Homosexuality in Australia (2 Viewers)

[Graham Trevor]

ie. a sexual living

but yeah you probably should, you always gotta question someone who radically fights for gay "rights" even though they claim that they are "straight" ..

I am against discrimination in all its forms. Irrational hatred will not help the advancement of humanity.

 

[bshoc]

I am against discrimination in all its forms. Irrational hatred will not help the advancement of humanity.

The problem with people of such a mindset is that discrimination means that outcomes, rather than the rules, are discriminatory

 

[bshoc]

bshoc, it's not even worth having a debate with you. Your blatantly disgusting and homophobic comments have no substance and you seem to only have an interest in insulting gay people rather than having a reasonable debate. You have consistently rejected reasonable arguments by others by disregarding them as "leftist propaganda". All of your "arguments" come down to the idea that homosexuality is disgusting, a view not welcome here. Why did you bother coming back to this debate if all you're bringing to the table is more bigoted insults?

Actually there is one agrument that is potentially legitimate, that is getting government out of marriage altogether and letting the religious institutions decide who and who not to marry, which I acknowledge as legitimate, but not realistic. The rest has yes, been mainly empty rhetoric rather than any constructive reasoning.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Actually there is one agrument that is potentially legitimate, that is getting government out of marriage altogether and letting the religious institutions decide who and who not to marry, which I acknowledge as legitimate, but not realistic. The rest has yes, been mainly empty rhetoric rather than any constructive reasoning.

I have no problem with that. What is currently the rights of legal marriage could be transferred to what we'll call 'civil unions', religious 'marriages' could then be performed at the discretion of the religious authorities.

As for various proposed gay marriage ammendments not being too successful, you have to realise that such laws are GAINING support which is the important thing to gay marriage/civil union advocates. Of course society isn't going to change in a few years, but slowly we're seeing more and more people come around to accepting the idea of civil unions.

 

[rific]

So if Australian society acknowledges that there are viable options in regards to the tradition of marriage, and these options separate the state from any religious responsibility, why is marriage still an issue in relation to homosexuality?

It seems as though society, even secular societies such as ours, utilise the banner of faith in the divine as foundation for discriminatory action. If the church/religious manifestations are removed from the State, would this reduce discrimination, or do we need to address the deeper causes? If so, what do we think they are?

 

[KFunk]

Haven't the last 70 or so pages answered that in some comprehension?

Because I value social conhesion over petty social crusades. Plus the very nature of homosexuality is disgusting and subhuman, who the hell wants to give rights to people just because they fudgepack for a living?

I have a problem with changing society even the slightest to accomidate such people, or perhaps more accurately, changing society for people whose one defning difference from the rest of us is choosing who to lay, those are absolutely no grounds for any challenge, either legal or moral, or maybe I should be getting special rights for liking certain foods etc.

Changing society affects everyone, thats why its called society, especially with marriages and civil unions which are for normal people only. Ofcourse it affects me, it turns an institution in which I may partake into a freakshow.

...

No they are special rights, discriminating against gay in terms of marriage would be to disallow a homosexual to marry a person of the opposite sex, what you're seeking to do is to try and change the substance an instution itself, which cannot be by the way since gay marriage is just a fad, its never really existed, and that invokes speciality.

Looking over what you have written it seems to me that, at the core, the only reason you have for not wishing to allow civil unions for homosexual couples is that they disgust you. To argue that it is wrong to allow homosexual unions becuase they turn such an institution "into a freakshow"is one of the more self centred things I've ever heard. I hope you realise how similar your views are to those of an individual who denies africans the right to marry because they are disgusted by the colour of their skin. The fact that you would deny a subset of society equal rights just so that your mind doesn't have to be dirtied by thoughts of them is shameful. I apologise if my words are too strong but I find few things harder to bear than blatant intolerance.

 

[dagwoman]

As always, KFunk has said, in a much more eloquent manner, what I was unable to.

 

[bshoc]

I have no problem with that. What is currently the rights of legal marriage could be transferred to what we'll call 'civil unions', religious 'marriages' could then be performed at the discretion of the religious authorities.

No if we get the government out of marriage, thats that, no civil unions, no nothing, either the government decides or the churches do, there cant be any duality.

As for various proposed gay marriage ammendments not being too successful, you have to realise that such laws are GAINING support which is the important thing to gay marriage/civil union advocates. Of course society isn't going to change in a few years, but slowly we're seeing more and more people come around to accepting the idea of civil unions.

Whatever makes you sleep at night, don't say things you cannot prove.

 

[bshoc]

Looking over what you have written it seems to me that, at the core, the only reason you have for not wishing to allow civil unions for homosexual couples is that they disgust you. To argue that it is wrong to allow homosexual unions becuase they turn such an institution "into a freakshow"is one of the more self centred things I've ever heard. I hope you realise how similar your views are to those of an individual who denies africans the right to marry because they are disgusted by the colour of their skin. The fact that you would deny a subset of society equal rights just so that your mind doesn't have to be dirtied by thoughts of them is shameful. I apologise if my words are too strong but I find few things harder to bear than blatant intolerance.

Africans have always had the right to marry, wtf are you on about, even during the slave trade africans still married.

 

[lengy]

I see it's still bshoc verse just about every sane person on this forum.

 

[bshoc]

most of us agree with that. it was clear from the beginning that bshoc is disgusted by homosexuality etc. he simply garnished his views to debate against anything homosxual using the premise of marraige as a heterosexual insittuion, the sanctity of reproduction and "social cohesion". i've said this before...BoS'ers...get into parliament...infiltrate....change things

ahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahhahahaha oh man first funny thing said in this thread

lefties are only able to pick up each of the inner city seats tops

 

[Not-That-Bright]

No if we get the government out of marriage, thats that, no civil unions, no nothing, either the government decides or the churches do, there cant be any duality.

There is no duality, churches decide whom is married in the eyes of God, the state decides whom gets couples' rights.

Whatever makes you sleep at night, don't say things you cannot prove.

What? You don't think I could prove there's been improvement in people's views of homosexuals and homosexual rights - including same-sex marriage?

 

[bshoc]

There is no duality, churches decide whom is married in the eyes of God, the state decides whom gets couples' rights.

With rougly 15% of the country nonreligious, the majority of people who participate in the state are the ones who participate in the church, therefore its an unfeasible concept. Then theres nonreligious people like myself who oppose it on other grounds as well, its not looking to good for you and you imaginary majority of leftists.

What? You don't think I could prove there's been improvement in people's views of homosexuals and homosexual rights - including same-sex marriage?

Well last time I checked 70% of the people in this country believed in the bible, and the bible believes that gays burn in hell, not to mention Judaism, Islam etc. Thats an imporvement? I haven't seen anyone scrubbing out biblical passages, just because there is now an inner city community of retards who preach things like gay marriage doesen't indicate that the rest of the community has changed at all. Its even the subtle things, like "gay" and "homo" are as offensive as most other things you can say in school.

You're living in an imaginary community NTB.

 

[crazyhomo]

I have a problem with changing society even the slightest to accomidate such people, or perhaps more accurately, changing society for people whose one defning difference from the rest of us is choosing who to lay, those are absolutely no grounds for any challenge, either legal or moral, or maybe I should be getting special rights for liking certain foods etc.

i actually like where you were going with this. we shouldn't change society to appease any minority. no more asian food. no more vegetarian foods stores. if you don't like steak, go back to fucking africa.

also, what is the deal with wheelchair ramps? and those wheelchair buses? the disabled put a huge stress on our economy, i don't understand why we tolerate disabilities at all. who came up with this 'braille' shit? just because you're blind doesn't mean you are expect from learning to read. get over yourself

and hip hop music? pub rock is this country's national genre, if you don't like it, get out

 

[bshoc]

i actually like where you were going with this. we shouldn't change society to appease any minority. no more asian food. no more vegetarian foods stores. if you don't like steak, go back to fucking africa.

also, what is the deal with wheelchair ramps? and those wheelchair buses? the disabled put a huge stress on our economy, i don't understand why we tolerate disabilities at all. who came up with this 'braille' shit? just because you're blind doesn't mean you are expect from learning to read. get over yourself

and hip hop music? pub rock is this country's national genre, if you don't like it, get out

You're conflating demand for inanimate economic products to something as intangible as marriage?

 

[crazyhomo]

Africans have always had the right to marry, wtf are you on about, even during the slave trade africans still married.

back then they couldn't marry whites. and that's the way it should be. they had the right to marry someone of their race, which is the same right whites had. it's not discrimination

 

[Not-That-Bright]

With rougly 15% of the country nonreligious, the majority of people who participate in the state are the ones who participate in the church, therefore its an unfeasible concept.

I didn't propose that there's a majority of leftists.... I also don't see how what you've stated deals with what you quoted.

Well last time I checked 70% of the people in this country believed in the bible, and the bible believes that gays burn in hell, not to mention Judaism, Islam etc.

That statistic isn't important at all to the debate. Belief in religion != Dislike of homosexuals.

indicate that the rest of the community has changed at all.

But if you look at statistics that actually measure people's views of gays, I think you'll find there's been great improvement.

You're living in an imaginary community NTB.

I'm quite aware that there is still alot of extreme homophobia out there, but I'd also point out that such extreme homophobia is really looked down upon by the majority of the community.

 

[KFunk]

Africans have always had the right to marry, wtf are you on about, even during the slave trade africans still married.

My comparison wasn't a historical one. My point had little to do with what is (or is not) allowed in each situation, it was about the attitudes of individuals, i.e. your own hate of homosexuals compared with the hate that a hypothetical individual has for Africans - both of which are unjustifiable.

---> The central idea: You choose to perpetuate inequality because you hate the less equal party.

 

[crazyhomo]

You're conflating demand for inanimate economic products to something as intangible as marriage?

no, i'm agreeing that society shouldn't change. ever. there should be laws that prohibit social change, it is currently far too easy for radicals to pervert the foods we eat

 

[crazyhomo]

Almighty God created the races white, black, yellow, Malay and red, and he placed them on separate continents. The fact that he separated the races shows that he did not intend for the races to mix.