Homosexuality in Australia (1 Viewer)

[skip89]

(response to UIC) Yes that is what i believe.

 

[Se!zuRe.]

Yeah i no wat your getting at, lawfully homosexuals may be able to get married, which already happens in many parts of the world. But part of being religious is beliveing in a law that is above mankind set down by God. So no matter what a pice of paper from parliament says, i will never accept that a homosexual couple is married in the eyes of God. I acknowledge that this does not affect many people since they dont belive Him anyway.

Yo this was the point i was making b4... marriage is a word linked to religion and even though certian government documentation states 2 ppl are married, not necessarily in the eyes of God... also with you views on God not liking homosexuality and the fact even though God protests be kind, be nice etc, yet priests (not all mind u) are continually putting down homosexuality and stating their view points against it... if they didnt do this God wuld be seen as a hypocrite.... your saying if God teaches forgiveness and doesnt even follow his own rules then hes wrong... but by doing this he will alternatively break his own rules once more... kinf of mind boggeling as to how this works... im still unsure just syaing either way he must go against his own teachings...

 

[ihavenothing]

Which is the reason why I find religion totally irrelevant in today's world

 

[Se!zuRe.]

aah yer thats why i dont understand bringing religion into this thread.. like i understand skip89's reasons because well his beliefs on homosexuality are based on his religious beliefs... thats the end of religion as for everyone else trying to some how prove religion wrong possibly hit up the religion threads...

 

[bshoc]

Its freedom of religion not freedom from, if someone wishes to inact public policy based on their religious beliefs, let them, assuming there is popular support for such a policy.

 

[KFunk]

So, bshoc, I'm still wondering why you're not willing to allow civil unions for homosexual couples?

 

[ElendilPeredhil]

Yeah i no wat your getting at, lawfully homosexuals may be able to get married, which already happens in many parts of the world. But part of being religious is beliveing in a law that is above mankind set down by God. So no matter what a pice of paper from parliament says, i will never accept that a homosexual couple is married in the eyes of God. I acknowledge that this does not affect many people since they dont belive Him anyway.

I can accept that POV as long as you accept that many heterosexual couples are thus not 'really' married because they don't belive in God.

I'm actually fine with civil unions- I mean, as long as the union converys all the rights a marriage does, who cares if they call it a marriage but their certificate from the gov'ment calls it a civil union. either way, its only so long before gay marriage becomes acceptable in all the western countries as the tide is already turning. lol.

So, bshoc, I'm still wondering why you're not willing to allow civil unions for homosexual couples?

That would be because he thinks gays are abnormal freaks who hang around oxford street waiting to molest little boys and girls.

 

[bshoc]

So, bshoc, I'm still wondering why you're not willing to allow civil unions for homosexual couples?

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?

 

[bshoc]

I can accept that POV as long as you accept that many heterosexual couples are thus not 'really' married because they don't belive in God.

I'm actually fine with civil unions- I mean, as long as the union converys all the rights a marriage does, who cares if they call it a marriage but their certificate from the gov'ment calls it a civil union. either way, its only so long before gay marriage becomes acceptable in all the western countries as the tide is already turning. lol.

Even though every vote against it has passed lol keep dreaming, its just a temporary phase.

 

[dagwoman]

Attempting to move beyong the hideousness of your last comment, do you have a problem with lesbians as well, or just gay men?

 

[dagwoman]

And how is homosexuality "disgusting and subhuman"? Your comments never cease to adhere to the sterotype of ignorant homophobe.

 

[bshoc]

Attempting to move beyong the hideousness of your last comment, do you have a problem with lesbians as well, or just gay men?

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.

 

[dagwoman]

So you're saying you're against changing society to allow others equality, even when it won't affect you? Their one defining difference is their sexuality, which isn't simply a "choice of who to lay", but who they choose to spend their lives with and have a family with. There is grounds for challenge when people are discriminated against and experience inequality legally and socially due to such a simple difference. These aren't "special rights" gay people are demanding, but equal rights. And you cannot compare sexuality, which will affect (as I said) aspects of one life such as family etc. to liking certain foods.

 

[ur_inner_child]

I have a problem with changing society even the slightest to accomidate such people, or perhaps more accurately, changing society for people who's 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.

Ah, here lies the fundamental part of your argument.

Homosexuality is a choice.

I was about to say that you could say this same sort of stuff when women wanted the right to vote, but that would be void considering you feel homosexuality is a choice.

How is it a choice? I'm not very confident with what causes homosexuality so I'm interested to see how you feel its a lifestyle choice rather than a human condition.

 

[bshoc]

So you're saying you're against changing society to allow others equality, even when it won't affect you?

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.

Their one defining difference is their sexuality, which isn't simply a "choice of who to lay", but who they choose to spend their lives with and have a family with.

Same principle, nobody is forcing anyone to choose anyone, gay famalies dont exist and spending a lifetime with someone does not require any permissions from the government.

There is grounds for challenge when people are discriminated against and experience inequality legally and socially due to such a simple difference. These aren't "special rights" gay people are demanding, but equal rights.

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.

And you cannot compare sexuality, which will affect (as I said) aspects of one life such as family etc. to liking certain foods.

Its exactly the same principle.

 

[bshoc]

Ah, here lies the fundamental part of your argument.

Homosexuality is a choice.

I was about to say that you could say this same sort of stuff when women wanted the right to vote, but that would be void considering you feel homosexuality is a choice.

How is it a choice? I'm not very confident with what causes homosexuality so I'm interested to see how you feel its a lifestyle choice rather than a human condition.

I'm not too concerned with the nature of homosexuality, one scientist says its genetic the next says its a behavioural trait etc. That discussion is about as interesting as watching paint dry. Even if it was all natural, which I doubt, that still provides zero excuse for gays, even to a gay person, there is always a choice.

 

[Graham Trevor]

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?

Homosexual sex will bring an income? Christ, I ought to jump on that immediately!

 

[bshoc]

Homosexual sex will bring an income? Christ, I ought to jump on that immediately!

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" ..

 

[Not-That-Bright]

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

hahahahaha

It's like white people that fight for black "rights".

 

[ur_inner_child]

I'm not too concerned with the nature of homosexuality, one scientist says its genetic the next says its a behavioural trait etc. That discussion is about as interesting as watching paint dry. Even if it was all natural, which I doubt, that still provides zero excuse for gays, even to a gay person, there is always a choice.

If it was socially accepted and proven the homosexuality is a normal and naturally occuring human condition that affects part of our population, your idea about not accomodating to them is as equal to the idea of not accomodating to women so they have the right to vote.

Even if it was all natural, which I doubt, that still provides zero excuse for gays, even to a gay person, there is always a choice.

Doesn't make sense to me...

Based on your confident ideas about homosexuality, I think you should be concerned about whether or not it is a human condition or an actual choice