2 cents worth:-

Point :-
1. Heterosexuals can have a defacto and this person can talk for them at a lot of legal levels...eg:- you can give them as next of kin

2. Gay relationships have no right legally to talk on one anothers behalf....

Point 2 I feel is the biggest issue for most gay couples...

If they were legally married...they can make choices for their spouse just like any other couple...

I feel sure it is not about the church wedding but having the same rights as anyone in a long term relationship...

doggie said...

cisco said...

log man said...

cisco said...

log man said...

Unbelievable how many god botherers are on this forum!

Not really. This nation was founded on Christian principles such as equality, tolerance and forgiveness.

Yes we know communism/socialism is founded on equality too, just so long as some are more equal than the rest.

So wrong, on so many levels

Care to expand on that??

Why? I agree with soggy on this one..

So that makes it indisputable truth does it??

...I mean correct me if I'm wrong here, but the main argument against gay marriage seems to be purely because of religious reasons. Which brings into question the separation of church and state. [cough cough]

I agree with Adolf.

And also with fly surfer in a sense

Just quickly marriage was around before the state and it is till today (although recognised by the state in any which way that it wants) a religious ceremony.

It's true stitch how does it affect me if they want to get married? well it does, they are wanting to change a religious ceremony to make it there way. And therefore destroying its natural status (being a man and a woman) Why cant i marry a dog? or Three women and a snake? They are all out of the boundaries.

They want us to accept gay marriage without accepting what marriage is :s

And i do care what is happening in society. Marriage is a building block of society. Families are built and come from a natrul normal marriage. Have some respect for the people who cherish marriage and leave ur fetish in ur bedroom.

Adziz said...



Have some respect for the people who cherish marriage and leave ur fetish in ur bedroom.

Absoluckingfoootly!!! You have it in a nut shell there.

I have decided to believe in equality for all.

I now believe in so much equality I don't even think homosexuals should be called something different to hetrosexuals. I think homosexuals should be called hetrosexuals so they are equal.

Or is it OK to have a sexual orientation that is called something different, but not OK to have a partnership that is called something different ?





Now it all just seems too confusing to me. I might just go back to calling 'em all homos.

evlPanda said...

cisco said...
Not really. This nation was founded on Christian principles such as equality, tolerance and forgiveness.

(does that include killing the natives?)

They sounds like principles from every religion, and athiesm too. Why is it always Christian, Christian, Christian? Seriously.

As for gay MARRIAGE: Marriage does not belong to Christians, Hindus, Communists, whatever. Leave religion and even politics (if possible because we are talking about law, which is what, essentially, politics is) out of the argument, completely.

true. why are we talking about religion here?? the last five marriage ceremonies i went to were not religous. i learnt my morrals and ethics from my athiest parents.

Cause I only go to weddings to Get royally drunk for free and to hit on the bridesmaids..

And my reach around is a little out of practice

cisco said...

d1 said...

cisco said...
Not really. This nation was founded on Christian principles such as equality, tolerance and forgiveness.

Oh... and I read somewhere that it started out as a penal colony

No. Brush up on your history. The colony of NSW and Van Diemens Land were penal colonies in the 1770s which did not include WA,SA or NT.
Nationhood did not happen until 120 odd years later. The founding fathers wrote our constitution which the corrupt British Aristocracy found necessary to edit in subtle ways to ensure their control and influence which continues to this day.
The founding fathers had the highest moral intent and where influenced by Americans in Australia and the American model of a democratic republic.

Thanks for the explanation, I get it now. You are of course totally correct - one could argue successfully that the correct "foundation" timepoint is not 1770's but 1901. That's the time of Federation, which came with the introduction of the "White Australia" policy. So, I guess the principle of "equality" you are talking about is the one explained in "Animal Farm"?

"I believe their agenda is far more sinister and aimed squarely at breaking down the moral fibre of our society." ???? OOOOHHH YEAHHHH! the gaypocalypse, HA HA!

i can't believe how many people are against same sex marriage and parenting.

it wont effect YOU in any way. simple as that

log man said...

"I believe their agenda is far more sinister and aimed squarely at breaking down the moral fibre of our society." ???? OOOOHHH YEAHHHH! the gaypocalypse, HA HA!

You are big on ridicule and inference loggy but lacking even mildly intelligent argument.

I am thinking you were the schoolyard bully but more than likely just his yapping offsider.

Sham1984 said...

i can't believe how many people are against same sex marriage and parenting.

it wont effect YOU in any way. simple as that

Not quite so. At the very least my children will be effected by interaction with children of same sex couples at school. Not so simple.

cisco said...

Sham1984 said...

i can't believe how many people are against same sex marriage and parenting.

it wont effect YOU in any way. simple as that

Not quite so. At the very least my children will be effected by interaction with children of same sex couples at school. Not so simple.

how exactly do you think this would affect your children?

i dare say it would be impossible to tell on face value a person who has been raised by a same sex parents vs male/female parents.

e.g