It is seriously both hilarious and embarrassing reading this thread... The highlights should be printed and posted in a museum in about 20 years time...
Do you people against same sex marriage even realise that GAY PEOPLE ALREADY LIVE TOGETHER IN COMMITTED RELATIONSHIPS, MILLIONS OF THEM????
Do you realise that GAY PEOPLE CAN ALREADY HAVE CHILDREN IF THEY WANT TO? (most prefer a couple of Dachshunds)
Just because they get married isn't going to change a bloody thing and yet it means so much to them. It is the ultimate commitment to one another.
What is wrong with you people seriously? Do you not see how ridiculous you sound? Can you not see that this is inevitable? It is just a matter of time... You don't have to like it but you will have to accept it. You're like children that have a toy that you're bored with but you won't let the other kid have it because you can see how badly they want it.... Have a heart and and stop embarrassing yourselves. AND for gods sake stop hiding behind this "it's all about the children" argument. THIS ISN'T ABOUT LEGALISING CHILDREN INTO GAY RELATIONSHIPS, THAT ALREADY EXISTS! Open another thread if that's what your issue is!
Be honest with yourselves and GROW THE HELL UP.... The next generation is coming
View attachment 63221
http://articles.latimes.com/2003/feb/18/local/me-mom18
Lesbian Sues Over Physician's Refusal to Do Insemination
Appeals court reviews case that pits civil rights claim against a doctor who declined for religious reasons to perform procedure.
February 18, 2003|Peter Y. Hong | Times Staff Writer
Eager to start a family, Lupita Benitez asked her doctor to help her conceive a child through artificial insemination. Benitez thought her request was routine -- just another of many from women who face infertility and seek medical help to get pregnant.
But Benitez's doctor, Christine Z. Brody, refused to perform the procedure. Her reason: Benitez is a lesbian, and Brody said it was against her Christian beliefs to help a homosexual become pregnant.
After that 1999 appointment in her doctor's office in the San Diego suburb of Vista, Benitez filed a civil rights lawsuit against Brody and the doctor's medical group. The trial court initially dismissed the lawsuit. Now the matter is before the 4th District California Court of Appeal in San Diego....
Is this the future we want? As Sen Abetz said this morning, this is a Pandoras Box.
The case for same sex marriage has neither been fully nor honestly made. Same sex changes to the Marriage Act would undermine constitutional rights to freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
As for a majority wanting it - you mean like the majority supposedly wanted the republic? Look how that turned out.
When the ACT legalised same sex marriage in 2013, it went to the High Court, who ruled against it as invalid under the constitution.No one is trying to change the constitution, what the majority of Australians want is the legal definition of marriage to be changed. This requires an amendment to the Marriage Act 1961.
When the ACT legalised same sex marriage in 2013, it went to the High Court, who ruled against it as invalid under the constitution.
This was because of the definition of marriage under the Marriage Act. Hence, a change to the Marriage Act is a change to the constitution.
Is this the future we want? As Sen Abetz said this morning, this is a Pandoras Box.
The case for same sex marriage has neither been fully nor honestly made. Same sex changes to the Marriage Act would undermine constitutional rights to freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
As for a majority wanting it - you mean like the majority supposedly wanted the republic? Look how that turned out.
Watch and wait what happens, then you will see.
For me it's about dilution of the value of my marriage and the dilution of a principle that should be held sacrosanct.
.
There you go an example of an lgbt who does not respect the right of another human being to have their own freedom.
If I go to the dentist and tell the doctor to remove my front teeth and he says no he won't, I then go to court and sue him? What a terrorist this lgbt person has become.
I go to the city with my children and I see a gay parade with such lewdness shoved into my face. I don't see a normal peaceful march, my children get scared and confused.
I go to the local beach which has a nude section and there are only gay people openly having sex and soliciting in the dunes. Is it their right to do that and my discrimination against them if I object to my kids seeing that.
Why are my rights not important?
Watch and wait what happens, then you will see.
For me it's about dilution of the value of my marriage and the dilution of a principle that should be held sacrosanct.
Nothing wrong with civil unions, between humans and animals if they so wish, I don't even give a damn about 1 woman having a civil union with ten other women and 3 men and a blue whale. Give these unions the same rights, don't allow any form of discrimination.
But get your hands of the value of my marriage and its single meaning and the legacy of it that I want to pass down to my kids. Don't go teaching my children your views, because I care about my bloodline, it's good name and its survival down the generation. Don't go degrading my morals and my beliefs. I won't interfere in yours you leave mine alone. Go get your own name for your definition of your same sex unions and f-off from mine.
Marriage is between a single man and a single woman, always has been, always will be. No descendant of mine will ever be taught different.
If the filthy rich lobby (probably the majority of gays who have no stress due to no family life and plenty of income due to no children) managed to get laws changed in another patently stupid country that's their problem America is a parasite anyway, which by the way if you read the opinion of the dissenting judges you see that Americans took their constitution and just threw it away into the dirt pile of being able to be changed by judges when this was only to be possible by the people.
Get your own name for your own particular sex Union. Don't come attacking us for ours. Have some decency and respect what is ours.
Is this the future we want? As Sen Abetz said this morning, this is a Pandoras Box.
The case for same sex marriage has neither been fully nor honestly made. Same sex changes to the Marriage Act would undermine constitutional rights to freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
As for a majority wanting it - you mean like the majority supposedly wanted the republic? Look how that turned out.
No, Luutzu, I don't agree with changing Marriage, and I have given my reasons why.
As stated in this video, there is no benefit to same sex marriage in society, it actually harms society.
I have also added more throughout this thread.
This trying to steamroll people with this victim mentality, doesn't wash.
Well they are on the same par, TH.
The homosexual activists and the Islamic activists are becoming almost one and the same.
Both are using similar means to achieve similar goals.
How would it dilute the value of your marriage?
Well they are on the same par, TH.
The homosexual activists and the Islamic activists are becoming almost one and the same.
Both are using similar means to achieve similar goals.
Lol, maybe you should stop taking your children out to nude beaches and gay parades.
VC, you are only good at putting people down when you have nothing to say, go learn some manners.
Maybe you should think about it before mouthing off.
lets delver into the concept of sacrosant. The dictionary definition is very sacred or holy; inviolable. sacrosanctity, sacrosanctness, noun. Word Origin. C17: from Latin sacrōsanctus made holy by sacred rite, from sacrō by sacred rite, from sacer holy + sanctus, from sancīre to hallow
Judging by this, there would be a religious element into you belief that the current form of marriage is how God intended? But as others have shown, in the bible polygamy was condoned by God, even had instructions from him. Concubines AKA sex slaves were also quite acceptable. Even Jesus had no issues with polygamy or concubines. So why is the current restriced form of marriage held us as the will of God, as the only for of marriage that is right?
Many gays are not filthy rich. I don't believe there's a gay billionaire in Australia, and I don't recall there being any openly gay people on the BRW rich list here. I know Paul Zarah is openly gay, and for a time I think he was the only oopen gay CEO on the ASX 200, though now he has Alan Joyce there with him.
Gay do have stress in life, usually due to discrimination and intolerance. Still too many young gays face rejection by family and friends when they come out. Gay life is certainly not all sunshine and lollipops. There's plenty of heterosexual couples and singles who choose not to have children. I work with some straight couples that choose not to have children. What right do you have to judge anyone on how they choose to live their life?
So when interacial couples wanted to get married, do you think it was reasonable for those against them being able to marry had the right to say Get your own name for your own particular sex Union. Don't come attacking us for ours. Have some decency and respect what is ours. I'd argue since you want marriage to be sacrosanct that those who want polygamy and concubines, as the good Lord supported in both the old and new testaments, have first claim to the word marriage and those wanting to have monogamous marriages should have to call their unions something else.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?