Marriage is based on the truth that men and women are complementary, the biological fact that reproduction depends on a man and a woman, and the reality that children need a mother and a father.
Redefining marriage does not simply expand the existing understanding of marriage; it rejects these truths.
Marriage is society’s least restrictive means of ensuring the well-being of children.
By encouraging the norms of marriage—monogamy, sexual exclusivity, and permanence—the state strengthens civil society and reduces its own role.
The future of this country depends on the future of marriage.
The future of marriage depends on citizens understanding what it is and why it matters and demanding that government policies support, not undermine, true marriage
-------------------------------
The explanation as far as I'm concerned is "love" was redefined when the marriage act was changed in 2004. I don't see this being any different.
Prior to that it was changed when homosexuality was decriminalised.
Yep, that's my view. Homosexuals are attracted to each other the same way heterosexuals are. They love each other and they want to get married and that's it.You just know where I'm going to go with this don't you LOL
So now you are saying homosexuality is a love concept rather than activity. Interesting and explains why so many people are voting yes.
Insofar as legislation, we fortunately have a tidy little compendium called The Interpretations Act that is useful, rather than using a moral compass which points west.
because in my view it's harmless.
What about it ?AIDS ?
Yep, that's my view. Homosexuals are attracted to each other the same way heterosexuals are. They love each other and they want to get married and that's it.
Now...to me, it's an alternative lifestyle that has no appeal to me but I can still respect it because in my view it's harmless. It doesn't affect me at all. I personally feel that my time on this planet is better from living in a society that no longer marginalises people because of their race, colour, height, weight and sexual preferences. It's all good
What about it [AIDS] ?
So the issue is unprotected sex. Not AIDS. AIDS was equally spread by injecting drug users.It decimated the gay community and spread around the world. It was spread by unprotected sex with multiple partners , a feature of the gay male community.
Here's a thought...
If anything, gays getting married could even mitigate the spread of AIDS if we can assume a married couple are less likely to have unprotected sex with multiple partners
In other words you are saying gays who love each other are unlikely to spread the AIDS virus.People who love each other don't have sex with others. A piece of paper has nothing to do with it, it's called commitment.
So the issue is unprotected sex. Not AIDS. AIDS was equally spread by injecting drug users.
Being married or unmarried has nothing to do with it.
Did you just hot-link us to a felching site whilst stating you wanted to be one of the boys ?✄ ✄ ✄
Marriage is based on the truth that men and women are complementary, the biological fact that reproduction depends on a man and a woman, and the reality that children need a mother and a father.
Redefining marriage does not simply expand the existing understanding of marriage; it rejects these truths.
Marriage is society’s least restrictive means of ensuring the well-being of children.
By encouraging the norms of marriage—monogamy, sexual exclusivity, and permanence—the state strengthens civil society and reduces its own role.
The future of this country depends on the future of marriage.
The future of marriage depends on citizens understanding what it is and why it matters and demanding that government policies support, not undermine, true marriage
-------------------------------
I guess we should take children away from single parents too then. Definitely take kids away from single fathers, we all know men can't raise kids.
But that's only if the kid/s are straight. 'cause we only care about straight kids with all these laws. If the kid looks queer... not sure what the final solution would be.
It decimated the gay community and spread around the world. It was spread by unprotected sex with multiple partners , a feature of the gay male community.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/re...g/news-story/f5d47b788812540816179e2730aaf40e
Miranda Devine - September 27, 2017
The failure of ‘Yes’ to control its militant wing
...The militant left has hijacked the debate in frightening fashion.
Last weekend, protesters stormed the Melbourne launch of the Coalition for Marriage, chanting “Crucify Christians” and unfurling a banner which read: “Burn Churches not Queers”, complete with a red Anarchy symbol.
We’ve seen violence and expletives directed at Catholic students manning an “It’s OK to Say No” stall at Sydney University...
...So much for “love is love”...
http://sheikyermami.com/2017/09/burn-churches-not-queers-homo-marriage-is-only-the-beginning/If 'Yes' loses, this will be a big part of the reason why. Sorry there's a paywall.
The idea that, in his own words, Turnbull would lead a “thoroughly Liberal government” is but a fond and distant memory. Under Turnbull taxes are up, government spending is up, and red tape has increased. With things like the bank tax, retrospective superannuation taxes, and telling energy companies who they can sell their gas to and for how long they must keep their plants operating, the Coalition is making the arbitrary administration of policy an art form.
it just seems weird to me that parent aren't demanding to attend physics, chemistry, math or any other classes.That's your opinion. I think a lot of people would attend just to see what is going on. If the people who conduct these courses have nothing to hide then they should welcome the parents as well.
it just seems weird to me that parent aren't demanding to attend physics, chemistry, math or any other classes.
Yet on this one topic which is shrouded in stigma and religious nonsense and which clearly is not being handled well at home, parents suddenly want to interfere.
The naysayers want to stop any discussion of the topic, and thats clearly not healthy.
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?