beyond the idea of marriage as a religious institution. The issue will continue to divide if the religious angle is not dealt with (which would not involve disregarding every statement that makes reference to the bible, let alone other religious texts).

 

[400miles]

We could also say the same thing about the UN's Declaration of Human Rights, as it is only a declaration.

I just find it hard to believe that you are all so optimistic in believing that 'contemporary' Australia has moved beyond the idea of marriage as a religious institution. The issue will continue to divide if the religious angle is not dealt with (which would not involve disregarding every statement that makes reference to the bible, let alone other religious texts).

The UN declaration of human rights is applicable to everyone.
Religion is not.

 

[tWiStEdD]

While I have not been -particularly- active of late... I wish to let it be known that this is the last time I will appear in this thread.

I concede that the arguements against gay marriage is based in tradition. It is based in quasi-subjective, emotional, majority-rules reasoning.

I alledge that the arguements for it are just as flawed.

Why have gays marry? Do they need to marry? You could ask the same of heterosexual couples. I suppose they have the choice.... So it boils down to choice, having the ability to, if you want to do this then you have the opportunity to do it. The thing is.... life is not fair... not at all. Sometimes I wish I could walk naked in public... hey... fuck clothes.... i'd save money. No, i'd be arrested. I'd insult people, so its against the law. I figure this marriage thing insults some people, it affects some people.

It affects me because of my parental situation. It affects me because gay people make me uncomfortable (No, not because I have problems with my sexuality but rather because gays have not treated me well in the past... dont understand? read back... way back.). Do I see what I have, live with what I have for NOTHING? Its not just me, it is many many people who should value marriage more than you obviously do. Okay, more control now .

None of you have a say. It is up to the politicians. It is up to the lawmakers. It is not up to us.

Too much time is spent mulling over how it should be, how it could be... how it is NOT. Change is not always necessary, prove that it has ever been positive. You CANNOT prove beyond any doubt that change has EVER been positive.

Democracy? Republic? Anarchy? Monarchies? Women's Rights? The 1961 Referendum? The Versailles Treaty? The development of the Wheel? The development of electricity? They've all changed the world... but we will never know if things could have been better had they not happened. That is fact. The one thing we do know is that we really dont know.

Religion and tradition. Right and wrong. You can all argue till you're blue in the face. The simple fact that 'Yes' is winning due to the fact that most children using this site and this thread are in favour of it means nothing in the real world.... Realistically every word we've typed means nothing. Sad isnt it? 'No' is just as 'right' as 'yes'. Its true in everyday life.... who are you to say that black is black and white is white? My white may be your black and vice versa....

I think we're all wrong... I also think we're all right. For the sake of stability and because I believe I am right on a smaller scale, 'No' should win this debate in the end.... I really hope it does.

MoonlightSonata:
I understand your arguements but as i've said in this post, the arguements against gay marriages is quasi-subjective. In my opinion, they have a mental illness brought on through conditioning of the family unit, of the individual's social circles of any aspect of the individual's life.

Researchers would touch the subject tentatively or not at all due to the fact that people may not like to be told that your feelings are a result of mental instability.... However, I understand that it was removed from the list of mental illnesses... but perhaps that was more of a political move than anything else?

I reserve my right to have an opinion, if you wish to discuss this further please PM me or contact me via email at twistedd86@ozemail.com.au or twistedd_@hotmail.com. Thank you.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

While I have not been -particularly- active of late... I wish to let it be known that this is the last time I will appear in this thread.

I concede that the arguements against gay marriage is based in tradition. It is based in quasi-subjective, emotional, majority-rules reasoning.

Thankyou for conceding that the reasons against gay marriage are groundless. I agree.

I alledge that the arguements for it are just as flawed.

Because? You really ought to back uo your claims with actual arguments. Maybe you haven't been reading everything, but to sum up very briefly:
1. Treating people equally is the right thing to do, unless there is a reason not to
2. Banning gay marriages is not treating people equally

Too much time is spent mulling over how it should be, how it could be... how it is NOT. Change is not always necessary, prove that it has ever been positive. You CANNOT prove beyond any doubt that change has EVER been positive.

I believe its completely the opposite actually. Not enough time is spent mulling over how it should be.

Religion and tradition. Right and wrong. You can all argue till you're blue in the face. The simple fact that 'Yes' is winning due to the fact that most children using this site and this thread are in favour of it means nothing in the real world.... Realistically every word we've typed means nothing. Sad isnt it? 'No' is just as 'right' as 'yes'. Its true in everyday life.... who are you to say that black is black and white is white? My white may be your black and vice versa....

I think we're all wrong... I also think we're all right. For the sake of stability and because I believe I am right on a smaller scale, 'No' should win this debate in the end.... I really hope it does.

'No' is just as 'right' as 'yes'? We're all right and wrong? The reason we're using logic in this debate is to produce logical proofs that constitute a valid argument. Those monumentally nebulous and paradoxical expressions you just made don't make any sense.

In my opinion, they have a mental illness brought on through conditioning of the family unit, of the individual's social circles of any aspect of the individual's life.

Researchers would touch the subject tentatively or not at all due to the fact that people may not like to be told that your feelings are a result of mental instability.... However, I understand that it was removed from the list of mental illnesses... but perhaps that was more of a political move than anything else?

What a wonderfully groundless speculation. But to reply, no, it is not an ilness, as I've mentioned before. In the psychological community the DSM IV is the authority on mental disorders. There is good reason to appeal to it, and your replies are simply reiterations of "well, I disagree," without any argument to back them up.

 

[poloktim]

The thing is.... life is not fair... not at all. Sometimes I wish I could walk naked in public... hey... fuck clothes.... i'd save money. No, i'd be arrested. I'd insult people, so its against the law. I figure this marriage thing insults some people, it affects some people.

If life is not fair, then shouldn't more time be spent to remedy this? Even if, as Generator said, humanity hasn't progressed as much as people think, should we not be heading down the progression path, constantly moving forward?

It affects me because of my parental situation. It affects me because gay people make me uncomfortable (No, not because I have problems with my sexuality but rather because gays have not treated me well in the past... dont understand? read back... way back.). Do I see what I have, live with what I have for NOTHING? Its not just me, it is many many people who should value marriage more than you obviously do. Okay, more control now .

While that may have made you uncomfortable, think about this. Have you had bad experiences with women? Other blokes (like bashings and such)? Do you feel uncomfortable around the entire group of those people, or do you realise when it comes to those groups, that each person is different? Instead of brand an entire minority as evil, why don't take each person as they are, that unique person, and not some sick weirdo who likes the same thing s/he is?
Obviously I'm not going to argue whether or not you're uncomfortable, there's a definitive answer there. You are. I asked the above to hopefully let you know that homosexuals, like all of us, have unique qualities in every person. We're all different. There's no point branding an entire group as evil.

None of you have a say. It is up to the politicians. It is up to the lawmakers. It is not up to us.

I think this is a "you can't do anything, so quit your crying" argument.

Too much time is spent mulling over how it should be, how it could be... how it is NOT. Change is not always necessary, prove that it has ever been positive. You CANNOT prove beyond any doubt that change has EVER been positive.

Change is just that, change. Without it, we wouldn't have the wheel, or fire, and so we wouldn't be where we are today. We could be somewhere far better, or extinct. We change because it's human nature, it's the basis of our existance. We grow up, we physically change, puberty hits and we physically change again, but also hit a huge psychological changing point, as we grow old, we change again. We change, so we change our environment to fit. Not allowing change is against our nature. It's not possible.

Religion and tradition. Right and wrong. You can all argue till you're blue in the face. The simple fact that 'Yes' is winning due to the fact that most children using this site and this thread are in favour of it means nothing in the real world.... Realistically every word we've typed means nothing. Sad isnt it? 'No' is just as 'right' as 'yes'. Its true in everyday life.... who are you to say that black is black and white is white? My white may be your black and vice versa....

I think we're all wrong... I also think we're all right. For the sake of stability and because I believe I am right on a smaller scale, 'No' should win this debate in the end.... I really hope it does.

I don't really see anyone winning this debate. If we can get our points across to each other, and what's being said is understood, that's a win. Same for the other side. You can't force change people's opinions. Using religion as an argument will definately not contribute to the changing of an athiest's, or someone anti-religion's opinion.

Why do you think you're right? You have an uncomfort with homosexual people, so you wish to treat them as epsilons? There are many, many things that I don't like (I'm a bitter person), should people who practice those be treated as epsilons too?

MoonlightSonata:
I understand your arguements but as i've said in this post, the arguements against gay marriages is quasi-subjective. In my opinion, they have a mental illness brought on through conditioning of the family unit, of the individual's social circles of any aspect of the individual's life.

Researchers would touch the subject tentatively or not at all due to the fact that people may not like to be told that your feelings are a result of mental instability.... However, I understand that it was removed from the list of mental illnesses... but perhaps that was more of a political move than anything else?

You'll disagree with a medical authority on mental illness without supporting your disagreement? It may be your opinion, but still, as MS put it, groundless speculation. If you wish to argue that matter further, provide me with material to support your case.

I reserve my right to have an opinion, if you wish to discuss this further please PM me or contact me via email at twistedd86@ozemail.com.au or twistedd_@hotmail.com. Thank you.

I have.

 

[eviltama]

I concede that the arguements against gay marriage is based in tradition. It is based in quasi-subjective, emotional, majority-rules reasoning.

I alledge that the arguements for it are just as flawed.

Thats nice. Criticise our arguments one by one before making a generalised statement. We manage to give you that courtesy before we go and make rash statements like that.

Why have gays marry? Do they need to marry? You could ask the same of heterosexual couples.

Please, do go ask some heterosexuals what made them marry. Then go approach some homosexuals and ask them why they want to marry (or would marry if they could). I doubt the answers will differ much.

I suppose they have the choice.... So it boils down to choice, having the ability to, if you want to do this then you have the opportunity to do it. The thing is.... life is not fair... not at all. Sometimes I wish I could walk naked in public... hey... fuck clothes.... i'd save money. No, i'd be arrested. I'd insult people, so its against the law. I figure this marriage thing insults some people, it affects some people.

Yes, it is choice. Heterosexuals HAVE a choice. Homosexuals don't. Heterosexuals can go get married, Homosexuals can't. As for life being fair.. what fun would it be if life were fair? Hrm.. It would be boring and well a plain shit hole really. Now about this insulting 'some people', i figure (using ur way of so called logic) that because idiots insult me that idiots also insult 'some people' and affect those 'some people'.. unfortunately it doesn't mean i can go masscre them or deprive them of things.. I also figure that heterosexuals seem to insult people, so do bisexuals, and transexuals and homosexuals, and pan sexuals... thing is all of those affect 'some people' but it doesn't mean that because of any of it that we can divide our laws or our government into sections to create law just to deal with them.

It affects me because of my parental situation. It affects me because gay people make me uncomfortable (No, not because I have problems with my sexuality but rather because gays have not treated me well in the past... dont understand? read back... way back.). Do I see what I have, live with what I have for NOTHING? Its not just me, it is many many people who should value marriage more than you obviously do. Okay, more control now .

Dude your parental situation is your own, your feelings about 'gay people' are also your own. Deal with them and get over it. There are many, many, many worse off people in this world who speak no word of complaint. I don't whine about my dealings in the past with certain members of 'society', i deal with them and i also deal with the impact upon my life that they forced on me. Deal with it, and don't blame one general area of society for something that isn't their fault. Its stupid, its selfish and its only doing you more damage in the long run.

As for those many many people who value marriage i have to ask.... WHAT THE FKN HELL DO YOU THINK HOMOSEXUALS WANT TO BE MARRIED FOR?!?!!!@#$%^$&($!!!?
If they didn't value marriage why the fk would they bother? They would settle for just a civil union or something equally accomodating. I mean fk. Think about it man, use your damned brain for one and think before you write something so stupid.

None of you have a say. It is up to the politicians. It is up to the lawmakers. It is not up to us.

Been through this. It went something along the lines of.... Government meant to reflect the ever changing needs of society, laws meant to reflect society and politicians being the peoples point of first call when asking for reform. Or something to a similar affect... take some time out and read it up.

Change is not always necessary, prove that it has ever been positive. You CANNOT prove beyond any doubt that change has EVER been positive.

Democracy? Republic? Anarchy? Monarchies? Women's Rights? The 1961 Referendum? The Versailles Treaty? The development of the Wheel? The development of electricity? They've all changed the world... but we will never know if things could have been better had they not happened. That is fact. The one thing we do know is that we really dont know.

The simple fact that 'Yes' is winning due to the fact that most children using this site and this thread are in favour of it means nothing in the real world.... Realistically every word we've typed means nothing. Sad isnt it? 'No' is just as 'right' as 'yes'.

I think we're all wrong... I also think we're all right. For the sake of stability and because I believe I am right on a smaller scale, 'No' should win this debate in the end.... I really hope it does.

Change: A new fence
Why: The old one was falling down and hazardous to the health of anyone who happened to be by when it fell apart.
Conclusion: A positive change.
I'm sorry but you are wrong, we know the past and we know the present the only thing we don't know is the future.

Stop being so ridiculously nihilistic, just because you don't want the change you don't think it will be positive. Hell the way you talk is anything positive to you? If the boot was on the other foot... what would this change be then? If one person reads this thread and walks away with a new thought then what we've written here means something, if one person takes the time to consider their opinion a bit closer then what we've written means something... if a whole bunch of people do it then guess what you've just gotten you voice out to 'the masses' as it goes. One voice can be heard and then echoed in many different directions, this is a public forum and people will read and respond to what we write even if they never write themselves... but still they are affected and it matters.. it matters alot.

Mate from the way you talk you aren't stable so don't talk about 'for the sake of stability', what happens happens whether it goes for the conservatives or against them or whether later on down the track changes are still happeneing. But as far as i'm concerned it would be a step backwards in progress if the conservatives get their way, next step to progress hell might as well be making illegal all homosexual acts and gaoling all homosexuals as well as bringing back into practice school prayers and all that bs. Its fkn ridiculous and i really can't see how you lot can honestly believe its right to deny anyone the right to marriage. Fkn ridiculous.

In my opinion, they have a mental illness brought on through conditioning of the family unit, of the individual's social circles of any aspect of the individual's life.

Once again.. fkn ridiculous.

Researchers would touch the subject tentatively or not at all due to the fact that people may not like to be told that your feelings are a result of mental instability....

Parkinsons? Alzihemers? OCPD? Perhaps you should find a list of mental disorders and find out what mental instability means.. then perhaps visit a mental hospital and see what a REAL case of mental instability is.

 

[chookyn]

maybe it would be easier if no-one married...

 

[malkin86]

Perhaps it would be easier if all adults could...

 

[eviltama]

Perhaps make marriage a religious institution governed by the individual churches AND make it a civil marriage.

So you could have the choice to go get married in a church if that particular church allowed homosexual marriages then good-o great, if not find a church who did. Otherwise you could go for a civil marriage which would be all the legal aspects of a marriage but no religious bias and it would allow both homosexual and heterosexual unions.

*shrugs*

 

[vote1latham]

we must maintain life (crap)

i just think that the whole "we must maintain life" excuse is utter crap. gay people are in the minority. can we be really expected to beleive that allowing gay marriages will negate evolution and threaten the future of humanity!!!
nah course not howard ya wanker!

 

[vote1latham]

its inevitable

wow i just realised that you people think way too much about something that is ineviatably going to happen. gay marriages will be included in the law and all you opposers can take your red neck, conservative, old fashioned and draconian ideals and fuck yourselves!

the world is changing and so are the majority of peoples attitudes towards things like this. move with the times twisted d we are not in the 1800's any more. besides you talk of homosexuality as if it is a new thing. not so homosexuality was extremely present in places like ancient egypt and even in the american indians. homosexual indians were revered and treated with high respect!

and as to your statement that homosexuality is a mental disease. where are you pulling these random bullshit facts from. you cant just say something and have it taken as fact (wanker)

not that any of this matters, your conservative creed is dying out. gay marriages will be included in the marriage act and thats the simple fact of the matter.
youll see : )

 

[400miles]

wow i just realised that you people think way too much about something that is ineviatably going to happen. gay marriages will be included in the law and all you opposers can take your red neck, conservative, old fashioned and draconian ideals and fuck yourselves!

Here here!!

 

[vote1latham]

a supporter

so 400 you agree then? am i to count you as a supporter of gay marriages?
get back to me on your opinons

 

[Generator]

so 400 you agree then? am i to count you as a supporter of gay marriages?
get back to me on your opinons

Try reading through the thread...

 

[400miles]

just to save time.. i am a supporter and there are quite a few supporters... my opinion is pretty much that i think they're equal, and at the moment disadvantaged (and shouldnt be) and they're all normal yada yada yada... and they deserve to be treated much better and that society has to wake up to itself and stop oppressing these groups unjustly

 

[BeJay]

vote1latham... u seem to be very "passionate" about this topic...are u planning on being a politician in the future or something? why is this so? do u have a girlfriend by the way? (just wondering)

 

[vote1latham]

flattered

fair go bejay keep it on the low...
i dont need that shit from you of all people... that was low blow.
ALERT bejay is a redneck homophobic yokel STEER CLEAR!!!

haha you crack me up bejay if thats your real name

 

[vote1latham]

moohoohaha

nah nah just kidding. billy jean king

i just hate people that think gay people have a "mental disease" and shouldnt be equal.
such wankers
such rednecks
such idiots

 

[Atticus.]

oooh

oooh bejay and vote1latham keep it down you never know who might get jealous!!!

 

[eviltama]

Australian PM looks to rush through ban on gay marriage
Ben Townley
Gay.com UK
4 August, 2004

Australia's Prime Minister John Howard has said he is keen for laws looking to ban same-sex marriage to be rushed through the country's parliament as early as next week.

Speaking at Parliament House at a forum organised to discuss opposition to allowing gay marriage, Howard said that be making sure the legislation was passed quickly through the parliamentary system, the issue would not become a key discussion point during elections.

The government is expected to call elections for Australia in the autumn, and critics of Howard have already accused him of using the issue of gay marriage to shore up conservative support.

"I think it would be a great pity if this issue were left hanging in an election campaign," the AAP reports Howard as saying at Parliament House earlier today.

"If you put it into law in the next two weeks, nobody can say it's being used as a wedge," he added.

"Everyone can say it's a united expression of the national parliament and therefore the will of the Australian people."

He has also called for opposition parties to support the proposals in parliament to ensure the ban goes through easily.

But it has faced harsh criticism previously.

Carmen Lawrence, a lawmaker opposed to the proposals, was quoted as saying the marriage bill was crafted out of "spite and malice."

"This bill is an appalling abuse of this parliament," he said as the proposals passed through the country's lower house last month.

"I'm frankly one of those people who's very dismayed that our prime minister has stooped so low."

The law will also restrict adoption rights for gay and lesbian people, forbidding same-sex couples from adopting children from overseas.

Visit this article online at http://uk.gay.com/headlines/6647