Same sex marriage - Yes or No?

Tisme · 17 November 2017

overhang said:
Thankfully the majority of Australians disagree with your view, your religion is dying in this country.

Just remember you chose this and when you reflect on the consequences for your descendants you will be culpable. You tinker with nature and nature will always retaliate in kind.

overhang · 17 November 2017

Tisme said:
Just remember you chose this and when you reflect on the consequences for your descendants you will be culpable. You tinker with nature and nature will always retaliate in kind.

You just remember you were on the wrong side of history.

Tisme · 17 November 2017

overhang said:
You just remember you were on the wrong side of history.

I'll remember alright and I'll delight in the misery you guys are going to go through and the guilt you will carry to your death beds and bonus for heathens like me, no chance of heaven for you people even if you are a Catholic and confess this sin !!!!

Wysiwyg · 17 November 2017

Sigmund wrote a letter ...

In 1935, Freud wrote to a mother who had asked him to treat her son's homosexuality, a letter that would later become famous:
I gather from your letter that your son is a homosexual. I am most impressed by the fact that you do not mention this term yourself in your information about him. May I question you why you avoid it? Homosexuality is assuredly no advantage, but it is nothing to be ashamed of, no vice, no degradation; it cannot be classified as an illness; we consider it to be a variation of the sexual function, produced by a certain arrest of sexual development. Many highly respectable individuals of ancient and modern times have been homosexuals, several of the greatest men among them. (Plato, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, etc). It is a great injustice to persecute homosexuality as a crime –and a cruelty, too. If you do not believe me, read the books of Havelock Ellis.

overhang · 17 November 2017

Tisme said:
I'll remember alright and I'll delight in the misery you guys are going to go through and the guilt you will carry to your death beds and bonus for heathens like me, no chance of heaven you people even if you are a Catholic and confess this sin !!!!

I question your intellect if your major concern is a few gays getting married and not our deficit, threats of climate change, housing affordability, automation, record low wage growth etc

Tisme · 17 November 2017

overhang said:
I question your intellect if your major concern is a few gays getting married and not our deficit, threats of climate change, housing affordability, automation, record low wage growth etc

That's obscuration and deflection arguing and doesn't deal with case at hand. Social trends and fads like the this latest SSM one have an ongoing affect on the community in intangible ways, but history has a way of repeating itself and a correction will occur in the future to repeal any unnatural laws of nature.

If you were a student of common law you would know the succession of laws upto that point in the beginning of the 13th century when the beginnings of public records in England and the distillation of the Laws of Mercia, Dane Law and Law of Wessex using Frankish and Roman law into Glanvilles treatise. This was enhanced by Bracton, Fleta and Britton. Common law has its roots in pre Christian lifestyles, but draw much of its codified morality from ecclesiastical law.

Fleta itself reflects the historical and contemporary attitudes to homosexuality by advocating death for sodomites. Buggery was example based and the word derived from the malaise of heretical fad activity centred in Bulgaria. Queen Mary I repealed the law that Thomas Cromwell had used so well to attack the Catholic church and its sodomite pastors, but Queen Elizabeth reinstated it after knocking off her blood lust catholic sister and institutionalising the Anglican Church to reflect the displeasure of the act to "Almighty God".

So when you guys twist history and try to make out SSM bans are a relatively new thing, it just isn't so is it. Those laws go back way before Christianity.

Tisme · 17 November 2017

overhang said:
I question your intellect if your major concern is a few gays getting married and not our deficit, threats of climate change, housing affordability, automation, record low wage growth etc

You can question all you like, but you are one of the many who have made an emotional vote predicated on nothing more than pity, completely devoid of the facts and refusing to acknowledge the king wearing no cloths. Have you even bothered to look at what the schools are teaching? In QLD the Labor Govt is refusing to disclose the 10% of test schools where it is promoting alternative sexual lifestyles to youg impressionable minds, with the presumption that girls are sexually active at 13 and telling those abstaining girls by extension that it's OK to lose their virginity....something true lesbians (which is a genetic impossibility being X&X combination) never voluntarily lose and in no position to usher forth their wisdom of what equal is.

Stay with the facts overhang and you will see I am correct. The insult you feel is your own set of codes reacting, which obviously have no place for empathy for the insult of SSM on millions of people in this country and the sentence you have put on children now and in the future.

overhang · 17 November 2017

Tisme said:
You can question all you like, but you are one of the many who have made an emotional vote predicated on nothing more than pity, completely devoid of the facts and refusing to acknowledge the king wearing no cloths. Have you even bothered to look at what the schools are teaching? In QLD the Labor Govt is refusing to disclose the 10% of test schools where it is promoting alternative sexual lifestyles to youg impressionable minds, with the presumption that girls are sexually active at 13 and telling those abstaining girls by extension that it's OK to lose their virginity....something true lesbians (which is a genetic impossibility being X&X combination) never voluntarily lose and in no position to usher forth their wisdom of what equal is.

Stay with the facts overhang and you will see I am correct. The insult you feel is your own set of codes reacting, which obviously have no place for empathy for the insult of SSM on millions of people in this country and the sentence you have put on children now and in the future.

You couldn't waffle more crap if you tried. But none of this has anything to do with SSM, just another red herring you throw up. But I wouldn't expect someone who still thinks that people choose to be gay would think anything different, no wonder you hate education as you ignore science.

Tisme · 17 November 2017

Wysiwyg said:
Sigmund wrote a letter ...

In 1935, Freud wrote to a mother who had asked him to treat her son's homosexuality, a letter that would later become famous:
I gather from your letter that your son is a homosexual. I am most impressed by the fact that you do not mention this term yourself in your information about him. May I question you why you avoid it? Homosexuality is assuredly no advantage, but it is nothing to be ashamed of, no vice, no degradation; it cannot be classified as an illness; we consider it to be a variation of the sexual function, produced by a certain arrest of sexual development. Many highly respectable individuals of ancient and modern times have been homosexuals, several of the greatest men among them. (Plato, Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci, etc). It is a great injustice to persecute homosexuality as a crime –and a cruelty, too. If you do not believe me, read the books of Havelock Ellis.

https://io9.gizmodo.com/why-freud-still-matters-when-he-was-wrong-about-almost-1055800815?IR=T

basilio · 17 November 2017

Enough of the interminable diatribes against homosexuality, the decay of civilisation as we know, the loss of Western Glory, the need to put the Anglo/Christian/ Colonialist heritage back on the front page and send the darkies, chinks and poofs back into their respective holes.

The spirit of where we are now was well put in the Canberra Times.

Turnbull conveyed the aura of a leader intent on capitalising on the emphatic mandate that the Australian people had delivered to him. The contrast with his predecessor, Tony Abbott, captured on Four Corners, speaking to a forlorn group of Christian activists about Judeo-Christian culture was stark.

Abbott's rhetoric in the wilderness is esoteric, pompous and marginal, with no resonance outside the pseudo-intellectual ghetto populated by the alt right. They revel in their alienation from the mainstream like the communists of old.

Of course, this costly, hateful campaign was Abbott's legacy to his riven party. While ostensibly about same-sex marriage, it was really a ramshackle compromise to allow the Liberal Party to avoid a schism between the progressives and reactionaries inside its ranks. It was merely a delaying tactic.

Yet, even Abbott seemed resigned to defeat by last week. He sought to deflate expectations among reactionaries by asserting that a 40 per cent "no" vote was effectively a victory for the shrinking, sanctimonious clique who have assumed the mantle of defending Western civilisation from the depravity of the rest of us.

Illustration: Simon Letch
Despite his own disingenuous and contemptible attempts to link gender variance, defective parenting and other risible distractions to same-sex marriage Abbott failed dismally. He is the biggest loser out of this rout.

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/com...tionary-mps-to-the-sword-20171115-gzm79p.html

Tisme · 17 November 2017

overhang said:
You couldn't waffle more crap if you tried. But none of this has anything to do with SSM, just another red herring you throw up. But I wouldn't expect someone who still thinks that people choose to be gay would think anything different, no wonder you hate education as you ignore science.

Where did I say I hate education? You're just now outright lying to qualify your fault in this injustice on children and community.

If you take away homosexuality you take away SSM n'est pas?

Your pejorative posts and hateful personal insults clearly point to your own lack of education, which I can assure you is nowhere near the levels I have achieved and especially on your fitness to make qualitative votes on matter of national importance.

Thankfully being one of the apex men in this thread means I can easily dismiss you comments for what they = hysterical response to a conflict between common sense and riding the bandwagon of fads.

overhang · 17 November 2017

Tisme said:
Where did I say I hate education? You're just now outright lying to qualify your fault in this injustice on children and community.

If you take away homosexuality you take away SSM n'est pas?

Your pejorative posts and hateful personal insults clearly point to your own lack of education, which I can assure you is nowhere near the levels I have achieved and especially on your fitness to make qualitative votes on matter of national importance.

Thankfully being one of the apex men in this thread means I can easily dismiss you comments for what they = hysterical response to a conflict between common sense and riding the bandwagon of fads.

Perhaps you should just come to terms with the fact your side lost, most the country has seen through the hate and fear campaign the no camp ran. If society somehow turns on it's head then so be it but frankly there are far greater threats to our country than a few gays marrying.

basilio · 17 November 2017

There were some constructive comments made by politicans who debated the No case in the SSM survey. Maybe it's worth acknowledging and respecting their thoughts.

In a generous speech to the Senate on Thursday evening, cabinet minister and social conservative, Matt Canavan warmly congratulated equality campaigners for their success, noting that a simple proposition that two people in love should be able to "solemnise" their relationship, had been compelling. He went as far as to call it a good argument.

Undertaking to keep his word and reflect the peoples' decision in the Senate, Canavan did however part company with many "yes" campaigners by applauding the survey, citing the French moralist, Joseph Joubert's excellent dictum, "It is better to debate a question without settling it than to settle a question without debating it."

As hard as this is for many to acknowledge – especially because it involves ceding ground to conservative naysayers – his assessment cuts a lot of ice on the Coalition side. Canavan's own new pluralism on the question is testament, driven as it is by the unimpeachable virtue in a democracy of the majority verdict.

And this transformation is evident more broadly as all but the most doctrinaire campaigners on the "no" side begin a similar journey of acceptance.

The blizzard of red herrings about "safe schools", radical gender theory, conscientious objecting bakers and faith groups being told what to teach, has slowed.

Author of the private senator's bill now before the Parliament, Dean Smith, loathed the survey. But his main objection was as an institutional conservative worried about sidelining Parliament.

Still, his words in the Senate on Thursday morning as he opened this momentous debate reflected the surprising worth of what was a testing, painful process.

"I never believed the day would come when my relationship would be judged by my country to be as meaningful and valued as any other. The Australian people have proven me wrong," he said.

"It wasn't just a vote of acceptance, it was that deep loving embrace of a big family."

http://www.theage.com.au/federal-po...age-on-the-national-soul-20171117-gznbih.html

Tisme · 17 November 2017

overhang said:
Perhaps you should just come to terms with the fact your side lost, most the country has seen through the hate and fear campaign the no camp ran. If society somehow turns on it's head then so be it but frankly there are far greater threats to our country than a few gays marrying.

Hey I'm onboard and you guys can gloat all you like.... I wear a teflon suit most times, especially on forums. The pollies are already lining up to save their political necks so it's a non sequitur in my view.

The whole exercise has been highly predicable, basic marketing tactics and strategies. For me I am disappointed so many succumbed, citing cliche mistruths wrapped up as fact, but then again the 80/20 consumer rule of emotional buying held true +/-.

Say something often enough and even the bull54itter starts to believe it. The rapacious socialist media (e.g. ABC, Ten, etc) and carefully positioned misleading memes, fake history and fake articles have been very compelling to many, but for me the most disappointing is the juggernaut ability of actors and tv productions to manipulate and desensitise viewers to point of acceptance.... It worries me how much of our opinions have been manipulated and why the laws that were in place to prevent subliminal manipulation haven't been invoked.

I have stated before that I actually socialise with homosexuals. Drawing a conclusion that I in any way hate or detest them would be wrong. My concern is the unhealthy aspect of such behaviours and the imprinting of young minds to ignore their disciplines towards unnatural behaviours. It's not about men getting a tent in their pants looking at other men, in this thread it's about marriage and marriage isn't predicated on love, professing that love, etc it about children and family in a balanced environment even though 45% of the 61% who voted yes are divorce material themselves.

Wysiwyg · 17 November 2017

I accept the survey result and ensuing legislation.

cynic · 17 November 2017

Wysiwyg said:
I accept the survey result and ensuing legislation.

How about we wait until the legislation is finalised before giving the govnuts a blank cheque?

Wysiwyg · 17 November 2017

cynic said:
How about we wait until the legislation is finalised before giving the govnuts a blank cheque?

Blank cheque for?

SirRumpole · 17 November 2017

I foresee that we will have outbreak of gay militants targetting and suing anyone whom they think are opposed to them, demanding service and litigating if the poor service providers don't bend over backwards (literally) and submit to the gay's smallest desires.

basilio · 17 November 2017

SirRumpole said:
I foresee that we will have outbreak of gay militants targetting and suing anyone whom they think are opposed to them, demanding service and litigating if the poor service providers don't bend over backwards (literally) and submit to the gay's smallest desires.

Really !!?? And truly ? You can see them having the money, vindictiveness and capacity to create a storm in a teacup ? For what purpose ?

Overreach by miles at this point in time Rumpy.

Tisme · 17 November 2017

SirRumpole said:
I foresee that we will have outbreak of gay militants targetting and suing anyone whom they think are opposed to them, demanding service and litigating if the poor service providers don't bend over backwards (literally) and submit to the gay's smallest desires.

Never happen:

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/hea...hse-of-institutionalised-homophobia-1.3185630

Same sex marriage - Yes or No?