Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Poll Poll
Question: Do you support gay marriage in Australia?



« Last Modified by: Progs on: Jul 15th, 2007 at 8:16pm »

Pages: 1 
Send Topic Print
GAY MARRIAGE (Read 20956 times)
ozadmin
Senior Member
****
Offline


Hello

Posts: 469
oz
Gender: male
GAY MARRIAGE
Jul 24th, 2007 at 8:49am
 
oops
Back to top
« Last Edit: Aug 2nd, 2007 at 3:42pm by ozadmin »  

The Friendly Administrator.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #1 - Apr 24th, 2007 at 3:47pm
 
This is a good way to solve the gay marriage issue in a way that grants equal rights to gays without upsetting those who like to think they own the term 'marriage.'

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Samesex-register-by-years-end-Bracks/2007/04/24/1177180620708.html

Human rights and same-sex lobby groups have hailed the Victorian government's decision to introduce a register for gay couples before years' end.

Premier Steve Bracks announced that his government would move to introduce similar laws to those in Tasmania, setting up a register for same-sex and de facto couples plus people in long-term care giving relationships.

"It is a register system where you apply through births, deaths and marriages with a statutory declaration for a register for your relationship," Mr Bracks told Southern Cross radio.

"It eases the pressure on continual proof, for example if you have an accident and somebody is in intensive care obviously those proof arrangements are difficult.

"I think this step removes any legal impediments and makes sure the law works equally no matter what your situation."

Couples on the register will receive a proof-of-relationship certificate that will be recognised by government agencies in Victoria and also the courts.

"In Tasmania, unmarried same and opposite-sex couples can access parenting rights in areas like adoption by registering their relationship," Mr Croome said.

"Just as importantly, we urge both the Victorian and Tasmanian Governments to ensure they offer reciprocal recognition to each other's schemes so that registered couples have full spousal entitlements regardless of which side of Bass Strait they reside."

Mr Croome said many same-sex couples in Tasmania had reported increased acceptance from their families following the registering of their relationships.

The Victorian Equal Opportunity and Human Rights Commission described the proposed Victorian register as a critical step in reducing discrimination.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jul 27th, 2007 at 9:26pm by ozadmin »  

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 39430
Gender: male
Re: Victoria gets defacto gay marriages
Reply #2 - Apr 24th, 2007 at 4:11pm
 
Gays make up 1 - 3 % of the population.

Why do they have so much ......... leverage ?
Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Victoria gets defacto gay marriages
Reply #3 - Apr 24th, 2007 at 4:15pm
 
Because it is an equal rights issue, which everybody can empathise with.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Labor backs legal rights for same-sex couples
Reply #4 - Apr 30th, 2007 at 9:32am
 
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/labor-backs-legal-rights-for-samesex-couples/2007/04/28/1177459995793.html

LABOR has backed a national scheme to legally recognise same-sex relationships after a divisive debate at its national conference in which opponents of the scheme warned that it would demean marriage and the family and hurt the party's electoral prospects.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
ex-member DonaldTrump
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Oh mere mortals, open
your eyes!

Posts: 1995
Overseas
Gender: male
Re: Victoria gets defacto gay marriages
Reply #5 - May 1st, 2007 at 2:35am
 
Man... I hate Steve Bracks.
Back to top
 

Quote:
Tolerance is the virtue of men who no longer believe in anything
&&-- G.K. Chesterton
 
IP Logged
 
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 39430
Gender: male
Re: Victoria gets defacto gay marriages
Reply #6 - May 1st, 2007 at 10:52am
 
Equal rights.

Yes, we all deserve equal rights.

Some deserve rights more equal than others.   Smiley

(A partial quote from "Animal farm" )
Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Govt may change gay pension laws
Reply #7 - Jul 12th, 2007 at 7:57pm
 
http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Govt-may-change-gay-pension-laws/2007/07/12/1183833673968.html

The federal government has held talks with gay activists to discuss changing the law to give same-sex couples the same rights as heterosexual couples.

The meeting comes after High Court judge Michael Kirby asked Attorney-General Philip Ruddock to change the judicial pension scheme so his long-term partner Johan van Vloten is treated the same as the spouse of a heterosexual judge.

Justice Kirby's case has highlighted the conclusion of a report by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission that more than 20,000 gay Australian couples face systematic discrimination on a daily basis.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
ex-member DonaldTrump
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Oh mere mortals, open
your eyes!

Posts: 1995
Overseas
Gender: male
Re: Govt may change gay pension laws
Reply #8 - Jul 13th, 2007 at 12:06am
 
freediver wrote on Jul 12th, 2007 at 7:57pm:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Govt-may-change-gay-pension-laws/2007/07/12/1183833673968.html

The federal government has held talks with gay activists to discuss changing the law to give same-sex couples the same rights as heterosexual couples.

The meeting comes after High Court judge Michael Kirby asked Attorney-General Philip Ruddock to change the judicial pension scheme so his long-term partner Johan van Vloten is treated the same as the spouse of a heterosexual judge.

Justice Kirby's case has highlighted the conclusion of a report by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission that more than 20,000 gay Australian couples face systematic discrimination on a daily basis.


Sickening. I don't mind gays THAT much.... but that's just sick. Why are people pushing this krap forward?
Back to top
 

Quote:
Tolerance is the virtue of men who no longer believe in anything
&&-- G.K. Chesterton
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Victoria gets defacto gay marriages
Reply #9 - Jul 13th, 2007 at 10:36am
 
How are equal rights sickening? How would you even notice if they got these rights?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
mantra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


ozpolitic.com

Posts: 10750
Gender: female
Re: Victoria gets defacto gay marriages
Reply #10 - Jul 13th, 2007 at 12:37pm
 
It's terrible the way gays have been vilified over the past few years.  For so long they fought for their rights - they get them and now a change of government is eliminating them.

Justice Kirby has a point - why should his pension just disappear into thin air when all the other judges who die can leave their lucrative pension to their wives.  He's been in a relationship for many years and worked hard for his money, so why isn't his "spouse" entitled to it - like any other spouse?

Spouse means - husband, wife, partner or mate.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
oceanz
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Auzgurl..

Posts: 3531
Gender: female
the right to have children
Reply #11 - Jul 13th, 2007 at 3:11pm
 
Do gay men have the right to have children in Australia..just wondering?


In America they do.

Im wondering if gay men having children in theyre care is in the best interest of the child.!

By that I mean school peers not understanding and confused gender roles as they grow to adulthood.
Back to top
 

&&Jade Rawlings on Cousins " He makes our team walk taller..a very good team man , Ben Cousins"
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Victoria gets defacto gay marriages
Reply #12 - Jul 13th, 2007 at 3:24pm
 
It depends on what you mean by 'have.'
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Classic Liberal
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 769
sydney
Gender: male
Re: Victoria gets defacto gay marriages
Reply #13 - Jul 13th, 2007 at 5:17pm
 
i dont know whgat all the complaining is about, gay people have the same marriage rights as everyone else, a gay man can marry any woman he wants Cheesy.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
oceanz
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Auzgurl..

Posts: 3531
Gender: female
Re: Victoria gets defacto gay marriages
Reply #14 - Jul 13th, 2007 at 8:20pm
 
freediver wrote on Jul 13th, 2007 at 3:24pm:
It depends on what you mean by 'have.'



I guess i mean..is it appropriate for gay men to have children in theyre care?

many pple dont agree with it..I guess there are reasons.


Soem gay men use surrogacy to have a baby. This somehow doesnt seem right to me.

For lots of different reasons
Back to top
 

&&Jade Rawlings on Cousins " He makes our team walk taller..a very good team man , Ben Cousins"
 
IP Logged
 
ex-member DonaldTrump
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Oh mere mortals, open
your eyes!

Posts: 1995
Overseas
Gender: male
Re: Victoria gets defacto gay marriages
Reply #15 - Jul 13th, 2007 at 8:59pm
 
WHY do they want to be recognised as a legal couple? Isn't their so-called 'love' good enough? 

There's nothing normal about being gay... it's a mental disorder


Like I said... I dont mind gay people... I find them to be polite and nice people. But ones that want the same rights as a man and woman make me sick. Why do they need kids and to get married? If you want that... marry a smacking woman.


Quote:
How are equal rights sickening? How would you even notice if they got these rights?


Because 2 men are not equal to a man and a woman. Simple as that, freediver. bugger your version of equal rights. You're as bad as Paul Keating with his dictionary definitions.
Back to top
 

Quote:
Tolerance is the virtue of men who no longer believe in anything
&&-- G.K. Chesterton
 
IP Logged
 
oceanz
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Auzgurl..

Posts: 3531
Gender: female
Re: Victoria gets defacto gay marriages
Reply #16 - Jul 13th, 2007 at 9:36pm
 
Quote:
Because 2 men are not equal to a man and a woman. Simple as that, freediver. bugger your version of equal rights. You're as bad as Paul Keating with his dictionary definitions


lol DT.
Back to top
 

&&Jade Rawlings on Cousins " He makes our team walk taller..a very good team man , Ben Cousins"
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Victoria gets defacto gay marriages
Reply #17 - Jul 14th, 2007 at 9:50am
 
WHY do they want to be recognised as a legal couple? Isn't their so-called 'love' good enough?

For financial reasons mostly. Also to be recognosed as a co-carer if one of them has a biological child.

Because 2 men are not equal to a man and a woman. Simple as that, freediver.

They aren't asking for vaginas DT, they are asking for equal access to each other's pension, stuff like that. They aren't asking to be the same, they are asking for legal recognition of those aspects of their lives that are the same.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Progs
Junior Member
**
Offline



Posts: 68
Port Stephens, NSW
Gender: male
Umm... Do you support gay marriage?
Reply #18 - Jul 15th, 2007 at 8:13pm
 
I realise this could be an uncomfortable question for the...uh... more conservative among us, but do try.

I personally don't support gay marriage, in my view marriage was meant for between a man and a woman. But I do support a civil union type arrangement.

edit....
Guests are more than welcome to vote.
Back to top
 

An Aussie for Progressive Progressivness.
 
IP Logged
 
Aussie Nationalist
Ex Member
*****



Gender: male
Re: Umm... Do you support gay marriage?
Reply #19 - Jul 15th, 2007 at 8:35pm
 
HELL NO
Back to top
 
Total anti-marxist and anti-left wing. The Right is Right.&&&&&&
 
IP Logged
 
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 39430
Gender: male
Re: Umm... Do you support gay marriage?
Reply #20 - Jul 15th, 2007 at 8:46pm
 
I have no problems with a formal agreement amongst gays.

prob a good idea if it affords them more stability, a framework to base future decisions and events on.

must be hard living a secret life. A guy at work came out a while ago, he was a real pest for a while with his new found "freedom". 
Seems to me most gays are not happy people ??

Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
ex-member DonaldTrump
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Oh mere mortals, open
your eyes!

Posts: 1995
Overseas
Gender: male
Re: Umm... Do you support gay marriage?
Reply #21 - Jul 15th, 2007 at 9:33pm
 
No.

They should have no legal recognition as a couple, nor in marriage. That's just like me and a mate getting recognised as a couple.
Back to top
 

Quote:
Tolerance is the virtue of men who no longer believe in anything
&&-- G.K. Chesterton
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Umm... Do you support gay marriage?
Reply #22 - Jul 16th, 2007 at 11:34am
 
Yes they should get legal recognotion. I don't care whether it's called marriage or civil union and I doubt most gay couples do either. The state is the only organisation that can claim 'ownership' of the term. Churches cannot claim ownership of it, nor a right to define it. That is too much interference by the church in government.

That's just like me and a mate getting recognised as a couple.

If you formed a loving pair bond and lived together, sharing all expenses and wanting each other to have legal rights that normally only family would, then you pretty much would be a gay couple - just not having sex.

Would you like me to splice these two threads?

Victoria gets defacto gay marriages: http://ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1177393639
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Classic Liberal
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 769
sydney
Gender: male
Re: Umm... Do you support gay marriage?
Reply #23 - Jul 16th, 2007 at 4:18pm
 
i third dt's and ausnats statements.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
mantra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


ozpolitic.com

Posts: 10750
Gender: female
Re: Umm... Do you support gay marriage?
Reply #24 - Jul 16th, 2007 at 6:14pm
 
Quote:
If you formed a loving pair bond and lived together, sharing all expenses and wanting each other to have legal rights that normally only family would, then you pretty much would be a gay couple - just not having sex


I agree - gays have had their rights stripped away.  If a partner is dying in hospital, the other partner can't even give permission for medical treatment and they are not recognised legally in many areas of life.

Many gays are very lonely men and those who are able to form a bond with another man should be given full recognition as a spouse.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
ex-member DonaldTrump
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Oh mere mortals, open
your eyes!

Posts: 1995
Overseas
Gender: male
Re: Umm... Do you support gay marriage?
Reply #25 - Jul 16th, 2007 at 6:21pm
 
mantra wrote on Jul 16th, 2007 at 6:14pm:
Quote:
If you formed a loving pair bond and lived together, sharing all expenses and wanting each other to have legal rights that normally only family would, then you pretty much would be a gay couple - just not having sex


I agree - gays have had their rights stripped away.  If a partner is dying in hospital, the other partner can't even give permission for medical treatment and they are not recognised legally in many areas of life.

Many gays are very lonely men and those who are able to form a bond with another man should be given full recognition as a spouse.


Who cares? If they're lonely they should date women.

And who cares if they aren't recognised as a legal couple? Only they do.

Being gay is just to satisfy sexual urges etc...  a sickness of the mind.
Back to top
 

Quote:
Tolerance is the virtue of men who no longer believe in anything
&&-- G.K. Chesterton
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Umm... Do you support gay marriage?
Reply #26 - Jul 16th, 2007 at 6:26pm
 
And who cares if they aren't recognised as a legal couple? Only they do.

If they care and you don't, why not let them have what they want? Denying something to another person when it would cost you nothing is not a good sign.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
cautious connie
Full Member
***
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 215
Re: Umm... Do you support gay marriage?
Reply #27 - Jul 16th, 2007 at 6:29pm
 
I voted yes, but I am unsure whether it should be marriage or civil union. I can't see why a gay couple living like a married couple shouldn't  have similar rights and responsibilities if they want them.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
cautious connie
Full Member
***
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 215
Re: Umm... Do you support gay marriage?
Reply #28 - Jul 16th, 2007 at 6:36pm
 
"Being gay is just to satisfy sexual urges etc...  a sickness of the mind."

That is a very negative view of it. Is being heterosexual equally sick? I must admit the promiscuousness and casual sexness of some people  living the gay lifestyle I find sickening, but it would be sickening to see heterosexuals having multiple casual sex contacts in public toilets also - just degrading of their and our humanity.

The promiscuous gay lifestyle is generally confined to a segment of the male gay population anyway (I am unsure of the size of the segment) and is atypical in female gay people.

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
ex-member DonaldTrump
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Oh mere mortals, open
your eyes!

Posts: 1995
Overseas
Gender: male
Re: Umm... Do you support gay marriage?
Reply #29 - Jul 16th, 2007 at 6:46pm
 
Quote:
And who cares if they aren't recognised as a legal couple? Only they do.

If they care and you don't, why not let them have what they want? Denying something to another person when it would cost you nothing is not a good sign.


I'll accept the union under a few conditions...

1) It's in name only.
2) The taxpayer doesn't have to pay anything extra as a result of this union.
3) They don't get a marriage.
4) They don't show it in public. No kissing... no holding hands. Etc etc.
5) They don't make the union 'religious' in any way. Just a signing of a paper... etc.
6) They don't get any special priveleges.

If they just want acknowledgement... whatever... give them a certificate. But it shouldn't affect the rest of us. Sorry if I'm benig fascist... but I'm just being honest.

Poofters alone don't bother me... it's two poofters together that bother me.


Quote:
That is a very negative view of it. Is being heterosexual equally sick? I must admit the promiscuousness and casual sexness of some people  living the gay lifestyle I find sickening, but it would be sickening to see heterosexuals having multiple casual sex contacts in public toilets also - just degrading of their and our humanity. 

The promiscuous gay lifestyle is generally confined to a segment of the male gay population anyway (I am unsure of the size of the segment) and is atypical in female gay people.


But it is a sickness of the mind connie... sorry... but it is.... for both men and women.

We're built with penises and vaginas primarily for pro-creation. If you prefer sticking it up a guys bum and HATE women.... then quite frankly... you're sick-minded. Sorry. I can't see that any other way.

As far as their choice of lifestyle goes... I don't care so long as it doesn't directly affect me. In the privacy of their own homes... away from us normal people.
Back to top
 

Quote:
Tolerance is the virtue of men who no longer believe in anything
&&-- G.K. Chesterton
 
IP Logged
 
mantra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


ozpolitic.com

Posts: 10750
Gender: female
Re: Umm... Do you support gay marriage?
Reply #30 - Jul 16th, 2007 at 7:06pm
 
I know your post wasn't meant to be funny DT but it made me laugh anyway.  You sound just like my son.  My daughter gets on with gay males and enjoys their company.  She has a few close gay boys as friends who are very good to her.

You have to wonder why so many males - particularly the younger ones - are so against gay males.  Older gays seem to disappear into the woodwork, but the younger ones are very insecure and are subject to a lot of ridicule.  They want to have young friends of both sexes too - yet they are constantly rejected by their own sex.  Is it fear that makes young heterosexual males think that a gay boy wants to come onto them?

Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: Umm... Do you support gay marriage?
Reply #31 - Jul 16th, 2007 at 7:08pm
 
If they just want acknowledgement... whatever... give them a certificate.

You are missing the point DT. They don't want a hollow acknowledgment, they want equal rights under the law. It would not have a significant effect on anyone else. If you don't like seeing them in public, that's your problem not theirs. Get over it.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
ex-member DonaldTrump
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Oh mere mortals, open
your eyes!

Posts: 1995
Overseas
Gender: male
Re: Umm... Do you support gay marriage?
Reply #32 - Jul 16th, 2007 at 7:22pm
 
freediver wrote on Jul 16th, 2007 at 7:08pm:
If they just want acknowledgement... whatever... give them a certificate.You are missing the point DT. They don't want a hollow acknowledgment, they want equal rights under the law.


Well that's MY point, freediver, they shouldn't be allowed. It IS affecting me.


Quote:
It would not have a significant effect on anyone else.


Would it give them more cash?


Quote:
If you don't like seeing them in public, that's your problem not theirs. Get over it.


Yeah... I'm sure you'd love two guys holding hands and getting it on in public freediver.  That's why you want it so much.  Grin

I for one, like many other males... don't want to see it. We'd see them as 'equals' just so-long as they'd keep it behind closed doors. Until then... they'll forever be seen as outsiders. Guys having sex with guys are by no means equal... and should not be recognised as so.


Quote:
My daughter gets on with gay males and enjoys their company.  She has a few close gay boys as friends who are very good to her.


Does your daughter have many lesbian friends?  Roll Eyes

Thought not.
Back to top
 

Quote:
Tolerance is the virtue of men who no longer believe in anything
&&-- G.K. Chesterton
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Gay sex okay at Pacific Games: officials
Reply #33 - Jul 16th, 2007 at 7:29pm
 
Would it give them more cash?

Maybe. But it would mean that a gay man on the dole would have to list his partner as an income source. Not sure whether it would increase or decrease the amount of money overall. In any case, that is not a valid reason for denying someone fair treatment under the law.

It IS affecting me.

Gay marriage wouldn't. You wouldn't even notice. Public displays of affection might, but that is a different issue and it is your problem anyway.



http://www.smh.com.au/news/Sport/Gay-sex-okay-at-Pacific-Games-officials/2007/07/19/1184559924575.html

South Pacific Games officials in Samoa have overruled a ban on the country's gay competitors at the event having sex.

Team Samoa management issued a memo to its athletes and officials banning them from engaging in gay or lesbian sex at the games, which start in Apia on August 25.

The Samoa Observer newspaper recently published the full text of the memo, issued on June 20.

"Do not embarrass yourself, your family and your country by trying this in the village," the memo reads in a section on gay relationships.

"Best not to even think about this. It's against the law of God!" it says.

Homosexuality is illegal in Samoa, with a penalty for indecency between males of up to five years' jail.

South Pacific Games organising committee chairman, Tapasu Leung Wai, told AAP his country did not discriminate against anybody.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jul 19th, 2007 at 5:34pm by freediver »  

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 39430
Gender: male
Re: Umm... Do you support gay marriage?
Reply #34 - Jul 24th, 2007 at 8:49am
 
Judge strips mum of custody because she's a lesbianArticle from: Agence France-PresseFont size: Decrease Increase Email article: Email Print article: Print From correspondents in Madrid
July 24, 2007 06:38am

A JUDGE in Spain has stripped a mother of custody of her two daughters because she is a lesbian, the media said today, in a ruling that has sparked an outcry in the gay community and brought disciplinary action against him.

In a ruling last month in the south-east region of Murcia, Judge Fernando Ferrin handed the girls over to their father's care, saying a homosexual environment threatened their education and upbringing.

He said a gay environment increased the "risk" that the children would also grow up homosexual.

"The mother has to choose between her daughters and the new partner," Judge Ferrin was quoted as saying in his June 6 ruling which has just come to light.

The decision provoked outrage among Spain's gay community, which said it ran contrary to the constitution, and prompted Murcia's Supreme Court to open disciplinary proceedings against Judge Ferrin.

The same judge, in a separate case, already faces a probe into attempts to block the adoption of a girl by her mother's gay partner.

Homosexuals in Spain benefit from some of Europe's most liberal gay rights legislation following decades of repression, including imprisonment, under conservative dictator Francisco Franco.

Homosexuality was legalised in 1979 and two years ago the Socialist government made Spain only the third country in the world to legalise gay marriage.


http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,22124972-954,00.html

This view was bought by by others here. Pretty valid point.

Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Entsch to hand PM gay rights petition
Reply #35 - Aug 8th, 2007 at 8:03pm
 
http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Entsch-to-hand-PM-gay-rights-petition/2007/08/08/1186530437155.html

Queensland federal Liberal MP Warren Entsch will present Prime Minister John Howard with a petition signed by 25,000 people which calls for an end to discrimination against same-sex couples.

The petition addressed to Mr Howard and Opposition Leader Kevin Rudd reads: "Same-sex couples should have the same legal rights as de facto heterosexual couples.

"It shows that support for removal of financial and legal discrimination is very significant and I'll be taking to the PM," he said.

"He already says he doesn't support discrimination and the HREOC report shows there's a way forward," Mr Entsch said.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
First gay couple adopt in WA
Reply #36 - Jun 14th, 2007 at 1:10pm
 
http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/First-gay-couple-adopt-in-WA/2007/06/14/1181414432133.html

The legal adoption of a child by a gay couple in Western Australia, believed to be Australia's first, has been hailed as "groundbreaking" by the state government.

The adoption by the two men follows 2002's changes to the state adoption act.

He said some people would find the decision to let a gay couple adopt challenging.

But the minister said the child's best interests were considered.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
AusNat
Ex Member
*****



Gender: male
Re: First gay couple adopt in WA
Reply #37 - Jun 14th, 2007 at 2:03pm
 
Now ive got the runs. that is so wrong. think of the poor kid, he/she is going to grow up tormented, and possibly sexually abused.
Back to top
 
Total anti-marxist and anti-left wing. The Right is Right.&&&&&&
 
IP Logged
 
ex-member DonaldTrump
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Oh mere mortals, open
your eyes!

Posts: 1995
Overseas
Gender: male
Re: First gay couple adopt in WA
Reply #38 - Jun 14th, 2007 at 4:41pm
 
*Shakes head*

Do those f@gs realise that they're going to mess up the poor kids mentality?

Dark day in Australia.  Smiley
Back to top
 

Quote:
Tolerance is the virtue of men who no longer believe in anything
&&-- G.K. Chesterton
 
IP Logged
 
AusNat
Ex Member
*****



Gender: male
Re: First gay couple adopt in WA
Reply #39 - Jun 14th, 2007 at 8:25pm
 
ex-member DonaldTrump wrote on Jun 14th, 2007 at 4:41pm:
*Shakes head*

Do those f@gs realise that they're going to mess up the poor kids mentality?

Dark day in Australia.  Smiley



C'mon mate drop the Political correctness.

The kid(s) are screwed (literally) and its a crime to allow the mentally ill to ''own'' kids.


Dark day in Australia?  It will get worse DT.
Back to top
 
Total anti-marxist and anti-left wing. The Right is Right.&&&&&&
 
IP Logged
 
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 39430
Gender: male
Re: First gay couple adopt in WA
Reply #40 - Jun 14th, 2007 at 8:31pm
 
It did say the childs best interests were taken into account.
While I am not greatly pleased by it, it may be the best resolution.

Kids are best bought up by a man and a woman I believe.
Perhaps the mum is a drug addict or dead or mental ?
perhaps the two gays are .... stable.
Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
oceanz
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Auzgurl..

Posts: 3531
Gender: female
Re: First gay couple adopt in WA
Reply #41 - Jun 14th, 2007 at 8:40pm
 
Sprintcyclist wrote on Jun 14th, 2007 at 8:31pm:
It did say the childs best interests were taken into account.
While I am not greatly pleased by it, it may be the best resolution.

Kids are best bought up by a man and a woman I believe.
Perhaps the mum is a drug addict or dead or mental ?
perhaps the two gays are .... stable.  



The voice if reason Sprint..good to see.
Back to top
 

&&Jade Rawlings on Cousins " He makes our team walk taller..a very good team man , Ben Cousins"
 
IP Logged
 
cautious connie(Guest)
Guest


Re: First gay couple adopt in WA
Reply #42 - Jun 15th, 2007 at 6:33am
 
A very difficult thing to form an opinion on.  On the one hand there is a discrimination against gay people issue involved if this couple are decent people and were not allowed to adopt a child. On the other is that the affects of gay couple parenting on a child are not, as I understand it, well-known.

We also do not know what information was considered by those making this decision and what knowledge they have that we don't.

I believe the child's interest is what should be of  primary importance as the child is more vulnerable and has more maturing to do than the adult(s). I also believe it possible for some gay couples to parent effectively. BUT, does discrimination in our community mean the child of such a couple will have a very difficult time?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 39430
Gender: male
Re: First gay couple adopt in WA
Reply #43 - Jun 15th, 2007 at 8:54am
 
yes, the kid would be much better off with normal parents. Much better.

Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
cautious connie(Guest)
Guest


Re: First gay couple adopt in WA
Reply #44 - Jun 15th, 2007 at 8:58am
 
But what if one of the parents is the child's natural father and already has a relationship with the child established? What if the child already lives with the couple? We don't know the details.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
AusNat
Ex Member
*****



Gender: male
Re: First gay couple adopt in WA
Reply #45 - Jun 16th, 2007 at 2:32pm
 
What about the mental anguish the kid will experience?
Back to top
 
Total anti-marxist and anti-left wing. The Right is Right.&&&&&&
 
IP Logged
 
Classic Liberal
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 769
sydney
Gender: male
Re: First gay couple adopt in WA
Reply #46 - Jun 16th, 2007 at 6:25pm
 
what ever this politically correct world says we all know that in reality a single mum or dad is better than two gays for a kids mental stability and life in the future.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Religious groups lead gay pride parade
Reply #47 - Jun 25th, 2007 at 11:17am
 
http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Religious-groups-lead-gay-pride-parade/2007/06/25/1182623773918.html

Religious groups including Christians, Jews and Buddhists led the New York gay pride parade, lending gravity to the often outrageous event that celebrates the night patrons of a gay bar in Manhattan resisted a police raid.

"We stand for a progressive religious voice," said Rabbi Sharon Kleinbaum of New York City's Congregation Beth Simchat Torah.

"Those who use religion to advocate an anti-gay agenda I believe are blaspheming God's name."
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
skeptic
Full Member
***
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 188
Re: Religious groups lead gay pride parade
Reply #48 - Jun 25th, 2007 at 11:24am
 
freediver wrote on Jun 25th, 2007 at 11:17am:
"Those who use religion to advocate an anti-gay agenda I believe are blaspheming God's name."


that's a weird statement to come from a Rabbi, as far as i'm aware all religions refer to homosexuality as an "abomination" in their holy scriptures. So how is following God's teachings blasphemy? i reckon it would be those saying homosexuality is okay that would be guilty of blasphemy as they are going against God's teachings.

basically, homosexuality is unnatural, as mankind require a male & female to have children to ensure the continued existence of the species. Put it this way, if we were all gay, then the entire human race would die out pretty quickly.

to quote Rev Fred Nile "God created Adam & Eve, not Adam & Steve".
that nicely sums it up.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
US Lutherans to allow gay pastors
Reply #49 - Aug 12th, 2007 at 10:45am
 
http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/US-Lutherans-to-allow-gay-pastors/2007/08/12/1186857316576.html

Homosexual Lutheran clergy who are in sexual relationships will be able to serve as pastors, the largest US Lutheran body said.

The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) passed a resolution at its annual assembly urging bishops to refrain from disciplining pastors who are in "faithful committed same-gender relationships".

The resolution passed by a vote of 538-431.

"The church ... has just said 'Do not do punishments'," said Phil Soucy, spokesman for Lutherans Concerned, a gay-lesbian rights group within the church. "That is huge."

The ELCA, which has 4.8 million members, had previously allowed gays to serve as pastors so long as they abstained from sexual relations.



Italians protest at anti-gay outburst

http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/Italians-protest-at-antigay-outburst/2007/08/12/1186857316586.html

Hundreds of Italians protested in the northern Italian city of Treviso after the city's deputy mayor called for the "ethnic cleansing" of homosexuals from the area.

The protesters gathered outside city hall to demand Giancarlo Gentilini's resignation, some wearing pink triangles like the ones homosexual men had to wear in Nazi concentration camps.



Hundreds march to protest gay marriage ban

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22231315-29277,00.html

HUNDREDS of people marched on Sydney's Town Hall today calling for the Federal Government to legalise same-sex marriages.

Greens senator Kerry Nettle said today's rally, which began at Taylor Square in Sydney's east, marked three years since the Howard government decided against legalising gay marriages.



http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Senate-inquiry-to-examine-boycott-laws/2007/08/16/1186857645359.html

Also on Thursday, Democrats senator Andrew Bartlett failed in an attempt to have a Senate committee examine changes to the migration system as well as laws designed to give same-sex couples equal entitlements.



This is pretty low:

US church liable in funeral protest

http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/US-church-liable-in-funeral-protest/2007/11/01/1193619025335.html

A US jury ordered an anti-gay Kansas church to pay $US10.9 million ($A11.7 million) in damages to relatives of a US Marine who died in Iraq after church members cheered his death at his funeral.

Church members said Lance Corporal Matthew Snyder's death was God's punishment of America for tolerating homosexuality. They attended his 2006 funeral in Maryland with signs saying "You're going to hell" and "God hates you".

The federal jury determined the Westboro Baptist Church, based in Topeka, and three of its principals invaded the privacy of the dead man's family and inflicted emotional distress.

The jury awarded Snyder's family $US2.9 million ($A3.11 million) in compensatory damages plus $US8 million ($A8.59 million) in punitive damages in the first civil suit against the church, which has demonstrated at 300 military funerals the past two years.

The lawsuit said church websites vilified US soldiers, accusing them of being indoctrinated by "fag propaganda".

"I hope it's enough to deter them from doing this to other families. It was not about the money. It was about getting them to stop," said Snyder, of York, Pennsylvania.



Govt pledges super for same sex couples

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Govt-pledges-super-for-same-sex-couples/2007/11/08/1194329357864.html

A re-elected coalition government would change superannuation laws to allow same-sex couples access to payouts if one partner dies.

Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull made the promise at a Sydney Gay and Lesbian Business Association dinner on Wednesday night, but stopped short of committing to abolish 58 laws that the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission has identified as discriminatory, ABC Radio reported.

Opposition frontbencher Tanya Plibersek pledged a Labor government would scrap all 58 laws that discriminate against gay and lesbian people in areas such as tax, pensions and Medicare.

"I believe that there are absolutely vast differences between the government and Labor on this issue," she said.

Mr Turnbull holds his seat of Wentworth by just 2.5 per cent. The electorate takes in the route of the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras.



Gay couples 'deserve equal treatment'

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Gay-couples-deserve-equal-treatment/2007/12/02/1196530462124.html

Newly elected Liberal leader Brendan Nelson says he supports equal economic and social rights for gay couples - but not marriage, adoption or IVF.

Dr Nelson said on Sunday gay couples should be treated the same as heterosexuals under Australia's tax and social security laws.

"I realise that there are some people listening to this, watching this, some of them quite conservative perhaps, who feel a little unease about this," he told ABC television.

"Our challenge is to say to ourselves, how would I feel if that were me? How would I feel if I had a son or a daughter or a brother or a sister in these arrangements.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Dec 2nd, 2007 at 12:34pm by freediver »  

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Rudd won't veto ACT's same-sex unions
Reply #50 - Dec 6th, 2007 at 4:57pm
 
Rudd won't veto ACT's same-sex unions

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Rudd-wont-veto-ACTs-samesex-unions/2007/12/06/1196812907790.html

The federal government will not step in to veto ACT government plans to legalise same-sex civil unions, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd says.

The territory's last bid to give same-sex couples the same legal recognition as heterosexual couples was disallowed by the Howard government last year, but Mr Rudd pledged to take a different tack.

Mr Rudd said it was Labor policy not to interfere with state and territory legislation.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Labor_Man
New Member
*
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 36
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #51 - Dec 14th, 2007 at 1:31am
 
I'm all for Gay rights, they deserved to be recognized.

Gay Marriage = No

Gay Civil Unions = Yes

Gay Adoption = Still thinking about that one, I think it should be possibly age limited? In a public school, I think there's more of a chance of the kid being vilified. But I'm not totally against it. I'm all for bringing lonely kids out of orphinages etc. (Come to think of it, Do we even have orphanages here? I haven't seen one yet?

Most christians I assosiate with are against it simply because they think it's wrong, (Probably why we're seemingly slowly growing apart)
I'm a christian, but Doesn't the bible preach against segregation?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Lesbian women to get access to IVF
Reply #52 - Dec 14th, 2007 at 6:38pm
 
Lesbian women to get access to IVF

http://news.smh.com.au/lesbian-women-to-get-access-to-ivf/20071214-1h3j.html

Lesbians will be able to access fertility treatment in Victoria in a major breakthrough for gay parenting rights.

The Victorian government will legislate next year to allow single and gay women to use in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) to conceive.

In a major overhaul of parenting laws, surrogacy rules will also be relaxed, giving gay partners - as well as parents of surrogate children - greater parenting rights.

But the government has stopped short of legalising gay adoption as it rewrites the 20-year-old laws.



ACT wants resolution to gay stand-off

http://news.smh.com.au/act-wants-resolution-to-gay-standoff/20080202-1ppi.html

The ACT government has told a gay-rights rally it expects a disagreement with the commonwealth over its plan to allow same-sex civil unions to be resolved by the end of March, but neither side are giving any ground.

The ACT also used the rally to announce plans to give gay couples equal access to parental leave.

Laws that would allow homosexual couples to form civil unions - giving them the same rights as heterosexual de-facto couples - were originally scheduled to be debated in parliament this month, but the ACT in December came under pressure from the new federal government.

The commonwealth is pressing the territory to accept a "registration" model similar to that in place in Tasmania, but the ACT wants a system of civil unions that would allow gay couples to hold a ceremony.

The federal government has the power to disallow any laws the ACT Legislative Assembly passes, which the former Howard government did in 2006 to stop the ACT's first attempt at allowing civil unions.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd in December said it was Labor policy not to interfere with state and territory legislation.



Relations register clears first hurdle

http://news.smh.com.au/relations-register-clears-first-hurdle/20080312-1z14.html

Gay and unmarried couples in Victoria are a step closer to winning the right to register their relationships following a historic vote in parliament.

Under a bill that passed through the lower house by 54 votes to 24, unmarried or homosexual couples in Victoria would be able to register their relationship for easier access to entitlements.

However, the bill would not facilitate gay marriage or civil unions.

Under existing laws, couples may be required to provide evidence to prove their relationship, for example, in medical emergencies or to access property and life insurance entitlements.

The bill must also pass through the upper house to be enacted.

Government MPs were expected to support the legislation, which would give registered couples new rights, while the coalition has been given a conscience vote.

During the debate, Victorian Nationals Leader Peter Ryan told parliament the bill would inevitably lead to legislating gay marriage.

"What this bill does is to establish a structure which is a step toward equalising the notion of a same sex relationship, in particular, with that of marriage," he said.

"I must say I think that anybody who does not see this legislation in that context is being naive and is kidding themselves."

Mr Ryan said he was an unapologetic and a strong advocate of the institution of marriage and there was no equivalent.



Same sex superannuation changes coming

http://news.smh.com.au/same-sex-superannuation-changes-coming/20080317-1zxd.html

The federal government will soon move to change superannuation laws which discriminate against public sector employees in same-sex relationships, a Labor frontbencher says.

Homosexual couples working for the commonwealth are barred by law from accessing superannuation death benefits.

Democrats Senator Andrew Murray, during debate in the Senate about a bill which makes technical changes to superannuation laws, called on the government to reveal when it would move to address the "blatant discrimination" in public sector super.



Judge lobbies against anti-gay message

http://news.smh.com.au/judge-lobbies-against-antigay-message/20080429-297a.html

The church's teachings continue to be a cause of hatred and prejudice against the homosexual community, outspoken High Court judge Michael Kirby says.

The comments came on Monday in Sydney as Justice Kirby addressed a light-hearted forum on ageing and ageism in the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) community, calling on members to lobby against inequality and prejudice.

"A lot of the prejudice that still exists ... comes from religion ... handing out messages of hate," Justice Kirby said.

"Things written four or five thousand years ago are the cause of a lot of hatred out there. It has to change. I don't know how it will change but it has to change."
Back to top
« Last Edit: Apr 29th, 2008 at 1:30pm by freediver »  

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
gay reform
Reply #53 - May 1st, 2008 at 4:25pm
 
Federal Govt to remove 100 discriminatory laws this year

http://buggery.org/2008/04/30/federal-govt-to-remove-100-discriminatory-laws-this-year/

Federal Attorney-General Robert McClelland has confirmed that the federal government will go ahead with a raft of legal reforms for same-sex relationships. One hundred laws have been identified for change, including social security, taxation, health, superannuation and aged care.

The A-G has stressed that the law reforms will not change access to IVF or adoption and will not (surprise!) change the Marriage Act to enable same-sex marriage, and it’s unclear so far whether same-sex couples will gain access to the Family Court for custody and property disputes.

Nonetheless, these are exciting, sweeping and long-awaited reforms which should make gay and lesbian Australians very happy.

There had been some concern that the reforms, which had been promised by the ALP, would be shelved due to budgetary constraints, however the A-G has today confirmed that the needed funding (apparently something like $400 million) will be made available.



http://goodqualityrant.blogspot.com/2008/04/bunch-of-thugs.html

After promising to legislate against discrimination against same-sex couples, Rudd and company have pulled a Ruddock and decided to continue the illegitimate blocking of ACT civil unions legislation.

"Attorney-General Robert McClelland says the Commonwealth remains opposed to ACT moves to allow same sex couples to hold a formal ceremony to recognise their relationships."


"Mr McClelland says he would prefer to see a registration scheme for same-sex couples similar to the models adopted in Tasmania and Victoria.

"Consistently with Labor Party policy we made it clear before the election that the Government regards marriage as being between a man and a woman and we don't support any measures that seek to mimic that," he said."

Laughable. The policy seems to be "you can have civil unions, but you must do it QUIETLY. No formal events." Oh? What are they going to do if people decide to have a big celebration on the day they 'register'? Sick Bjelke-Petersen on them?

What's the real motivation here? Because I'm not convinced it's the ALP's core religious belief in the sanctity of marriage. Political cowardice is everywhere in Rudd's Government. They're happy to stand by and let inflation run out of control, declining to rescind any of the numerous and inflationary bonuses Howard commissioned, and they're happy to pander a little to the quiet middle class bigotries. You know the sort I'm talking about -protective mothers who have 'homosexuality' on the list of things they should be protecting their kids from. Not the raging bigots that Pauline loves, mind you, but bigots nontheless-people who, as QP has said, don't want to be confronted with the image of two men or two women



http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2008/04/sweeping-reforms-for-australias-gays.html

The Australian government has announced over 100 reforms giving gay couples almost the same rights as straight couples - with the notable exception of marriage.

The move has been welcomed by LGBT groups but has drawn criticism over the refusal to legalise 'gay marriage'. Under the changes, gay couples in long-term relationships would be treated the same as married couples on issues such as taxation, pensions and welfare payments. Attorney General Robert McClelland announced that the Labour government would introduce legislation next month to remove same-sex discrimination from some 100 laws.

The Netherlands was the first country to allow same-sex marriage in 2001. Same-sex marriages are also recognized in Belgium, Spain, Canada and South Africa. The first same-sex union in modern history with government recognition was obtained in Denmark in 1989.

Civil unions, civil partnership, domestic partnership, unregistered partnership/ unregistered co-habitation or registered partnerships offer varying amounts of the benefits of marriage and are available in:

Andorra,
Colombia
Croatia
Czech Republic
Denmark
Finland
France
Germany
Hungary
Iceland
Israel
Luxembourg
New Zealand
Norway
Portugal
Slovenia
South Africa
Sweden
Switzerland
United Kingdom
Uruguay.

They are also available in some parts of Argentina, Brazil (Rio Grande do Sul), Mexico, the U.S. states of California, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maine, New Hampshire, New Jersey, Oregon, Vermont, Washington state, and the District of Columbia (Washington, D.C.).

In the United Kingdom, civil partnerships have identical legal status to a marriage, and partners gain all the same benefits and associated legal rights; ranging from tax exemptions and joint property rights, to next-of-kin status and shared parenting responsibilities.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
DILLIGAF
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1259
The greens are red
Gender: male
Re: Victoria gets defacto gay marriages
Reply #54 - May 2nd, 2008 at 1:57am
 
Sprintcyclist wrote on Apr 24th, 2007 at 4:11pm:
Gays make up 1 - 3 % of the population.

Why do they have so much ......... leverage ?


Minority groups scream the loudest.
You should know that Sprint.
Back to top
 

Total anti-marxist and anti-left wing. The Right is Right.&&&&&&
 
IP Logged
 
mozzaok
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 6741
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #55 - May 2nd, 2008 at 6:01am
 
Aussie N, I heard you aren't gay, but you may have kissed a bloke who was?

Come on guys, put your prejudices aside, to discriminate against people because of their inherent sexuality is just wrong, flat out, no equivocation, just wrong.

Gays are like the rest of the population, right wing, left wing, apolitical, moral, immoral, generous, selfish, in short, just plain old ordinary people, so worrying about their sexual activities is pretty silly.

If every heterosexual had to list, every sexual act they have ever been engaged in, a large number of other people, would think they are a bit wierd, sexual drive leads many to some pretty 'out there' pleasure domes, but we choose to ignore that aspect, and concentrate on these peoples' sexuality, rather than their ability to have a loving relationship, that is what matters.

So to say people who have been committed  to a long term, loving homosexual partnership, should have less rights than an 18 year old couple who met at a nightclub, and will probably be divorced in 18 months, is patently unfair, just because one couple is gay.
Back to top
 

OOPS!!! My Karma, ran over your Dogma!
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
what would happen to marriage????
Reply #56 - May 2nd, 2008 at 11:13am
 
Gays do not have 'leverage'. If they did they would not be discriminated against still. Any leverage they have comes from the fact that they are genuinely hard done by and that we value fairness. Your claim is like saying slaves had leverage because they were eventually freed.

from crikey:

Bruno Bouchet writes: Re. "ACT gay registration: keeping queers out of the pound" (Monday, item 12). Will someone please, please, please explain to me exactly what will happen to the "institution of marriage" if same-s-x rights are granted? In all the furious fear and "changing the fabric of society" outrage no-one has ever said what will happen. Is it thought less straight people marry? Will more people get divorced? Is that what's happened in Britain? Has anyone in world done any research on the impact on straight marriage of same-s-x relationship rights in Spain or Holland? So please, will someone somewhere who believes same-s-x marriage is wrong explain exactly what impact it will have on how much men and women love each other.

John Goldbaum writes: Re. "Same-s-x rights" (yesterday, comments). Are same-s-x rights the new black? Remember the good old days when gays only asked for tolerance? Then they wanted acceptance. Now they want equal rights and equal marriage Remember the good old days when blacks only asked for freedom? Then they wanted civil rights. Next you know, they’ll want to run for president! Oh for the good old days when gays and blacks knew their place. Especially swarthy gay Jews! I'm not homophobic, racist or anti-Semitic. Some of my best friends are gays, blacks and Jews. I even like women and Christians -- well, maybe not extreme Right-wing Christians.
Back to top
« Last Edit: May 8th, 2008 at 5:03pm by freediver »  

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
California Supreme Court overturns gay marriage ban
Reply #57 - May 16th, 2008 at 9:10am
 
http://news.smh.com.au/world/california-supreme-court-overturns-gay-marriage-ban-20080516-2evb.html

California's Supreme Court quashed a ban on gay marriage in a historic ruling here Thursday, effectively leaving same-sex couples in America's most populous state free to tie the knot.

In an opinion that analysts say could have nationwide implications for the issue, the seven-member panel voted 4-3 in favor of plaintiffs who argued that restricting marriage to men and women was discriminatory.

"Limiting the designation of marriage to a union 'between a man and a woman' is unconstitutional and must be stricken from the statute," California Chief Justice Ron George said in the written opinion.

The ruling added that all California couples had a "basic civil right" to marry "without regard to their sexual orientation."

Before Thursday only one US state -- Massachusetts -- allowed gay marriage, although California, New Jersey and Vermont have legislation which grants same-sex partners many of the same legal rights as married couples.

Plaintiffs in the court case were overcome with joy after their victory.



Queen's honour for gay rights campaigner

http://news.smh.com.au/national/queens-honour-for-gay-rights-campaigner-20080609-2npz.html

Melbourne academic and gay rights campaigner Professor Dennis Altman has written a dozen books, is a leading human rights activist and played a major role in the development of HIV/AIDS policy.

For those, and other, achievements he has become a Member of the Order of Australia (AM) in the Queen's Birthday honours list.

Born in Sydney and educated in Hobart, Prof Altman started his career as a politics lecturer at Monash University in the 1960s, moving to the University of Sydney where, in 1971, he published his first book, Homosexual: Oppression and Liberation.



Gay Anglican bishop enters civil union

http://news.smh.com.au/world/gay-anglican-bishop-enters-civil-union-20080609-2npu.html

The openly gay US Episcopal bishop at the centre of the Anglican church's global battle over homosexuality, has entered into a civil union with his longtime partner at a private ceremony.

About 120 guests gathered at St Paul's Church in New Hampshire for Saturday's ceremony for Bishop Gene Robinson and his partner of more than 19 years, Mark Andrews. The event was kept private out of respect for next month's worldwide Anglican conference, Robinson's spokesman, Mike Barwell, said on Sunday.

"It was absolutely joyful," Barwell said by telephone. "A lot of his supporters and friends were there, including many members of the gay and lesbian community."

The 77 million-member Anglican Communion, a global federation of national churches, has been in upheaval since 2003 when the Episcopal Church consecrated Robinson as the first bishop known to be in an openly homosexual relationship in more than four centuries of church history.

The Episcopal Church is the US branch of the worldwide Anglican Communion.

Disputes over scriptural authority, the blessing of gay unions and other matters have become a worldwide issue and threaten turmoil this summer when Anglicans gather for their once-a-decade Lambeth Conference in Britain.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Jun 9th, 2008 at 5:32pm by freediver »  

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #58 - Oct 6th, 2008 at 10:24am
 
bump
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
queer
Full Member
***
Offline


Socialism is the answer!

Posts: 117
SA
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #59 - Oct 6th, 2008 at 10:58am
 
WOW, over half to posters here support it, in light of all the negative bigoted posts I've been reading I would have thought it would be the other way around.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 39430
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #60 - Oct 6th, 2008 at 3:49pm
 

queer - people here make up their own minds.

From F/Ds posts on the homo Episcopal (anglican) marrying his man, can see why the anglican church is disappearing
Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
Exotic Cheese
Junior Member
**
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 82
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #61 - Oct 6th, 2008 at 6:19pm
 
I support gay marriage because if you are that hung up about its legal and institutional definition get the bugger over it.

I also support gay union or whatever reformist alternatives are put on the table.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Kytro
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #62 - Oct 15th, 2008 at 11:04am
 
I am opposed to any legal recognition of marriage at all.  There should be civil unions (or personal contracts) to handle the legal side of intimate relationships.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #63 - Oct 15th, 2008 at 11:30am
 
Welcome to OzPolitic Kytro.

I think that's how it works already. A standard marriage has two parts - the religious ceremony, and the legal union, which from a legal perspective is no different to a civil union that you get if you turn up to the registry and sign the appropriate paperwork. I think the paperwork might even be the same.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Kytro
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #64 - Oct 15th, 2008 at 11:44am
 
freediver wrote on Oct 15th, 2008 at 11:30am:
Welcome to OzPolitic Kytro.


Thanks!

freediver wrote on Oct 15th, 2008 at 11:30am:
I think that's how it works already. A standard marriage has two parts - the religious ceremony, and the legal union, which from a legal perspective is no different to a civil union that you get if you turn up to the registry and sign the appropriate paperwork. I think the paperwork might even be the same.


I was under the impression that there were legal differences for same sex couples.  I am opposed to that.

As for religion, they should be free to do as they please.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #65 - Oct 15th, 2008 at 1:31pm
 
Kytro wrote on Oct 15th, 2008 at 11:44am:
I was under the impression that there were legal differences for same sex couples.  I am opposed to that.

As for religion, they should be free to do as they please.


That about sums up my views too. The best thing they can do is just call it a marriage. That way, the law would adapt to fit the practice. They'd have to change the vows a bit though. "I now declare you husband and husband"  
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #66 - Oct 17th, 2008 at 9:26pm
 
Homosexuality is a dead end.
Heterosexuality is fertile.

Children, like religions, are the bridge between the past and the present and the future.

A hereosexual married couple may not want children and may never havee one. But it remains a possibility. The marriage, the sanctified relationship, carries that possibility.

Two blokes married carry no such possibility. They are a bridge to nothing.

This difference is important. It explains the importance of perceiving the difference.

Just in brackets - there is a difference between 'gay marriage' and 'homosexual marriage'. To my mind the former conceils, the latter reveals the differences I indicated above. It is harder to agitate for the latter because it does sound absurd, while the former is now imbued with a nice 'rights' agenda glow.

Gay is a euphemism and a 'lifestyle'. Intellectual and artistic gianst who were 'inverts', homosexuals, like Proust, Coward, Cole Porter, Wilde, would have shuddered at being thought 'gay'. It is so pink and lacking in fire. All the great homos were devourerers of life, not merely 'gay'.



(Yes, I have disscussed all this with a homosexual couple particularly close to my family. They still visit.)

Back to top
« Last Edit: Oct 17th, 2008 at 11:59pm by Soren »  
 
IP Logged
 
mozzaok
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 6741
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #67 - Oct 17th, 2008 at 11:22pm
 
Well thought out soren.
If we are going to be fair, we also must ban infertile people from marrying too, because if they cannot have kids, then what is the point? Roll Eyes
Back to top
 

OOPS!!! My Karma, ran over your Dogma!
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #68 - Oct 18th, 2008 at 12:14am
 
mozzaok wrote on Oct 17th, 2008 at 11:22pm:
Well thought out soren.
If we are going to be fair, we also must ban infertile people from marrying too, because if they cannot have kids, then what is the point? Roll Eyes



I am not talking about banning anything. What I am saying is the opposite - even if you legalise homosexual marriage, you cannot make it not absurd. Just becausee it can be legalised, as it has been and will be in various parts, it does not make it any less absurd. Nero could make his horse a consul, legally. It was still absurd.

An infertile couple is infertile by the reckoning of medical science, not by the reckoning, necessarily, of life and hope. A man and a woman can always hope for a child, grow old in this shared hope. It always remains imaginable, at least.
Hoping for a child in a homosexual relationship makes no sense. The mircle does not stretch that far. It is unimaginable.

(This is not about adoption or parenting)


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #69 - Oct 18th, 2008 at 9:28am
 
Gay people are not infertile. They are more than capable of procreating, if they want to. Many do. Humans are not so bound by instinct that they cannot figure out how to make babies where their instincts fail the job.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #70 - Oct 19th, 2008 at 1:10pm
 
freediver wrote on Oct 18th, 2008 at 9:28am:
Gay people are not infertile. They are more than capable of procreating, if they want to. Many do. Humans are not so bound by instinct that they cannot figure out how to make babies where their instincts fail the job.



We havee children, not litters. This is not about biology.



Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #71 - Oct 19th, 2008 at 1:12pm
 
Not about biology? So the fact that a gay couple is not a man and a woman is irrelevant?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #72 - Oct 21st, 2008 at 9:00am
 
freediver wrote on Oct 19th, 2008 at 1:12pm:
Not about biology? So the fact that a gay couple is not a man and a woman is irrelevant?


No.
Marriage is not only about sex (the limit of homo biology), not even only about mating (the hetero biological boundary of marriage). If it were, all biological entities would be 'married' and whovever rubs you somewhere vigorously would be your spouse.

Human concepts like marriage, freedom, love, past and future are not about the animal, biological element. You want to treated like a human, not like a mere 'biological entity' or an animal.



Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Kytro
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #73 - Oct 21st, 2008 at 10:16am
 
Soren wrote on Oct 21st, 2008 at 9:00am:
Human concepts like marriage, freedom, love, past and future are not about the animal, biological element. You want to treated like a human, not like a mere 'biological entity' or an animal.


Marriage is social construct, and the reason why some people wish to allow it and others wish to prevent it (it, being gay marriage) is because of the what the social construct represents.

Those in favour are looking for a more mainstream acceptance in society.  This is similar (from a social viewpoints) to women and blacks fighting for acceptance. 

Those opposed feel threatened by such social change.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #74 - Oct 21st, 2008 at 11:41am
 
Kytro wrote on Oct 21st, 2008 at 10:16am:
Soren wrote on Oct 21st, 2008 at 9:00am:
Human concepts like marriage, freedom, love, past and future are not about the animal, biological element. You want to treated like a human, not like a mere 'biological entity' or an animal.


Marriage is social construct, and the reason why some people wish to allow it and others wish to prevent it (it, being gay marriage) is because of the what the social construct represents.

Those in favour are looking for a more mainstream acceptance in society.  This is similar (from a social viewpoints) to women and blacks fighting for acceptance.  

Those opposed feel threatened by such social change.



Correct, as far as the social side is concerned. Marriage is not biological.

If homos want to reconstruct marriage they need to argue it on a basis other than sex. They also need to argue beyond individual rights.
They need to argue that homo marriage is an improvement for the whole society, not just the convenience of dead-end homo relationships.


Just a word of caution though - the talk of 'social construct' is a mental trap hard to climb out of once snared in. Marriage is not a social construct in your sense, because that assumes but leaves unstated who actually did the constructing. ANd if people think they are only married because some Roma aristo  needed an alliance with a neighbouring empire - you try looking into your wife's eyes and tell her that. And your children's eyes and tell them that they are only the fruit of the hollow remnant of some archaic barter ritual.


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #75 - Oct 21st, 2008 at 12:07pm
 
If homos want to reconstruct marriage they need to argue it on a basis other than sex.

Isn't that exactly what they are doing?

They need to argue that homo marriage is an improvement for the whole society, not just the convenience of dead-end homo relationships.

No they don't.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Kytro
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #76 - Oct 21st, 2008 at 1:38pm
 
Soren wrote on Oct 21st, 2008 at 11:41am:
Correct, as far as the social side is concerned. Marriage is not biological.


Absolutely so.  Biology isn't restricted by human constructs.

Soren wrote on Oct 21st, 2008 at 11:41am:
If homos want to reconstruct marriage they need to argue it on a basis other than sex. They also need to argue beyond individual rights.
They need to argue that homo marriage is an improvement for the whole society, not just the convenience of dead-end homo relationships.


I don't think  they need to prove it will enhance society, just that it will not cause harm.  I cannot see any major problems presented. 

Soren wrote on Oct 21st, 2008 at 11:41am:
Just a word of caution though - the talk of 'social construct' is a mental trap hard to climb out of once snared in. Marriage is not a social construct in your sense, because that assumes but leaves unstated who actually did the constructing. ANd if people think they are only married because some Roma aristo  needed an alliance with a neighbouring empire - you try looking into your wife's eyes and tell her that. And your children's eyes and tell them that they are only the fruit of the hollow remnant of some archaic barter ritual.


It is just a construct, love and relationships do not require marriage, it is a social statement to that effect.  I think this is what homosexuals are looking for, a social statement (and associated legal contexts).



Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #77 - Oct 21st, 2008 at 2:03pm
 
I think it is more the legal side that is the issue. It's about equal rights under the law.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #78 - Oct 22nd, 2008 at 7:44pm
 
[quote author=Kytro link=1184494423/75#76 date=1224560294 It is just a construct, love and relationships do not require marriage, it is a social statement to that effect.  I think this is what homosexuals are looking for, a social statement (and associated legal contexts).

[/quote]

Is there anything that is human that is not " just a construct"?
Isn't the idea that homos should get married , then, "just a construct"?
How do you decide between two "just a constructs"? Whatever basis you nominate - isn't that also "just a construct"? Law, relationship, love, personal liberty, etc.

How do you decide?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #79 - Oct 22nd, 2008 at 9:09pm
 
Legislation should adapt to societal norms. There are already gay unions - probably thousands of them - does anybody know how many?

Marriage is not just about having kids or the biological aspect of it. It goes a lot further than sex or procreation. In fact many married couples these days choose not to have kids.

The marriage ceremony is a public declaration of love and life-long commitment between two people and the acceptance and celebration by society of their union. Marriage is a very special thing. I've been happily married for 25 years this year. There is a lot of give and take involved for it to last that long.

Why should we deprive two people of that experience just because they are of the same sex?
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #80 - Oct 22nd, 2008 at 9:24pm
 
Soren wrote on Oct 22nd, 2008 at 7:44pm:
[quote author=Kytro link=1184494423/75#76 date=1224560294 It is just a construct, love and relationships do not require marriage, it is a social statement to that effect.  I think this is what homosexuals are looking for, a social statement (and associated legal contexts).



Is there anything that is human that is not " just a construct"?
Isn't the idea that homos should get married , then, "just a construct"?
How do you decide between two "just a constructs"? Whatever basis you nominate - isn't that also "just a construct"? Law, relationship, love, personal liberty, etc.

How do you decide? [/quote]

Equal rights before the law is a human construct. Do you support it?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Me
New Member
*
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 7
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #81 - Oct 22nd, 2008 at 11:45pm
 
This homosexuals are a bigger problem to the society then this mozlemz are.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Sprintcyclist
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 39430
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #82 - Oct 23rd, 2008 at 1:18am
 
muso - homos dont need to be married to be in a long term relationship or have a bit of "give and take"

they can declare their feelings publically in a civil ceremony, or a banner outside their house.
Back to top
 

Modern Classic Right Wing
 
IP Logged
 
queer
Full Member
***
Offline


Socialism is the answer!

Posts: 117
SA
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #83 - Oct 23rd, 2008 at 7:14am
 
Me wrote on Oct 22nd, 2008 at 11:45pm:
This homosexuals are a bigger problem to the society then this mozlemz are.

And bad spellers should be sterilized!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #84 - Oct 23rd, 2008 at 7:18am
 
queer wrote on Oct 23rd, 2008 at 7:14am:
Me wrote on Oct 22nd, 2008 at 11:45pm:
This homosexuals are a bigger problem to the society then this mozlemz are.

And bad spellers should be sterilized!



Bad spellerz of the world - untie!
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #85 - Oct 23rd, 2008 at 9:04am
 
Sprintcyclist wrote on Oct 23rd, 2008 at 1:18am:
muso - homos dont need to be married to be in a long term relationship or have a bit of "give and take"

they can declare their feelings publically in a civil ceremony, or a banner outside their house.


LOL I didn't realise the double entendre (give and take) when I posted it. 

The question is - what's the big issue with using the M word to describe their relationship? It is not owned exclusively by religions.

Is there a civil ceremony that they can go through already?
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #86 - Oct 23rd, 2008 at 9:09am
 
They can have any sort of ceremony they want.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Kytro
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #87 - Oct 23rd, 2008 at 10:38am
 
Soren wrote on Oct 22nd, 2008 at 7:44pm:
Is there anything that is human that is not " just a construct"?


Well, yes.  There are.  Instinct, emotion for example.

Soren wrote on Oct 22nd, 2008 at 7:44pm:
Isn't the idea that homos should get married , then, "just a construct"?


Indeed it is.

Soren wrote on Oct 22nd, 2008 at 7:44pm:
How do you decide between two "just a constructs"? Whatever basis you nominate - isn't that also "just a construct"? Law, relationship, love, personal liberty, etc.


Obviously a decision made based on any number of reasons. 

Soren wrote on Oct 22nd, 2008 at 7:44pm:
How do you decide?


Hopefully by applying reason.  The decision to allows gays to marry would be recognising the decision that previously prohibited them was based on a different social rules.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #88 - Oct 24th, 2008 at 2:34pm
 
freediver wrote on Oct 22nd, 2008 at 9:24pm:
Equal rights before the law is a human construct. Do you support it?


What do you mean by equal rights in this case? Obviously it's important. Can you please expand on this point? It's obviously about making sure that everybody gets treated equitably - isn't it?

What entitlements are we actually discussing here? - and isn't it a double edged sword?     Rights = obligations.

For example if the wife buys a hat, the husband is legally obliged to pick up the bill even though he knows nothing about it - isn't that right? (that's what I was told)

How would it work for same sex partners?
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #89 - Oct 24th, 2008 at 2:41pm
 
Things like access to superannuation, recognition of legal guardianship, next of kin etc - all the legal rights that married couples currently get access to. No idea about the hat thing.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #90 - Oct 24th, 2008 at 3:18pm
 
freediver wrote on Oct 24th, 2008 at 2:41pm:
Things like access to superannuation, recognition of legal guardianship, next of kin etc - all the legal rights that married couples currently get access to. No idea about the hat thing.


I don't think it should be automatic. Superannuation and Next of Kin - sure.

Gay Couples having kids is something I feel uneasy about. Maybe I'm old fashioned in that regard, but I just don't think it's appropriate for a Gay couple to adopt kids. That has nothing to do with prejudice against gays.

If you think about a straight teenager taking a girlfriend home to introduce her to his two dads - It just adds some unnecessary stress to their lives.
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
Kytro
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #91 - Oct 24th, 2008 at 3:51pm
 
muso wrote on Oct 24th, 2008 at 3:18pm:
If you think about a straight teenager taking a girlfriend home to introduce her to his two dads - It just adds some unnecessary stress to their lives.


Many families are dysfunctional and stresses can be created from a variety of sources - all this without gay parents.

Allowing gay people to adopt is not automatically create a bad environment, nor will it lead to more stress than a traditional family - just a different  source  of stress.  I don't think we should be attempting the pad the world in rubber foam in case someone gets hurt.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #92 - Oct 24th, 2008 at 4:02pm
 
Gay Couples having kids is something I feel uneasy about. Maybe I'm old fashioned in that regard, but I just don't think it's appropriate for a Gay couple to adopt kids. That has nothing to do with prejudice against gays.

Being married has never been equated with the right to adopt children.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #93 - Oct 24th, 2008 at 5:11pm
 
Paul keeting captured the absutrdity of homo marriage when he said: "You can't tell me that two jokers with a cocker spaniel amount to a family."
And even if you let the two jokers ado[pt a real kid, they are still not a family.

What is missing is the link to the past and the future. Homo life is a dead end by definition. Putting on costumes and charades of marriage, adopting children will not change that.
Why not marry your dog or cat or goat? (See edward Albee's The Goat or Who is Sylvia?)
What about three or four jokers and a couple of goats? Once you start the pretence that the absurd is not absurd but normal, there is no putting the lid back on.





Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #94 - Oct 24th, 2008 at 5:36pm
 
This is not about family. It's about legal recognition of marriage. Recognising marriage won't make people gay or make the human race die out.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #95 - Oct 24th, 2008 at 7:28pm
 
freediver wrote on Oct 24th, 2008 at 5:36pm:
This is not about family. It's about legal recognition of marriage. Recognising marriage won't make people gay or make the human race die out.

Marriage is about family, about past and future, as well as about the present. Homo marriage links into only the present. It is infertile as family, and therefore as a bridge between past and future.
Two jokers and a cocker spaniel are no different from two flamates and a cocker spaniel. And I am sure there are people arguing that a share house is a family. It is not.

Homos should - and the smart ones do - settle with having a different, often higher level of human relationship completely open to them - friendship.

It is really the only the unimaginative, lowbrow ones who agitate for the absurdity of homo marriage. If you respect them as individuals you owe it to them to point this out.


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #96 - Oct 24th, 2008 at 8:08pm
 
Marriage is about family, about past and future, as well as about the present.

Legal recognition of marriage is about legal rights, nothing more. The law should not be used to discriminate on the basis of sexuality, no matter how useless you think those equal rights are to those who demand them. You do not 'own' the concept of a marriage for legal purposes, any more than the church does. That doesn't stop the church having their own views on what is an acceptable marriage, nor does it stop you from waffling on about past, rpesent and future.

Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #97 - Oct 24th, 2008 at 8:34pm
 
You need to decide whether you are arguing on legal grounds or social, historical, institutional grounds. If the latteer, you have a much, much biggeer thing on your hands.  Can't be jumping in and out between legal and the rest.

I am saying that marriage is not merely a legal contract because it does more than regulate the lives of those who are alive. It is an institution, in religion a sacrament. Both mean that it is beyond the mere here and know of law.
That it has kleegal status does not mean that it is fully grasped when its leegal aspects are comprehended.

The law is concerned with the individuals now, before the court, as it were.
Civil contracts between two men or two women would cover every legal aspect. It will not accommodat the social, sacramental aspect.
Agitating for the social contract between two jokers to be treated as if it was the equivalent of the social institution of marraige, briddging past andd future, or the sacrament of marriage which is a model of the relationship between god and man - that is absurd and unsustainable once laid out plainly.




Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #98 - Oct 24th, 2008 at 9:17pm
 
I am only interested in changing the legal aspects. People are still welcome to make whatever they want of a marriage.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #99 - Oct 25th, 2008 at 2:29pm
 
so a legal contract for homos regulating financial and other partnership matters to achieve legal equality in these respects is sufficient. No need to get 'married' and browbeat everyone into pretending that they are just like a hetero married couple, or even a hetero de facto couple.
For one thing, you are not going to have a rich literary tradition on the basis of phallo-centrism and gynophobia of the most literal kind. And being an assophile is not something you want to reminisce about to your adopted kids either. 'Oh, when I was young I had it off with a dozen guys in the sauna in one evening' is not exactly caring for the next generation. Being 'gay' is far more sordid in most cases than even the most adventurous hetero skirt chaser can dream of.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #100 - Oct 25th, 2008 at 6:49pm
 
No need to get 'married' and browbeat everyone into pretending that they are just like a hetero married couple, or even a hetero de facto couple.

I'm not exactly sure what you have a problem with. They can expect their friends to recognise their partnership. If you are that hung up on, chances are you won't have any gay friends anyway.

For one thing, you are not going to have a rich literary tradition on the basis of phallo-centrism and gynophobia of the most literal kind.

So what? This has nothing to do with forcing gay people to fall in love with the opposite sex to make nice poetry for you. We are long past that sort of silliness.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #101 - Oct 25th, 2008 at 7:37pm
 
freediver wrote on Oct 25th, 2008 at 6:49pm:
No need to get 'married' and browbeat everyone into pretending that they are just like a hetero married couple, or even a hetero de facto couple.

I'm not exactly sure what you have a problem with. They can expect their friends to recognise their partnership. If you are that hung up on, chances are you won't have any gay friends anyway.

For one thing, you are not going to have a rich literary tradition on the basis of phallo-centrism and gynophobia of the most literal kind.

So what? This has nothing to do with forcing gay people to fall in love with the opposite sex to make nice poetry for you. We are long past that sort of silliness.



I am sorry if you do not see the difference between homo and hetero people. I think there is massive difference, which, if you like, starts with the small difference in prefernce for orifices, one for the holy of holeys, the other for the kyber pass next door. Yet from a little difference of knocking on one door or the other comes a massive divergence down the track. Our of one comes life, the other, only poo. If you can't see it, I cant make you see it.

Back to top
« Last Edit: Oct 25th, 2008 at 8:53pm by Soren »  
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #102 - Oct 25th, 2008 at 7:58pm
 
freediver wrote on Oct 24th, 2008 at 4:02pm:
Gay Couples having kids is something I feel uneasy about. Maybe I'm old fashioned in that regard, but I just don't think it's appropriate for a Gay couple to adopt kids. That has nothing to do with prejudice against gays.

Being married has never been equated with the right to adopt children.


Agreed. That's why I voted in favour of Gay Marriage, but not involving children.

Let's take an example - two brothers - one heterosexual, one homosexual. Parents and other relations are dead. Both get married. The heterosexual couple have kids, but are tragically killed in a car accident leaving the kids. The wife has no living relatives either.

1. Does the homosexual couple have the right to adopt the kids as a consequence of their equal status as a married couple?

2. Is it right?
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
Soren
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 25654
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #103 - Oct 25th, 2008 at 8:54pm
 
Adopting orhaned nieces has nothing to do with being homo.
I have every respect for robust homos who claim respeect on the grounds of individual liberty. It is 'gays' I find objectionable. Gay is an ideology,  a 'life style' for god's sake!! homo is a personal stance, it has integrity. Gay is so... gay.
Homo has a tinge of the tragic, fully comprehended. But how can  a 40 year old grown up utter the words 'I am a gay man'  and expect not to be laughed at? Ridiculous.




Back to top
« Last Edit: Oct 25th, 2008 at 9:06pm by Soren »  
 
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #104 - Oct 25th, 2008 at 9:31pm
 
Soren wrote on Oct 25th, 2008 at 8:54pm:
Adopting orhaned nieces has nothing to do with being homo.
I have every respect for robust homos who claim respeect on the grounds of individual liberty. It is 'gays' I find objectionable. Gay is an ideology,  a 'life style' for god's sake!! homo is a personal stance, it has integrity. Gay is so... gay.
Homo has a tinge of the tragic, fully comprehended. But how can  a 40 year old grown up utter the words 'I am a gay man'  and expect not to be laughed at? Ridiculous.



I've never thought about it that way, but I guess living in the outback, it's not exactly as 'in your face' as downtown Pott's Point.
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #105 - Oct 25th, 2008 at 9:50pm
 
Muso, the uncle has the right to adopt, because he is the uncle. Yes it is right. It would be wrong to take those children away from the last remnants of their family just because he is gay.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Christian
New Member
*
Offline


Where IS Australia, anyway?

Posts: 21
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Gender: male
Re: Victoria gets defacto gay marriages
Reply #106 - Oct 26th, 2008 at 11:59am
 
Sprintcyclist wrote on May 1st, 2007 at 10:52am:
Equal rights.

Yes, we all deserve equal rights.

Some deserve rights more equal than others.   Smiley


How is allowing same-sex marriage affording "more" rights or equality to gays than anyone else?

How absurd.
Back to top
 

Hey, look! It's fish guy.
christianbobak  
IP Logged
 
muso
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #107 - Oct 30th, 2008 at 3:16pm
 
freediver wrote on Oct 25th, 2008 at 9:50pm:
Muso, the uncle has the right to adopt, because he is the uncle. Yes it is right. It would be wrong to take those children away from the last remnants of their family just because he is gay.


Ok - Let's hypothetically kill off the uncle- and leave his 'b1tch' to take care of the kids. I'm starting to get an uneasy feeling about this.
Back to top
 

...
1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47043
At my desk.
Re: GAY MARRIAGE
Reply #108 - Oct 30th, 2008 at 3:22pm
 
That sort of thing also happens in cases where the uncle is heterosexual. You can't blame homosexuality for the death of someone's entire extended family and whatever situation they end up in afterwards.
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 
Send Topic Print