Gay Marriage

[Tisme]

well at least go three phase that will give you more bang for your buck lol

Three active phases and earth ... no place for a neutral position:

 

[PZ99]

So it's a phase of 50 times a second, a lot of humming, no room for square waves on this harmonious earth and a very expensive Electricity Bill at the end of it? No wonder the DC brigade want it differently

 

[Wysiwyg]

I'm hero sexual and proud of it .

Superman, Batman? Which costume is best in your opinion?

 

[tech/a]

Duffys just fine

 

[dutchie]

Superman, Batman? Which costume is best in your opinion?

Duffys just fine

I was thinking more James Bond

 

[tech/a]

EXACTLY

 

[crackajack]

Three active phases and earth ... no place for a neutral position:

View attachment 72211

Much better at least you get a buz out of that lol

 

[Tisme]

Sports bet

50%-59.99% yes = $3

https://www.sportsbet.com.au/betting/politics/same-sex-marriage

 

[crackajack]

Sports bet

50%-59.99% yes = $3

https://www.sportsbet.com.au/betting/politics/same-sex-marriage

ok I prefer ladbrokes but yes I will put some money on it lol

 

[Tink]

I will be voting NO.

The family unit (mother, father, child) is the TRUTH, and what Marriage stands for.

 

[Tisme]

http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/gay_strategies/overhauling.html

 

[basilio]

http://www.massresistance.org/docs/issues/gay_strategies/overhauling.html

Interesting...
So Tisme, what status do you believe gays/homosexual behaviour should have in our society ?

 

[basilio]

"Should all adults have the right to marry the person they love?"

Is that the issue we are discussing in this thread and as a country ? Perhaps this article offers an analysis of the question and various respones to the isue of same sex marriage .

We won't be giving equal time to spurious arguments against marriage equality
Lenore Taylor
The ‘no’ camp will try to contort this issue into anything other than what it is: should adults be able to marry the person they love?


Comments
832
Contact author


@lenoretaylor

Saturday 12 August 2017 09.57 AEST Last modified on Saturday 12 August 2017 16.41 AEST

Marriage equality opponents are trying everything to complicate this decision, but at its heart the question is simple: “Should all adults have the right to marry the person they love?”

The Coalition has contorted the decision-making process because it cannot manage its internal divisions, with political consequences as yet unknown, but we should not allow the question itself to be diverted or twisted out of shape.

As we start this unnecessary, voluntary, snail mail survey-thingie, the “no” case is loudly demanding the media run “both sides” of the question.

That makes it critical to precisely define the “question” itself. Because running both sides of the actual question is not the same as running “both sides” of all the other spurious “questions” the anti-equality case is setting up as obfuscations.

So here, at the get-go, is a list of the arguments this is not about, and to which Guardian Australia will definitely not be giving “equal time” or attention.

(IMO the following analysis of the various spurious arguments against same sex marriage is well worth considering.)
https://www.theguardian.com/austral...-spurious-arguments-against-marriage-equality

 

[Tisme]

Interesting...
So Tisme, what status do you believe gays/homosexual behaviour should have in our society ?

I think they should pull their heads in and put up with the unfairness of being an imperfect individual in a sea of regimented humanity, like the rest of us have to. They want A+B = C equality even though their relationships are A+A =C, when A cannot equal B, which is the lie all those who have joined the pro crusade won't consider incase it contradicts their socially scripted sense of fair play.

You already know my feelings about love and marriage; one can preclude the other and I do not believe love requires marriage.

 

[basilio]

I think they should pull their heads in and put up with the unfairness of being an imperfect individual in a sea of regimented humanity, like the rest of us have to.

I don't understand what you are saying here Tisme. Yes we are all imperfect. We all have our foibles, differences, challenges. Who gets to decide which difference is socially/politically wrong and punishable ? How far do we accept the range of differences in people ? How closely do we control behaviours "someone" doesn't approve of ? How does that relate to the question
“Should all adults have the right to marry the person they love?”

 

[SirRumpole]

“Should all adults have the right to marry the person they love?”

Marriage is a social construct, it's the recognition by society of a relationship. Society has the right to recognise relationships if it wants to, not wanting to does not preclude that relationship from taking place.

The question you have asked should be decided by society in general not by politicians, and it will be, by the second best choice of a postal ballot because the politically correct Greens and Labor don't like the citizens making decisions if it may hurt someone's feelings.

 

[Tisme]

I don't understand what you are saying here Tisme. Yes we are all imperfect. We all have our foibles, differences, challenges. Who gets to decide which difference is socially/politically wrong and punishable ? How far do we accept the range of differences in people ? How closely do we control behaviours "someone" doesn't approve of ? How does that relate to the question
“Should all adults have the right to marry the person they love?”

I guess you just answered your own question. What are your boundaries? Would you, for instance allow me into your partner's bed, if your partner wanted to have equal pleasure?

There is no point arguing this, because a large segment of the population has been successfully groomed over a generation and a bit to accept the concept of trivialising traditional marriage in favour of socialism.

You don't honestly think that people like me who have studied higher education in e.g. marketing don't know manipulation models when we see it.

You and others have a cognitive bias that has grown into a Semmelweis Reflex condition and you can't be deprogrammed in this lifetime, you don't even know why you feel compelled to be a standard bearer ... you will just have to live with your choices I'm afraid. Fortunately I'll be long departed before we all become drones .... I hope.

 

[basilio]

the concept of trivialising traditional marriage in favour of socialism.

WTF ?? How did you make that up ? Where does socialism fit into the same-sex marriage discussion.

With regard to the Semmelweiss Reflex condition. I guess what you are saying is that totally, clearly, and unequivocally homosexual behaviour is wrong but I and others who take this view have been programmed into such a belief by an insidious/inspired program of densensitization and grooming. ( Could this also be the case for interracial relationships ?)

I have to say I am bemused by many different behaviours in our society. I can readily agree that we are influenced by many factors and it isn't hard to see examples of where many seemingly sane people can come to believe quite bizzare ideas. Does that extend to acknowledging the broader range of sexual interests we have as totally wrong ?

 

[Tisme]

For facebook users who are already tired of the onslaught of SSM and hetrophobic rants, I recommend this Google extension:

http://www.fbpurity.com/#

It will probably filter out most of the ABC TV posts, but that's OK

 

[pixel]

WTF ?? How did you make that up ? Where does socialism fit into the same-sex marriage discussion.

With regard to the Semmelweiss Reflex condition. I guess what you are saying is that totally, clearly, and unequivocally homosexual behaviour is wrong but I and others who take this view have been programmed into such a belief by an insidious/inspired program of densensitization and grooming. ( Could this also be the case for interracial relationships ?)

I have to say I am bemused by many different behaviours in our society. I can readily agree that we are influenced by many factors and it isn't hard to see examples of where many seemingly sane people can come to believe quite bizzare ideas. Does that extend to acknowledging the broader range of sexual interests we have as totally wrong ?

I often find a very helpful trick to prime my BS Detector with regard to a statement like Tisme's is trying to turn it around.
When Tisme claims we have been brainwashed into accepting Gays, Lebians, and others as humans deserving respect and fair treatment, I am turning it around and ask myself,
Could the opponents of recognition have been brainwashed into sticking with a concept that was preached as Gospel for Millennia? Is it possible that their brains are lost to accepting new ideas?
And that, my dear Watson, makes a lot more sense than claiming people capable of accepting new paradigms have been brainwashed and are lost causes for a decent and free society.

Along with "marriage is one man and his women", the Bible also contains rules for slavery, sale of one's daughters, and describes the earth as flat. Slavery and pimping one's daughters is meanwhile frowned upon by most civilizations. Flat Earthers claim to be gaining members "all round the Globe".
Case rests...