Same sex marriage - Yes or No?

Hodgie · 26 August 2017

It will be interesting to see the general opinion on forums (or the general public) such as this in 20-50 years time once the law is inevitably passed. My prediction is people will look back at these times and think why on earth did we worry about it so much. Society isnt going to break down as a result.

SirRumpole · 26 August 2017

Hodgie said:
Society isnt going to break down as a result.

That's your opinion.

But if we continue to stretch the boundaries of what marriage and families are to include artificially manufactured children, then who knows where that will take us.

Societies don't degenerate suddenly, they get eaten away over time. Already the cry is "gays can have children so why can't they marry ?" . The discussion of whether gays should be allowed access to parenting schemes like adoption and IVF was done behind the scenes with no public discussion. Had it been widely known that we were going to allow manufacture of children to satisfy the inferioty complexes of gays, I believe there would have been wide objections.

Hodgie · 26 August 2017

But you are just speculating with a comment like "who knows what could happen"

There are many other countries around the world which have already passed similar laws and I haven't seen any unbiased evidence to show that it had a negative impact on their society.

I understand your concern (whether i agree or not is irrelevant) with the parenting factor but if thats already occuring than what will ssm change?

It seems like your assuming the worst without any solid evidence to support that argument.

Wysiwyg · 26 August 2017

Hodgie said:
It seems like your assuming the worst without any solid evidence to support that argument.

You're predicticting the best without evidence. We don't know how Australians will deal with homosexuality going mainstream. That being television and movies shows featuring homo's. Homo's walking down the street holding hands and kissing. Homo's pushing a stroller along the footpath. The sexuality unsure swinging to the gay camp.

Acceptance could take a generation or two as the present day 'old school marriage practices' dies off and the adopted or surrogate children of homo's see their father and father, mother and mother, transexual and transexual and whatever you like as a natural and normal parentage.

Hodgie · 26 August 2017

Wysiwyg said:
You're predicticting the best without evidence. We don't know how Australians will deal with homosexuality going mainstream. That being television and movies shows featuring homo's. Homo's walking down the street holding hands and kissing. Homo's pushing a stroller along the footpath. The sexuality unsure swinging to the gay camp.

Acceptance could take a generation or two as the present day 'old school marriage practices' dies off and the adopted or surrogate children of homo's see their father and father, mother and mother, transexual and transexual and whatever you like as a natural and normal parentage.

It sounds like your saying its not ok for gay people to be in public.

If a law is changed there wont suddenly be more homosexuals around. They just wont have to feel like there is something wrong with them.

Hodgie · 26 August 2017

Also there are plenty of "homo's" already in mainstream television. Most of what we watch comes from abroad anyway so our laws are kind of irrelevant in that regard.

Wysiwyg · 26 August 2017

Hodgie said:
It sounds like your saying its not ok for gay people to be in public.

They do what they want as far as I care. The issue to me is they are not male and female for marriage as per the timeless tradition, cultural norm, lawful union, father/mother parentage and definition. Why change it?

If a law is changed there wont suddenly be more homosexuals around. They just wont have to feel like there is something wrong with them.

I bet there are thousands waiting at closet doors for the government's green light. The coming out generational explosion.

cynic · 26 August 2017

Hodgie said:
It sounds like your saying its not ok for gay people to be in public.

If a law is changed there wont suddenly be more homosexuals around. They just wont have to feel like there is something wrong with them.

I am wondering whether, decades from now, society might experience an emergence of closet heterosexuals as a consequence of the likely confusion that could potentially ensue for children adolescing in predominantly homosexual family environments.

wayneL · 26 August 2017

Pickering's take

http://pickeringpost.com/story/we-are-coming-for-your-marriage-act-boys-and-girls/7500

Tisme · 26 August 2017

basilio said:
This is all crazy xhit .................
So in the real world we watch as gay friends,............... live lives just like us.

No they don't. You need to get out more often and mix it up with the gay community. They are promiscuous, they have a different value system, they favour their own in business and social dealings and they must each have hundreds of thousands of hetro friends because every hetro that defends them talks about having homo "friends".......... which just goes to show how many bandwagon liars there are out there.

Wysiwyg · 26 August 2017

wayneL said:
Pickering's take

Rolling on the floor laughing.

Smurf1976 · 26 August 2017

Tisme said:
No they don't. You need to get out more often and mix it up with the gay community. They are promiscuous, they have a different value system, they favour their own in business and social dealings and they must each have hundreds of thousands of hetro friends

As with anything it will vary between individuals.

There's plenty of men who see that having had sex with a huge number of women is some sort of badge of honor. And for that to be happening there must be plenty of women willing to go along with it. Likewise there are others of both genders who have had far fewer sexual partners.

As for friends, well if homosexuals are a small % of the population then it stands to reason that the average gay person is going to be friends with quite a few heterosexual people whilst the reverse will not be true. That's just basic maths there and no different to saying that there's hundreds of potential drivers of every Holden Kingswood still on the roads or that there's a million + people in Australia for every water slide at Sea World.

Personally I don't choose to be friends with someone based on their sexuality. That's relevant only if I intend having sex with them. Suffice to say I've never had sex with most of my friends and I expect that situation would apply to most people.

grah33 · 26 August 2017

other countries may not have SSM, but their view of marriage is different than the western version ( they have polygamy). and living in those countries isn't ideal for many of their citizens.

pixel · 26 August 2017

grah33 said:
other countries may not have SSM, but their view of marriage is different than the western version ( they have polygamy). and living in those countries isn't ideal for many of their citizens.

Bollocks!!
You have just slighted the bulk of European countries.

Malta and Germany have become the latest European countries to legalise gay marriage, joining more than a dozen others on the continent.

The Netherlands became the first in the world to allow homosexual couples to tie the knot at the turn of the century.

Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Norway, Portugal, Spain and Sweden have since joined the Dutch.

Gay marriage is also legal in the United Kingdom, except in Northern Ireland.

grah33 · 27 August 2017

u misunderstood me.
note: sometimes my words and tone don't actually reflect what i mean, same for everyone else i guess (the limitation of forums)...

but as for those countries, it's too soon. but form what little i just saw they already going downhill :
"IRELAND'S WARNING: FIRST GAY MARRIAGE, THEN YOUR FREEDOMS WILL FALL"
On Tuesday night the latest bastion against religious intolerance was swept away, as the Dáil voted unanimously to repeal Section 37 of the state’s Employment Equality Act. Section 37 granted specific exemptions for “religious, educational or medical institutions” when it came to gay rights, allowing them “to maintain the religious ethos of the institution”.

and that will mean that lots of charities will no longer operate which is bad for society. when you have religious institutions inspired by their faith to help needy people (clothing, food , medical etc.), the government ought to leave them alone. with less charity going on over there, it will be a worse place .

Tink · 27 August 2017

imv, we will end up the same as the US, Pixel.

Most of Europe stand by their traditions.

------------------------

Just have a look at all the statues they are trying to pull down.

Margaret Court is mobbed everytime she walks out the door by these terrorists in Melbourne.

Even to the extent of trying to wipe her name from the Margaret Court Arena that she achieved.

Stalinists, imv.

Tisme · 27 August 2017

Tink said:
imv, we will end up the same as the US, Pixel.

Most of Europe stand by their traditions.

------------------------

Just have a look at all the statues they are trying to pull down.

Margaret Court is mobbed everytime she walks out the door by these terrorists in Melbourne.

Even to the extent of trying to wipe her name from the Margaret Court Arena that she achieved.

Stalinists, imv.

If the Japs has succeeded taking Australia, there'd be no aborigines left, no whities, no English language, no christianity, etc, just Bushido law and giant ore pits feeding the Chinese and SE Asian Nippon colonies.

Logique · 27 August 2017

wayneL said:
Pickering's take
http://pickeringpost.com/story/we-are-coming-for-your-marriage-act-boys-and-girls/7500

Not far wrong either.

We Are Coming For Your MARRIAGE ACT, Boys and Girls - Harry Richardson: http://pickeringpost.com/story/we-are-coming-for-your-marriage-act-boys-and-girls/7500
...I just don’t think the Government gives a dam about you or your partner. I think this issue is being used as part of some larger agenda.
I don’t know exactly what that agenda is, but if Malcolm Turnbull, Bill Shorten and Sarah Hanson-Young are all in favour, then I’ll be voting no on principle.

ghotib · 27 August 2017

Tink said:
...Marriage is one man and one woman.
A father and a mother.
It is about the children,
Parents taking responsibility and raising their children.

When we married I was beyond child-bearing age, and I don't appreciate the suggestion that the status of my marriage depends in any way on our ability, or wish, to have children. If there's any argument against same sex marriage that would not also denigrate my marriage, I'll listen to it. But if such an argument exists naysayers have had a long time to find it.

Wysiwyg · 27 August 2017

I viewed a same sex marriage advertisement on television. The question was asked "so why can't we get married?" The reason is so obvious it alludes the desperate minority. Marriage is between a man and a woman.

Same sex marriage - Yes or No?