Australian Politics Forum - Rethinking SSM

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 40880
Gender: male

Re: Rethinking SSM
Reply #45 - Dec 14^th, 2017 at 5:46pm

Auggie wrote on Dec 14^th, 2017 at 4:14pm:

Grappler, just because something is practised by a minority, doesn't mean that it's not 'normal'. When people talk about homsexuality being 'deviant' or 'not normal', what they tend to mean is that there's something wrong with them psychologically or mentally. When I say 'normal', I mean that it is natural in so far as people don't choose to be homosexual (I'm talking about those who are genuinely gay, not those who stray side to side.)

But, it is not deviation.

I don't understand you, Grap. You're all for economic justice and equality, but when it comes to this issue you seem to be singing a different tune???

For a member of a heterosexual species - a species that exists ONLY because of heterosexual reproduction - being aroused by the same sex is not normal. It's not fit for purpose, just as being aroused by goats, exhaust pipes, shoes and a myriad other deviant fetishes and misdirected fixations. It is a deviant fixation. It is not a deviation because only a minority practices it. It's the other way around - only a minority practices it BECAUSE it's a deviation.

Heterosexual attraction is normal, it's the way of mammals. We wouldn't exist without it. On the other hand, we would never notice if there were no homosexuals or hunchbacks or fetishists and deviants and abnormalities of any kind.

Nobody wants to persecute every kind of sexual deviance but don't call them 'normal' because you would have to call every sexual deviance normal. And you are not prepared to be THAT consistent.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:17pm by Frank »

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Grendel

Gold Member

Offline

OzPolitic

Posts: 28080
Gender: male

Re: Rethinking SSM
Reply #46 - Dec 14^th, 2017 at 5:59pm

LOL
Even I thought you'd get it after Grappler's explanation but apparently not Auggie.

Denial... must be bliss for you.

I never thought I'd have to post this...

Quote:

deviation

diːvɪˈeɪʃ(ə)n/
noun
noun: deviation; plural noun: deviations

1.
the action of departing from an established course or accepted standard.
"deviation from a norm"
synonyms: divergence, digression, turning aside, departure, deflection, difference, variation, variance, alteration, veering, straying, fluctuation, aberration, abnormality, irregularity, anomaly, inconsistency, discrepancy, variableness, oddness, freakishness; More
change, shift, veer, swerve, bend, drift
"the slightest deviation from approved procedures could prove disastrous"
2.
Statistics
the amount by which a single measurement differs from a fixed value such as the mean.
"a significant deviation from the average value"
3.
the deflection of a ship's compass needle caused by iron in the ship.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Dec 14^th, 2017 at 8:49pm by Grendel »

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 40880
Gender: male

Re: Rethinking SSM
Reply #47 - Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:20pm

‘Coercion is built into gay marriage’.

For gentle gay couples who need social affirmation, a law for same-sex marriage will bring comfort. But for serious LGBTQ activists, this debate has never been about marriage – which they despise – but about power: capturing the legal high ground from where their full coercive agenda can be implemented. This ranges from imposing radical gender theory on our kids to passing laws that let cross-dressing males use girls’ bathrooms; from bankrupting bakers who don’t want to write a gay marriage slogan on a cake to prosecuting pastors for teaching Christian doctrine on marriage and sexuality; from removing mother and father from birth certificates to changing ‘husband and wife’ into ‘partner 1 & 2’, as we have seen overseas. Such is the seamless garment of the genderless revolution.

It’s not as if the revolutionaries have been coy about their plans. Michelangelo Signorile urged the LGBTQ community ‘to fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits and then, once granted, redefine the institution of marriage completely, because the most subversive action lesbians and gay men can undertake… is to transform the notion of “family” entirely.’ Lesbian social historian E.J. Graff agreed that ‘Same-sex marriage is a breathtakingly subversive idea’. Masha Gessen told the Sydney Writer’s Festival in 2012, ‘Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there’, and her preference was to abolish marriage entirely. Feminists like Ellen Willis celebrate this subversion of patriarchal power: ‘Conferring the legitimacy of marriage on homosexual relations will introduce an implicit revolt against the institution into its very heart.’

Subversion, lying, an implicit revolt… These are the words of culture warriors intent on deconstructing a despised heteronormative institution and – to quote lesbian lawyer Paula Ettelbrick – ‘radically reordering society’s view of reality’.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2017/12/they-legislated-a-lie/

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Rethinking SSM
Reply #48 - Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:32pm

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Dec 14^th, 2017 at 4:35pm:

Someone else said all Marriages should be civil unions and the church ceremony be at the discretion/wish of the participants...... with the right to say NO enshrined.

I've said that before - it's known as privatization of marriage. It's generally proposed by libertarians.

Grappler Truth Teller Feller wrote on Dec 14^th, 2017 at 4:35pm:

If you can't get your YES somewhere - go somewhere else.... I'm certain that many churches will happily oblige with a ceremony, so there is no need to deliberately confront those that do not wish to do so.**

I absolutely agree. Many churches will allow SSM; if they want the money, they'll have to do it.

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Rethinking SSM
Reply #49 - Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:34pm

Quote:

For a member of a heterosexual species - a species that exists ONLY because of heterosexual reproduction - being aroused by the same sex is not normal. It's not fit for purpose, just as being aroused by goats, exhaust pipes, shoes and a myriad other deviant fetishes and misdirected fixations. It is a deviant fixation. It is not a deviation because only a minority practices it. It's the other way around - only a minority practices it BECAUSE it's a deviation.

Heterosexual attraction is normal, it's the way of mammals. We wouldn't exist without it. On the other hand, we would never notice if there were no homosexuals or hunchbacks or fetishists and deviants and abnormalities of any kind.

Nobody wants to persecute every kind of sexual deviance but don't call them 'normal' because you would have to call every sexual deviance normal. And you are not prepared to be THAT consistent.

[/quote]

Do you agree that there are people who are attracted to the same-sex, which attraction is not of their choice??

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Rethinking SSM
Reply #50 - Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:35pm

Auggie wrote on Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:34pm:

[quote]For a member of a heterosexual species - a species that exists ONLY because of heterosexual reproduction - being aroused by the same sex is not normal. It's not fit for purpose, just as being aroused by goats, exhaust pipes, shoes and a myriad other deviant fetishes and misdirected fixations. It is a deviant fixation. It is not a deviation because only a minority practices it. It's the other way around - only a minority practices it BECAUSE it's a deviation.

Heterosexual attraction is normal, it's the way of mammals. We wouldn't exist without it. On the other hand, we would never notice if there were no homosexuals or hunchbacks or fetishists and deviants and abnormalities of any kind.

Nobody wants to persecute every kind of sexual deviance but don't call them 'normal' because you would have to call every sexual deviance normal. And you are not prepared to be THAT consistent.

Do you agree that there are people who are attracted to the same-sex, which attraction is not of their choice??

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Rethinking SSM
Reply #51 - Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:38pm

Grendel wrote on Dec 14^th, 2017 at 5:59pm:

LOL
Even I though you'd get it after Grappler's explanation but apparently not Auggie.

Denial... must be bliss for you.

I never thought I'd have to post this...

Quote:

deviation

diːvɪˈeɪʃ(ə)n/
noun
noun: deviation; plural noun: deviations

1.
the action of departing from an established course or accepted standard.
"deviation from a norm"
synonyms: divergence, digression, turning aside, departure, deflection, difference, variation, variance, alteration, veering, straying, fluctuation, aberration, abnormality, irregularity, anomaly, inconsistency, discrepancy, variableness, oddness, freakishness; More
change, shift, veer, swerve, bend, drift
"the slightest deviation from approved procedures could prove disastrous"
2.
Statistics
the amount by which a single measurement differs from a fixed value such as the mean.
"a significant deviation from the average value"
3.
the deflection of a ship's compass needle caused by iron in the ship.

Ah, you're very clever, G, changing words when it suits you.

Deviation has a different connotation to 'deviant'.

When people refer to homosexuals as deviant, they use the word as a pejorative term, to indicate that they have mental issues or are crazy.

Do you believe that same-sex attraction is a mental disorder? Yes or No?

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

Frank Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 40880 Gender:	Re: Rethinking SSM Reply #52 - Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:40pm philperth2010 wrote on Dec 13^th, 2017 at 9:09pm: My view is that left's ultimate end, and I think we'll see this in about 10 to 20 years, is the belief that every man and woman be afforded their due and be free to live in peace without discrimination or judgement from those who seek solace in their intolerance!!! This is idiotic.
Back to top	Estragon: I can’t go on like this. Vladimir: That’s what you think. IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Rethinking SSM
Reply #53 - Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:40pm

Frank wrote on Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:20pm:

‘Coercion is built into gay marriage’.

For gentle gay couples who need social affirmation, a law for same-sex marriage will bring comfort. But for serious LGBTQ activists, this debate has never been about marriage – which they despise – but about power: capturing the legal high ground from where their full coercive agenda can be implemented. This ranges from imposing radical gender theory on our kids to passing laws that let cross-dressing males use girls’ bathrooms; from bankrupting bakers who don’t want to write a gay marriage slogan on a cake to prosecuting pastors for teaching Christian doctrine on marriage and sexuality; from removing mother and father from birth certificates to changing ‘husband and wife’ into ‘partner 1 & 2’, as we have seen overseas. Such is the seamless garment of the genderless revolution.

It’s not as if the revolutionaries have been coy about their plans. Michelangelo Signorile urged the LGBTQ community ‘to fight for same-sex marriage and its benefits and then, once granted, redefine the institution of marriage completely, because the most subversive action lesbians and gay men can undertake… is to transform the notion of “family” entirely.’ Lesbian social historian E.J. Graff agreed that ‘Same-sex marriage is a breathtakingly subversive idea’. Masha Gessen told the Sydney Writer’s Festival in 2012, ‘Fighting for gay marriage generally involves lying about what we are going to do with marriage when we get there’, and her preference was to abolish marriage entirely. Feminists like Ellen Willis celebrate this subversion of patriarchal power: ‘Conferring the legitimacy of marriage on homosexual relations will introduce an implicit revolt against the institution into its very heart.’

Subversion, lying, an implicit revolt… These are the words of culture warriors intent on deconstructing a despised heteronormative institution and – to quote lesbian lawyer Paula Ettelbrick – ‘radically reordering society’s view of reality’.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2017/12/they-legislated-a-lie/

And it is this radical change of the definition of 'gender' on which I am concerned.

But, there's a key difference between you and me: you believe that homosexuals are crazy, socially and mentally deviant people. I don't.

A person who has a natural same-sex attraction to a person (full-blown gay) is a normal person.

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 40880
Gender: male

Re: Rethinking SSM
Reply #54 - Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:41pm

Auggie wrote on Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:35pm:

Auggie wrote on Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:34pm:

[quote]For a member of a heterosexual species - a species that exists ONLY because of heterosexual reproduction - being aroused by the same sex is not normal. It's not fit for purpose, just as being aroused by goats, exhaust pipes, shoes and a myriad other deviant fetishes and misdirected fixations. It is a deviant fixation. It is not a deviation because only a minority practices it. It's the other way around - only a minority practices it BECAUSE it's a deviation.

Heterosexual attraction is normal, it's the way of mammals. We wouldn't exist without it. On the other hand, we would never notice if there were no homosexuals or hunchbacks or fetishists and deviants and abnormalities of any kind.

Nobody wants to persecute every kind of sexual deviance but don't call them 'normal' because you would have to call every sexual deviance normal. And you are not prepared to be THAT consistent.

Do you agree that there are people who are attracted to the same-sex, which attraction is not of their choice??

Deviance doesn't have to be a choice. Nobody chooses to be a hunchback, yet is' nit normal, it is a deviance from the normal human body.

You are making silly mistake after stupid mistake.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Dec 14^th, 2017 at 7:09pm by Frank »

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

philperth2010

Gold Member

Online

Australian Politics

Posts: 19647
Perth
Gender: male

Re: Rethinking SSM
Reply #55 - Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:49pm

Frank wrote on Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:40pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Dec 13^th, 2017 at 9:09pm:

My view is that left's ultimate end, and I think we'll see this in about 10 to 20 years, is the belief that every man and woman be afforded their due and be free to live in peace without discrimination or judgement from those who seek solace in their intolerance!!!

Cool

This is idiotic.

Yet you say nothing about this....

Quote:

My view is that left's ultimate end, and I think we'll see this in about 10 to 20 years, is the notion that there is something fundamentally wrong with humans biologically - that we are limited by our biology. Therefore, the only solution to this problem is to fundamentally alter our biology in a way that no longer makes us 'primates'. This is known as transhumanism or post-humanism, and has been spoken about before - i.e. the term isn't new, and mainly is used in science fiction genres. Of course, we're still a long way from this; but I can see the Left arguing for this all the same. At some point, the push back from conservatives and moderates will be such that the Left will have to concede that there are biological foundations to human behaviour.

You must be joking if you criticise my piss take and let this slide....Moronic more like???

Smiley

Back to top

If knowledge can create problems, it is not through ignorance that we can solve them.
Isaac Asimov (1920 - 1992)

IP Logged

Auggie

Gold Member

Offline

The Bull Moose

Posts: 8571

Re: Rethinking SSM
Reply #56 - Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:52pm

Frank wrote on Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:41pm:

Auggie wrote on Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:35pm:

Auggie wrote on Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:34pm:

[quote]For a member of a heterosexual species - a species that exists ONLY because of heterosexual reproduction - being aroused by the same sex is not normal. It's not fit for purpose, just as being aroused by goats, exhaust pipes, shoes and a myriad other deviant fetishes and misdirected fixations. It is a deviant fixation. It is not a deviation because only a minority practices it. It's the other way around - only a minority practices it BECAUSE it's a deviation.

Heterosexual attraction is normal, it's the way of mammals. We wouldn't exist without it. On the other hand, we would never notice if there were no homosexuals or hunchbacks or fetishists and deviants and abnormalities of any kind.

Nobody wants to persecute every kind of sexual deviance but don't call them 'normal' because you would have to call every sexual deviance normal. And you are not prepared to be THAT consistent.

Do you agree that there are people who are attracted to the same-sex, which attraction is not of their choice??

Deviance doesn't have to a choice. Nobody chooses to be a hunchback, yet is' nit normal, it is a deviance from the normal human body.

You are making silly mistake after stupid mistake.

So, if it's part of nature, then there's nothing deviant about it. It is different, but it is not 'deviant'.

Hitler believed that Jews were 'deviant'.

Back to top

The Progressive President

IP Logged

Auggie Gold Member Offline The Bull Moose Posts: 8571	Re: Rethinking SSM Reply #57 - Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:54pm Frank, do you believe that there are 70+ genders?
Back to top	The Progressive President IP Logged

Frank

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 40880
Gender: male

Re: Rethinking SSM
Reply #58 - Dec 14^th, 2017 at 7:16pm

philperth2010 wrote on Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:49pm:

Frank wrote on Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:40pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Dec 13^th, 2017 at 9:09pm:

My view is that left's ultimate end, and I think we'll see this in about 10 to 20 years, is the belief that every man and woman be afforded their due and be free to live in peace without discrimination or judgement from those who seek solace in their intolerance!!!

Cool

This is idiotic.

Yet you say nothing about this....

Quote:

My view is that left's ultimate end, and I think we'll see this in about 10 to 20 years, is the notion that there is something fundamentally wrong with humans biologically - that we are limited by our biology. Therefore, the only solution to this problem is to fundamentally alter our biology in a way that no longer makes us 'primates'. This is known as transhumanism or post-humanism, and has been spoken about before - i.e. the term isn't new, and mainly is used in science fiction genres. Of course, we're still a long way from this; but I can see the Left arguing for this all the same. At some point, the push back from conservatives and moderates will be such that the Left will have to concede that there are biological foundations to human behaviour.

You must be joking if you criticise my piss take and let this slide....Moronic more like???

Smiley

Well, your mild stupidity is paving the way to that insanity.

The left used to be for universal human values but has now descended to identity politics of sex, race, ethnicity - blinkered, parochial tribalism.

There is nothing too outlandish along that path - and you are on it.

Back to top

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.

IP Logged

Frank Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 40880 Gender:	Re: Rethinking SSM Reply #59 - Dec 14^th, 2017 at 7:17pm Auggie wrote on Dec 14^th, 2017 at 6:54pm: Frank, do you believe that there are 70+ genders? No. There are three in grammar: masculine, feminine, neuter. There are no genders outside grammar.
Back to top	Estragon: I can’t go on like this. Vladimir: That’s what you think. IP Logged