Gay Marriage

[Value Collector]

For shizzle ... but the party believes in a "civil" marriage between man and a woman. Keeping of the realm and all that and you would be surprised as to how many demographics would identify themselves as "straight" ...

So let's let the Libs libel themselves up over this one now shall we?

I am not really sure what you are talking about, or how it relates to what I said, I was making a comment on anger statement that the Libs were getting themselves into a pickle with voters.

I simply said that I am a life time liberal voter, and would never previously have thought to vote labor, however if gay marriage becomes an election issue, that the Libs don't want to budge on, I would vote against them.

 

[Value Collector]

She has an opinion as do you have yours. I spoke with my partner about this and my partner answered thusly ... "You don't see this happening in the wild do you? I mean do you see male lions cohabitating with other male lions and expect the species to survive" (She actually used a lot more expletives and made funny gestures with her pelvis in a thrusting motion)

Yes you do have fish and frogs that change sex due to seasonal adjustments (Darwinsm?) but also the brain influences sexual development depending on the social environment. This is due to genetics.

Us homo sapiens are hardwired to be male or female in the brain. The body is the hinderance hence why we are having this discussion.

Check it out ... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/justi...d-the-rise-of-the-alpha-female_b_4968667.html

As it turns out your partner is just uneducated on the matter.

Both male and female lions have been seen to interact homosexually.[86][87] Male lions pair-bond for a number of days and initiate homosexual activity with affectionate nuzzling and caressing, leading to mounting and thrusting. About 8% of mountings have been observed to occur with other males. Pairings between females are held to be fairly common in captivity but have not been observed in the wild.

There is actually Wikipedia article that states that same sex sexual behaviour has been observed in over 500 species including, apes, monkeys, elephants, Dolphins, sheep just to name a few of the mammals.

 

[trainspotter]

I am not really sure what you are talking about, or how it relates to what I said, I was making a comment on anger statement that the Libs were getting themselves into a pickle with voters.

I simply said that I am a life time liberal voter, and would never previously have thought to vote labor, however if gay marriage becomes an election issue, that the Libs don't want to budge on, I would vote against them.

Good for you. I am a lifetime Liberal voter and if TA keels over and let's his carpet muncher sister destroy matrimonial harmony for the sake of the minority for a few lousy votes then I am voting against him as well and hang whatever happens when the lunatics are on the grass.

I posted how many men and women affiniare themselves as being in the minority ... I am all for their rights to be the same as currently enjoyed under the word "marriage" ... my anger statement is towards the legislation involved with "defacto" relationships. Man and woman AOK. Man and man NOT AOK and vici versa. Just give "them" the same legal rights and this is a non sequitur.

To be "married" under the guise of the law is a crock of excrement as it a LEGAL term. To be "married" under the guise of the Church is a LOVE thing. Which one are you arguing for?

 

[trainspotter]

As it turns out you partner is just uneducated on the matter.

The is actually Wikipedia article that states that same sex sexual behaviour has been observed in over 500 species.

As it turns out you failed to understand what my uneducated partner was thrusting about " and expect the species to survive" I believe they call it procreation. You will figure it out eventually.

 

[Value Collector]

As it turns out you failed to understand what my uneducated partner was thrusting about " and expect the species to survive" I believe they call it procreation. You will figure it out eventually.

A species can survive quite well with a certain percentage of the population being gay ( no one is suggesting we are all going to be gay), and given that so much of the talk here against gay marriage is about children, it turns out a lot of people are worried that gay's will breed.

But sure a homosexual couple can't give birth, but a lesbian couple could give birth to double the number of children that a straight couple that only has 1 womb could, all they need is a sperm doner.

 

[luutzu]

I am a life time liberal voter, never have I thought of voting labor. But if this becomes an election issue that the Libs won't budge on, I will give labor a protest vote, and if a hardline lib supporter like me is willing to do that, I guess a lot of others will to.

Going over to the Dark Side, threaten to, do you?
Ultimatum giving you are. Hmm?

The force is strong with this one. But anger lead to ultimatum; ultimatum results in banishment; banishment to rebellion.


You guys are about to ruin the Lion King for me.

 

[Ald123]

Imagine if you will for a moment that that creator doesn't actually exist.

What a waste it would be to live a life without love and sex, all because of a dusty old book of myths.

It's crazy, the best thing is just to live you life in a way that makes you happy, without harming others, and without stopping others from seeking their own happiness, as long as they aren't harming others.

If there were a god, do you really think he cares who you have sex with?

That depends you see. I have met a man so incredibly brilliantly gifted in every single facet of life, he could play chess with the devil himself and win. Luckily he was a person who experienced God.
Had he not done so, for such a person to Wander the world, is like letting ten nuclear bombs on the world. He could achieve whatever he wanted. When I saw this power, I quickly realised that things are not as they seem.
Don't worry God exists.

 

[Value Collector]

Good for you. I am a lifetime Liberal voter and if TA keels over and let's his carpet muncher sister destroy matrimonial harmony for the sake of the minority for a few lousy votes

I posted how many men and women affiniare themselves as being in the minority ... I am all for their rights to be the same as currently enjoyed under the word "marriage" ... my anger statement is towards the legislation involved with "defacto" relationships. Man and woman AOK. Man and man NOT AOK and vici versa. Just give "them" the same legal rights and this is a non sequitur.

To be "married" under the guise of the law is a crock of excrement as it a LEGAL term. To be "married" under the guise of the Church is a LOVE thing. Which one are you arguing for?

I don't want Tony to allow gay marriage for votes, I want him to allow it because it's the right thing to do.

Who cares how many gays there are, the fact that they are a minority is irrelevant.

people get married because they love each other, regardless if it's in a church or not, this debate is about whether the government should recognise these marriages or not.

We presently recognise marriages between straights, we don't recognise the marriages between gay's, that is just plane descrimination, I don't care what the churches recognise, I don't even know which church you are talking about, I care about the legal recognition from the state, at the end of the day, the states laws matter for a whole host of reasons, the churches rules only really affect those who take the church brand seriously.

Marriage predates all the major religions.

 

[Value Collector]

You guys are about to ruin the Lion King for me.

Lol, don't go to the wiki page then, it's got a picture of two male lions don't it jungle style.

 

[luutzu]

As it turns out you failed to understand what my uneducated partner was thrusting about " and expect the species to survive" I believe they call it procreation. You will figure it out eventually.

Homosexuals have been around since the beginning, hard to see how them being given equal rights as all adults are given would destroy or affect survival of the species.

I mean, if the wind turbine isn't going to do it...


Gay parents are not going to turn their children gay; just as heterosexual parenting haven't turn out all heterosexual children.

 

[trainspotter]

A species can survive quite well with a certain percentage of the population being gay ( no one is suggesting we are all going to be gay), and given that so much of the talk here against gay marriage is about children, it turns out a lot of people are worried that gay's will breed.

But sure a homosexual couple can't give birth, but a lesbian couple could give birth to double the number of children that a straight couple that only has 1 womb could, all they need is a sperm doner.

Don't forget hermaphrodites in this statement. If people LOVE each other and celebrate their individuality then children who grow in this environment are the same as any other "LOVING" couple. Unfortunately millions of years of evolution preclude this from happening. Also since the advent of science being able to test tube spermatozoa and create a bionic womb the repercussions of what we are voting for will become self evident in about 10 years.

You are missing what I am driving up on. Is it a LEGAL thing or is it a LOVE thing? There are many terms of engagement that require legislation FIRST rather than just a party vote behind closed doors to allow same sex marriage.

I can hear the ministers bleat ... "Congratulations I now announce you "Partners for Life" and you may kiss your respective partner" CHURCH

I can hear the lawyers bleat ... "Congratulations I now announce you "Partners for Life" and you may will your respective partner nothing" LEGAL

So is this legislation going to clear up what I have suggested? REALLY? It takes a "marriage certificate" to do this? Why not just legislate they have the same rights as a "married couple" and be FERKING done with it?

 

[Value Collector]

That depends you see. I have met a man so incredibly brilliantly gifted in every single facet of life, he could play chess with the devil himself and win. Luckily he was a person who experienced God.
Had he not done so, for such a person to Wander the world, is like letting ten nuclear bombs on the world. He could achieve whatever he wanted. When I saw this power, I quickly realised that things are not as they seem.
Don't worry God exists.

I think you are deluded. Big on claims, short on evidence. Most likely suffering from a whole host of logical fallacies.

Why don't you head over to the religion and science thread and explain why you believe your brand of God exists, I will be happy to help you identify the logical fallacies that have lead you down the wrong path, either that or you will convince me, my mind is open to be changed, but only by evidence.

 

[trainspotter]

Homosexuals have been around since the beginning, hard to see how them being given equal rights as all adults are given would destroy or affect survival of the species.

I mean, if the wind turbine isn't going to do it...


Gay parents are not going to turn their children gay; just as heterosexual parenting haven't turn out all heterosexual children.

You still are not getting it are you?

X chromosome PLUS x chromosome = 0

Y chromosome PLUS y chromosome = 0

X chromosome PLUS y chromosome = life

Y chromosome PLUS x chromosome = life

Wind turbine jibe is a sideshow ... move on.

 

[trainspotter]

We presently recognise marriages between straights, we don't recognise the marriages between gay's, that is just plane descrimination, I don't care what the churches recognise, I don't even know which church you are talking about, I care about the legal recognition from the state, at the end of the day, the states laws matter for a whole host of reasons, the churches rules only really affect those who take the church brand seriously.

Ahhhhh now you are starting to understand the en globo situation at hand. The media is pushing the "gay" button and developing ground swell of the proletariat to march with them to recognise the significance of being "married" in front of your peers. Photo opportunity and I am sure there will be a thriving business of celebrants and wedding planners hacking into this phenomenon. Elton John anyone?

Internally the LEGALISE of this is much more entertaining. I am agreeing with you on the "rights" of same sex partners .... property, superannuation funds, bank accounts, executor of wills etc ad infinitum. Not the issue here ... BUT the laws that are involved to change all of this is not a mere act of parliament. Well actually it is. But more of a society that requires acceptance and by playing this as a political football while Rome burns is a side event better than any magician worth his salt could have hoped for.

Reminds me of Keating when he proclaimed arguing with Hewson was like "being flogged by a wet lettuce"

 

[Value Collector]

You are missing what I am driving up on. Is it a LEGAL thing or is it a LOVE thing? There are many terms of engagement that require legislation FIRST rather than just a party vote behind closed doors to allow same sex marriage.

I can hear the ministers bleat ... "Congratulations I now announce you "Partners for Life" and you may kiss your respective partner" CHURCH

I can hear the lawyers bleat ... "Congratulations I now announce you "Partners for Life" and you may will your respective partner nothing" LEGAL

So is this legislation going to clear up what I have suggested? REALLY? It takes a "marriage certificate" to do this? Why not just legislate they have the same rights as a "married couple" and be FERKING done with it?

Marriage for the vast majority is a love thing,

What you have to understand is that marriage predates the major religions and all legal systems, so it is neither a church thing or a legal thing at its core, it's a primal partnership based on love and sexual attraction.

Now as countries and religions and legal systems developed, obviously we started recording and formally recognising marriages, even though they existed for thousands of years before the modern legal system or religion, just like the concept of property ownership, as the legal system grew there became benefits to having these devices recognised.

So we are currently in the position where only straight marriages are recognised by the state, however gay marriages exist, they are just not recognised under the law yet. Changing the marriage act to recognise these marriages doesn't mean they suddenly become less about love and more about legal matters, it just means that we give the gay members of our society the dignity they diserve by recognising their marriages in the same way we recognise straight ones.

If you are trying to say a religious marriage is more about love, I think you are dead wrong, I think religious marriages and funerals are some of the worst types, most of the talk ends up being about the religion rather than the couple or the dead person.

 

[luutzu]

You still are not getting it are you?

X chromosome PLUS x chromosome = 0

Y chromosome PLUS y chromosome = 0

X chromosome PLUS y chromosome = life

Y chromosome PLUS x chromosome = life

Wind turbine jibe is a sideshow ... move on.

Pretty sure there's no such thing as the "gay gene". So the x and y stuff would lead to what they call the "sex" of the person, not their gender. Sex would be their sexual organ and physical built, gender is... gender.

Don't remember all these genetic stuff but I did wrote a paper on the biological-psychological explanation of homosexuality (the prof. specialises in it so anyway)...

From memory, and I've said it here before... from an evolutionary, Darwinian perspective, there is actually a purpose for homosexuality, that it contributes to the survival of the species: homosexuals are the same as the population but require less resources as it does not breed, more time to hunt and gather and provide etc.

Our society have moved beyond, most of us anyway, beyond food scarcity... that and if gays are deemed equal, they can have their own kids or adopt otherwise orphan kids... that and society also benefits by not discriminating fellow human beings for no good reason other than some personal or religious reason.

Anyway... most of us don't care of our neighbour marries Sue or Mary-Ann or that other nice lady with a sweet smile we'd prefered him to. Beats me why we'd care of he love and want to marry Steve or John or Joe. The important thing is the lawn are mowed and the house is clean, alright? haha

 

[trainspotter]

Your flippant response perturbs me. It is not about lawns being mowed. It is about "gay rights" and I have stated is it a show of hands that a ceremony has been performed in the eyes of God before a Church to make this legal or is it a function of parliament to vote and give the same rights to same sex couples as do hetero's enjoy?

If it is the latter then a simple change of context to include the minority is a very easy matter.

You seem to have a difference between Church and State legislation. It is the moral ground that this is being fought upon and I am sure that this will not be given up easy by US Liberal voters.

 

[luutzu]

Your flippant response perturbs me. It is not about lawns being mowed. It is about "gay rights" and I have stated is it a show of hands that a ceremony has been performed in the eyes of God before a Church to make this legal or is it a function of parliament to vote and give the same rights to same sex couples as do hetero's enjoy?

If it is the latter then a simple change of context to include the minority is a very easy matter.

You seem to have a difference between Church and State legislation. It is the moral ground that this is being fought upon and I am sure that this will not be given up easy by US Liberal voters.

If it's ever made on moral ground, banning or in any way discriminating against any segment of society cannot be said to be "moral". Religious, yes, moral no.

In the US, it's not just about the ceremony and the party. In states where gay marriage is not recognised, gay couples living together all their lives are not considered married or defacto and that have a lot of consequences in terms of legal rights to property, taxes and all that.

Alright, it's wrong to be flippant about it. But it is somewhat ridiculous that there's even a debate as to whether or not gay brother or gay sister should be permitted to get married, that it could harm society and ruin the children.

 

[trainspotter]

Pretty sure there's no such thing as the "gay gene". So the x and y stuff would lead to what they call the "sex" of the person, not their gender. Sex would be their sexual organ and physical built, gender is... gender.

Don't remember all these genetic stuff but I did wrote a paper on the biological-psychological explanation of homosexuality (the prof. specialises in it so anyway)...

Once again I reiterate to what you have typed. You suggested my partner was uneducated to the prolonging of the species in relation to the lions quote. She made it very clear that you NEED a Mummy & a Daddy for any kind of life to begin. Jack and Jill went up the hill kinda simplistic stuff. But she is uneducated

I also wrote this:-

Yes you do have fish and frogs that change sex due to seasonal adjustments (Darwinsm?) but also the brain influences sexual development depending on the social environment. This is due to genetics.

Us homo sapiens are hardwired to be male or female in the brain. The body is the hinderance hence why we are having this discussion.

There is no GAY gene ... stop arguing semantics. Just give the same rights under legislation without the fanfare and we can all move on. It is rapidly moving ground and pretty soon you will realise that gay/straight/transgender/Caitlyn Jenner will not mean much in the long run when a lawyer gets hold of this and starts picking apart how much a "GAY" couple loves each other when it comes to separating the matrimonial home and kids and dogs and Swarovski crystal collections.

 

[bellenuit]

As it turns out you failed to understand what my uneducated partner was thrusting about " and expect the species to survive" I believe they call it procreation. You will figure it out eventually.

Scientists Discover Evolutionary Advantage For Homosexuality

http://www.iflscience.com/plants-an...iscover-evolutionary-advantage-homosexual-sex