Value Collector
Have courage, and be kind.
- Joined
- 13 January 2014
- Posts
- 12,238
- Reactions
- 8,487
I don't agree that it is not related, Syd.
Marriage is about children, and always has been.
Marriage and family are connected.
I am standing up for both.
This thread is about redefining Marriage as we know it, out of existence.
If it is not about children, then why is it to be run through public schools?
Same sex, pornography are all connected, and I don't agree with this being put to primary school children to describe their lifestyle.
My side, keeping marriage as is, needs to stop being censored.
If they want a proper debate, they need to let people talk.
As I said, I am standing up for Marriage to stay as is.
allowing people to drink vanilla coke will some how affect people who choose to drink classic coke.
The millenium gen doesn't care so they will vote yes just to get the annoyance away from their tri lattes.
She's got more credibility than you or me.
I think you are wrong there, the millennium generation care the most, they gay marriage has huge support among the young.
Gen Y care a fair bit, lots of support.
Gen X probably don't care so much, but will vote for it just to get it done.
Then you have the baby boomers and the dying elderly, who probably have the high rates against it, but their numbers are dropping by the day, and even some of them are coming around to the idea.
you guys are fighting a losing battle, you are living in the past, you are on the wrong side of history, and soon be viewed as the bitter old people that tried to stall a great civil rights achievement.
I don't know, believing in fairy tales makes you lose credibility in my opinion.
This Gay marriage crap is nothing more than a humbug for the Government and is dividing the community.
The Government has lots more important things to do like cleaning up the Green/Labor left wing mess from 2007/2013...it will take a decade to do it with no help from Labor.
Her life with lesbian parents was no fairy tale.
(or maybe it is).
Labor will be in next term to clean up the mess left by Abbott & Hockey.
Off thread again Rumpy.
Yes, you were
But the way the Libs have handled this issue does them no good whatever.
They say they are a party of "individualists", but on this issue everyone has to toe the line. They say they are the party of individual freedoms, except on this issue when people can't marry who they want.
Whether you agree with gay marriage or not, the Liberals have shown themselves to be a party of hypocrites (among other things), and this will weigh on them at the next election.
.I would be happy to accept what the majority of voters think....Would you?
I suppose it's a convenient tactic to shut down debate to allege that an argument is off topic, but it's a bit thin in this case.
Anyway, what are your views on a proposed plebiscite on gay marriage ? Imo it should be held at the next election so as not to drag the issue on for years. Should a bare majority decide the outcome or should it be 60-40 at least ?
As for gay foster parents, if the care agency decides that they are the best people available then that's fine by me.
So what time limit would you put on a child being in foster care with a homosexual carer? You're argument is that all children under that scenario will be negatively affected. How would foster care be any different to adoption? Should there be a time limit on single foster carers as they present the same "issues" you believe will be caused by homosexual parents.
As has been pointed out multiple times
* You don't need to be married to have children
* You don't have to have children if you get married.
* Gay people already have children.
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?