Same sex marriage debate...

General Social Discussion
User avatar
Cultured Bogan
Member
Member
Posts: 16241
Joined: Tue 15 Sep, 2009 11:20 pm
Location: Blue Mountains
Has liked: 78 times
Been liked: 158 times

Re: Same sex marriage debate...

Unread post by Cultured Bogan » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 11:46 am

Pawsandclaws wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 11:23 am
It's a no to this survey from me. My wife will vote yes but she has a cousin who is a lesbian and two others who are gay. I refuse to discuss this with her as we cannot have a mature debate without the inevitable homophobic slur being trotted out. I see this as the last bastion of the morally defeated.

I am pro marriage and no amount of goodwill in the world will get around the fact that same sex couples are fundamentally biologically different to a marriage between a man and a woman. Let them call it some other name but not marriage because in my view it devalues marriage as we know it.
Do you believe that gay marriage devalues the institution of any more than a pair of ice addicts who have a family and neglect their kids, a marriage with domestic violence or hetero marriages that end in divorce?

N.B. The ancient Greeks had gay marriage. It predates the Abrahamic faiths.

Marriage was a way for women and their children not to starve to death when agriculture was perfected 10,000 years ago and it wasn't always strictly monogamous. It was borne out of survival instinct and bears little if at all resemblance to what marriage is now.
I swing like hell but know full well that I won't win the fight, but big man I'm the beta male that's gonna ruin your night...

Fuerza en la adversidad.


User avatar
TerenceWatts
Posts: 26
Joined: Fri 07 Apr, 2017 2:50 pm

Unread post by TerenceWatts » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 11:49 am

I read somewhere online, a quote that said: "We live in a world where it's more socially and culturally accepted to see two men holdings guns instead of hands." Granted, the world spoken about in this quote is referring the Western privileged world, but regardless - in other words - we psychologically prefer to see something that represents violence over something that embodies love. Therefore, the only logical conclusion that one can draw from such a situation is that the human race finds expressions of physical love far more dangerous than expressions of physical hatred. A species with such a collective cultural attitude is destined for misery.

Pawsandclaws
Member
Member
Posts: 2415
Joined: Sat 20 Jun, 2015 5:53 pm
Been liked: 60 times

Unread post by Pawsandclaws » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:04 pm

Cultured Bogan wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 11:46 am
Pawsandclaws wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 11:23 am
It's a no to this survey from me. My wife will vote yes but she has a cousin who is a lesbian and two others who are gay. I refuse to discuss this with her as we cannot have a mature debate without the inevitable homophobic slur being trotted out. I see this as the last bastion of the morally defeated.

I am pro marriage and no amount of goodwill in the world will get around the fact that same sex couples are fundamentally biologically different to a marriage between a man and a woman. Let them call it some other name but not marriage because in my view it devalues marriage as we know it.
Do you believe that gay marriage devalues the institution of any more than a pair of ice addicts who have a family and neglect their kids, a marriage with domestic violence or hetero marriages that end in divorce?

N.B. The ancient Greeks had gay marriage. It predates the Abrahamic faiths.

Marriage was a way for women and their children not to starve to death when agriculture was perfected 10,000 years ago and it wasn't always strictly monogamous. It was borne out of survival instinct and bears little if at all resemblance to what marriage is now.
There is no such institution as "gay marriage".

hobbo
Member
Member
Posts: 7004
Joined: Mon 10 Mar, 2014 5:03 pm
Has liked: 129 times
Been liked: 97 times

Unread post by hobbo » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:08 pm

Pawsandclaws wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 11:23 am
It's a no to this survey from me. My wife will vote yes but she has a cousin who is a lesbian and two others who are gay. I refuse to discuss this with her as we cannot have a mature debate without the inevitable homophobic slur being trotted out. I see this as the last bastion of the morally defeated.

I am pro marriage and no amount of goodwill in the world will get around the fact that same sex couples are fundamentally biologically different to a marriage between a man and a woman. Let them call it some other name but not marriage because in my view it devalues marriage as we know it.
100% agree P&C....
My wife and myself will both be voting no .
It's all about tradition for us ...
Adam met Eve ... Not steve .
EPL 2014/15 Predict 6
Competition ...CHAMPION !
Winner of the 2016 $$$$
Work tipping comp !

User avatar
Yossarian
Member
Member
Posts: 9136
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Central Coast
Has liked: 38 times
Been liked: 115 times

Unread post by Yossarian » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:19 pm

As much as I object to the principle of voting on someone else's right to do something, I'll be voting yes. This is a secular society after all. If churches don't want to marry lesbians fine. Excluding gay people will simply contribute to their declining influence and relevance. But denying something on the basis of sexuality is something I don't understand anyone can support.


User avatar
Yossarian
Member
Member
Posts: 9136
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Central Coast
Has liked: 38 times
Been liked: 115 times

Unread post by Yossarian » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:24 pm

GNR4LIFE wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 11:24 am
One thing this debate has done is highlight how dumb some people from the No side of the argument are. That No ad was quite embarrassing, talking about how kids at school are being made to role play as same sex couples. Others who believe same sex marriage would encourage children to be gay, as if being gay is a choice. Plus the morons who ask "what next, will we start marrying animals?"

I will vote yes, but not because I support the "love is love" catchphrase or anything else, rather solely because 2 consenting adults marrying, regardless of their gender, does not change my life. There's something wrong with you if you wake up in the morning wanting to oppress others over things that have no affect on your life. Go find a hobby.

I've said all along and I will continue to say, whether it takes a month, a year, 5 years or 50, same sex marriage WILL be legalised because the world we live in is progressive. There will come a day when we look back on this the same way we look back now to a time when women and black people were not allowed to vote. Those voting no are only delaying the inevitable. They will ultimately come out on the losing end.
Because many on the no side are using this as a proxy to express their unease or displeasure with homosexuality in general. The amount of people who bang on about parenting is ridiculous - that bird has already flown.

User avatar
Yossarian
Member
Member
Posts: 9136
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Central Coast
Has liked: 38 times
Been liked: 115 times

Unread post by Yossarian » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:26 pm

hobbo wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:08 pm
Pawsandclaws wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 11:23 am
It's a no to this survey from me. My wife will vote yes but she has a cousin who is a lesbian and two others who are gay. I refuse to discuss this with her as we cannot have a mature debate without the inevitable homophobic slur being trotted out. I see this as the last bastion of the morally defeated.

I am pro marriage and no amount of goodwill in the world will get around the fact that same sex couples are fundamentally biologically different to a marriage between a man and a woman. Let them call it some other name but not marriage because in my view it devalues marriage as we know it.
100% agree P&C....
My wife and myself will both be voting no .
It's all about tradition for us ...
Adam met Eve ... Not steve .
Fair enough but if you're taking cues from a story featuring a fruit peddling snake you might want to reconsider!

User avatar
GNR4LIFE
Member
Member
Posts: 18817
Joined: Mon 28 Feb, 2011 5:57 pm
Has liked: 66 times
Been liked: 205 times

Unread post by GNR4LIFE » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:30 pm

Yossarian wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:24 pm
GNR4LIFE wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 11:24 am
One thing this debate has done is highlight how dumb some people from the No side of the argument are. That No ad was quite embarrassing, talking about how kids at school are being made to role play as same sex couples. Others who believe same sex marriage would encourage children to be gay, as if being gay is a choice. Plus the morons who ask "what next, will we start marrying animals?"

I will vote yes, but not because I support the "love is love" catchphrase or anything else, rather solely because 2 consenting adults marrying, regardless of their gender, does not change my life. There's something wrong with you if you wake up in the morning wanting to oppress others over things that have no affect on your life. Go find a hobby.

I've said all along and I will continue to say, whether it takes a month, a year, 5 years or 50, same sex marriage WILL be legalised because the world we live in is progressive. There will come a day when we look back on this the same way we look back now to a time when women and black people were not allowed to vote. Those voting no are only delaying the inevitable. They will ultimately come out on the losing end.
Because many on the no side are using this as a proxy to express their unease or displeasure with homosexuality in general. The amount of people who bang on about parenting is ridiculous - that bird has already flown.
A guy I went to school with went on a big rant about it on Facebook. He asked "What next, they will be able to adopt?" I told him they already could and his response was "Oh. Well it's probably easier for them to adopt then it is for normal couples".

TigerTiger
Member
Member
Posts: 232
Joined: Tue 13 Jun, 2017 4:56 pm
Has liked: 61 times
Been liked: 43 times

Unread post by TigerTiger » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:31 pm

I'm voting yes.
And to those people who tell me that my own mother can't marry her partner and that my own daughter can not get married one day because they are lesser people and 'gay'... well, let me say this.

My mother is no less of a person because of being gay. She has blue eyes, how about stoping her from being considered a person like any other because of that?

Marriage is a legal union, it can mean whatever you want beyond that to whoever, but legally it is a union between two people. Citing someone's sexual preference as a reason to not allow that union is just discrimination. You don't have to prove you are hetero to get married.

Gay people can still get married now right here, in Australia, down at the local church. But only to someone of the opposite gender. How do you think that adds to the 'sanctity of marriage'?

'Not Adam and Steve' really, how are you going to treat your son or daughter if they are gay? I honestly thought we as a country was better than this.

User avatar
Cultured Bogan
Member
Member
Posts: 16241
Joined: Tue 15 Sep, 2009 11:20 pm
Location: Blue Mountains
Has liked: 78 times
Been liked: 158 times

Unread post by Cultured Bogan » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:42 pm

Pawsandclaws wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:04 pm
Cultured Bogan wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 11:46 am
Pawsandclaws wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 11:23 am
It's a no to this survey from me. My wife will vote yes but she has a cousin who is a lesbian and two others who are gay. I refuse to discuss this with her as we cannot have a mature debate without the inevitable homophobic slur being trotted out. I see this as the last bastion of the morally defeated.

I am pro marriage and no amount of goodwill in the world will get around the fact that same sex couples are fundamentally biologically different to a marriage between a man and a woman. Let them call it some other name but not marriage because in my view it devalues marriage as we know it.
Do you believe that gay marriage devalues the institution of any more than a pair of ice addicts who have a family and neglect their kids, a marriage with domestic violence or hetero marriages that end in divorce?

N.B. The ancient Greeks had gay marriage. It predates the Abrahamic faiths.

Marriage was a way for women and their children not to starve to death when agriculture was perfected 10,000 years ago and it wasn't always strictly monogamous. It was borne out of survival instinct and bears little if at all resemblance to what marriage is now.
There is no such institution as "gay marriage".
No, you're right. It was just marriage, and it wasn't just limited to heterosexuals. I'm sorry if that is inconvenient development contrary to your world view.
I swing like hell but know full well that I won't win the fight, but big man I'm the beta male that's gonna ruin your night...

Fuerza en la adversidad.

Russell
Member
Member
Posts: 3280
Joined: Sat 10 Dec, 2011 6:46 pm
Has liked: 78 times
Been liked: 126 times

Unread post by Russell » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:50 pm

Yossarian wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:26 pm
hobbo wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:08 pm
Pawsandclaws wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 11:23 am
It's a no to this survey from me. My wife will vote yes but she has a cousin who is a lesbian and two others who are gay. I refuse to discuss this with her as we cannot have a mature debate without the inevitable homophobic slur being trotted out. I see this as the last bastion of the morally defeated.

I am pro marriage and no amount of goodwill in the world will get around the fact that same sex couples are fundamentally biologically different to a marriage between a man and a woman. Let them call it some other name but not marriage because in my view it devalues marriage as we know it.
100% agree P&C....
My wife and myself will both be voting no .
It's all about tradition for us ...
Adam met Eve ... Not steve .
Fair enough but if you're taking cues from a story featuring a fruit peddling snake you might want to reconsider!
I think that is below the belt Yoss.

If people want to vote Yes/no according to their religious beliefs - I can't see any difference in voting yes/no according to their secular beliefs. Isn't that a democracy.

By the way the story of the fruit peddling snake comes from a book called the "Bible" - you really won't turn into a pumpkin if you mention the word.

TigerTiger
Member
Member
Posts: 232
Joined: Tue 13 Jun, 2017 4:56 pm
Has liked: 61 times
Been liked: 43 times

Unread post by TigerTiger » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:58 pm

Russell wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:50 pm
Yossarian wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:26 pm
hobbo wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:08 pm
Pawsandclaws wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 11:23 am
It's a no to this survey from me. My wife will vote yes but she has a cousin who is a lesbian and two others who are gay. I refuse to discuss this with her as we cannot have a mature debate without the inevitable homophobic slur being trotted out. I see this as the last bastion of the morally defeated.

I am pro marriage and no amount of goodwill in the world will get around the fact that same sex couples are fundamentally biologically different to a marriage between a man and a woman. Let them call it some other name but not marriage because in my view it devalues marriage as we know it.
100% agree P&C....
My wife and myself will both be voting no .
It's all about tradition for us ...
Adam met Eve ... Not steve .
Fair enough but if you're taking cues from a story featuring a fruit peddling snake you might want to reconsider!
I think that is below the belt Yoss.

If people want to vote Yes/no according to their religious beliefs - I can't see any difference in voting yes/no according to their secular beliefs. Isn't that a democracy.

By the way the story of the fruit peddling snake comes from a book called the "Bible" - you really won't turn into a pumpkin if you mention the word.
It fires me up, but yes you're right mate about people being able to vote and say and think how they like.

I'm sticking up for my family, and I understand of course that other people/ families/ groups are just sticking up for theirs and what they believe in too.

I'm just glad that we are dealing with this perceived injustice, (whether it is or not, who am I to say for sure) as there are many more things which I perceive as injustices which I hope one day are addressed also.

User avatar
Yossarian
Member
Member
Posts: 9136
Joined: Sat 11 Jul, 2009 7:46 pm
Location: Central Coast
Has liked: 38 times
Been liked: 115 times

Unread post by Yossarian » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 1:03 pm

Russell wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:50 pm
Yossarian wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:26 pm
hobbo wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:08 pm
Pawsandclaws wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 11:23 am
It's a no to this survey from me. My wife will vote yes but she has a cousin who is a lesbian and two others who are gay. I refuse to discuss this with her as we cannot have a mature debate without the inevitable homophobic slur being trotted out. I see this as the last bastion of the morally defeated.

I am pro marriage and no amount of goodwill in the world will get around the fact that same sex couples are fundamentally biologically different to a marriage between a man and a woman. Let them call it some other name but not marriage because in my view it devalues marriage as we know it.
100% agree P&C....
My wife and myself will both be voting no .
It's all about tradition for us ...
Adam met Eve ... Not steve .
Fair enough but if you're taking cues from a story featuring a fruit peddling snake you might want to reconsider!
I think that is below the belt Yoss.

If people want to vote Yes/no according to their religious beliefs - I can't see any difference in voting yes/no according to their secular beliefs. Isn't that a democracy.

By the way the story of the fruit peddling snake comes from a book called the "Bible" - you really won't turn into a pumpkin if you mention the word.
It was a stab at humour. I know a lot of Christians, Jews Muslims - I respect their faith. But if you're going to use it to advance your case I reserve the right to say otherwise. The Bible brings a lot of comfort and good to many people but taking everything in it literally is IMO ridiculous. Use it to inform your view not dictate what your view is (I use your as a general concept not you personally).

My personal opinion is a person shouldn't get the right to stop other people doing something solely because their religion forbids it. By that logic we'd never have abortions, divorces. If the majority decided that Christians shouldn't be allowed to vote or drive a car I'd be as sttong in my objections.

TrueTiger
Forum Suppoter
Forum Suppoter
Posts: 4977
Joined: Thu 14 Aug, 2014 11:22 am
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 60 times

Unread post by TrueTiger » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 1:06 pm

Well guys there are some great opinions on this issue,I myself was taught from a very young age that man and woman get married have children and look after each other,however I now find myself in a world of ever changing ways,do I stand staunch in my view and teachings or do I take on board that things are changing dramatically around me..I first posted because I could see that there is a need to step out of the shadows of teachings long gone,do I still follow what I was taught??,absolutely,but I also have the demeanour to discuss and understand others plights and/or sufferings..take the example of Ian Roberts as

stated in the original post,he was a hard and tough competitor who also had the guts to come out and state his sexuallity,of course people were horrified,but most would have said its his life he can choose his own destiny,this is my main stand....we can all be taught something from early on in our lives but as we grow and develope we should have a right to choose which ever way we want in life its a personal choice,should I condemn that choice?NO,because what I was taught may not have been the same as they were taught....in this day and age we are free to choose,it may not be popular but its that freedom of choice that should be Paramount in anybodies life..
Lastly if a young guy or girl are at school and they have gay tendancies they should still be treated as human beings not lesser persons and be bullied until the brink of suicide...after all we all grow,get sick,bleed and eventually die,what you do with your life is entirely up to you as long as you don't interfer with others lives....


And Stryker I don't want to marry Ian ,he's not my type...he wouldn't be happy if I told him he would be mummy.... :D
You may see me struggle...but you will never see me quit... :D

Byron Bay Fan
Member
Member
Posts: 3898
Joined: Sat 17 Oct, 2015 2:14 pm
Has liked: 53 times
Been liked: 52 times

Unread post by Byron Bay Fan » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 1:13 pm

Kul wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 9:32 am
If I walked into a Church/Mosque/Synagogue today with some random girl from the street and asked to be married there and then, I have no problem them turning around and saying "No, we don't approve of the validity of your relationship". I respect their right to do that and, honestly, they are absolutely correct.

But the state has no right to make a judgement on the validity of a relationship.

By all means, protect religious freedoms and let the respective congregations have internal debates about the matter.
But there is another side to this. Some people like myself were brainwashed into a religion from a very young age which can result in two re-actions. Okay you wanted me and you got me so my gay wedding is taking place in my RCC come hell or high water. The RCC is the only institution that I recognise - blame yourself.

OR THE OPPOSITE

you (the RCC) immorally brainwashed me (child abuse) so now I will do whatever I want to take revenge on you - you harvest what you sow and if you don't want gay weddings I will be trying my hardest that they will take place.
Malcolm Knox: What has happened this week is a pity for the Tigers, a pity for Jason Taylor and a pity for Robbie Farah, who had achieved more than the Big Four put together but was somehow turned into collateral damage. (SMH 25-26 March, 2017)

colmcd
Member
Member
Posts: 530
Joined: Wed 04 Jan, 2017 11:38 pm
Has liked: 39 times
Been liked: 58 times

Unread post by colmcd » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 1:17 pm

Abraham wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 10:08 am
Sorry Col, your spittting out 50 random thoughts on a matter per post... makes it very hard to respond to, or engage in any sort of serious debate.
Sure (our posts are of the same size), Why on earth would you vote "NO" now if you fear for religious freedom?

Labor has committed to a parliamentary vote in future. Do you think religious freedoms will be better protected under Lee Rhiannon, Penny Wong and Labor when they get into government?

If you vote "YES" now then Malcolm Turnbull and the Liberals will be passing the motion. If you vote "No" then Lee Rhiannon, Penny wong and Greens/Labor will draft a future motion.

Russell
Member
Member
Posts: 3280
Joined: Sat 10 Dec, 2011 6:46 pm
Has liked: 78 times
Been liked: 126 times

Unread post by Russell » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 1:21 pm

TigerTiger wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:58 pm
Russell wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:50 pm
Yossarian wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:26 pm
hobbo wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 12:08 pm


100% agree P&C....
My wife and myself will both be voting no .
It's all about tradition for us ...
Adam met Eve ... Not steve .
Fair enough but if you're taking cues from a story featuring a fruit peddling snake you might want to reconsider!
I think that is below the belt Yoss.

If people want to vote Yes/no according to their religious beliefs - I can't see any difference in voting yes/no according to their secular beliefs. Isn't that a democracy.

By the way the story of the fruit peddling snake comes from a book called the "Bible" - you really won't turn into a pumpkin if you mention the word.
It fires me up, but yes you're right mate about people being able to vote and say and think how they like.

I'm sticking up for my family, and I understand of course that other people/ families/ groups are just sticking up for theirs and what they believe in too.

I'm just glad that we are dealing with this perceived injustice, (whether it is or not, who am I to say for sure) as there are many more things which I perceive as injustices which I hope one day are addressed also.
Just one last word on this from me, because in a way it is going off topic.

If my church, synogogue, mosque or whatever says to me - vote NO.

I don't have to, I have free will, it is a democracy. The point is, religions can say one thing but it is still a choice of sticking with what your religion says or not.

Religious people for the most part are not brainwashed.

colmcd
Member
Member
Posts: 530
Joined: Wed 04 Jan, 2017 11:38 pm
Has liked: 39 times
Been liked: 58 times

Unread post by colmcd » Mon 11 Sep, 2017 1:23 pm

Kul wrote:
Mon 11 Sep, 2017 9:32 am
If I walked into a Church/Mosque/Synagogue today with some random girl from the street and asked to be married there and then, I have no problem them turning around and saying "No, we don't approve of the validity of your relationship". I respect their right to do that and, honestly, they are absolutely correct.

But the state has no right to make a judgement on the validity of a relationship.

By all means, protect religious freedoms and let the respective congregations have internal debates about the matter.
Not 1 single priest/Imam/religious leader will be forced to perform a gay wedding. There will be an exemption for these people and their should be. Every bill that has come to the parliament has left them alone.

In fact what the current legislation does is stops a priest/Imam/Rabbi/celebrant from performing a Same sex wedding! So your church may recognise Same sex Marriage but you CANNOT have a gay wedding!

Vote "yes" for religious freedom!

Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”