Some are born gay, some achieve gayness, and some have gayness thrust upon them (1 Viewer)

[Kwayera]

I kind of have to agree.

Several reasons why I don't understand why gays want to get married by the Church

a. Even if it is made legal, the Church officiators can still refuse to marry you. Just like they can refuse to marry a couple if they don't attend those stupid premarital counselling sessions with the priest, or just like they can refuse if you're not a Catholic but you want to get married in a Catholic Church. Canon law or whatever is still separate from our civil law.

b. Why do you want to get married by an institution that calls for your death? The Church doesn't accept you mang. It won't for a long time. Why want it? Even if you're a Christian gay, you're still not accepted.

c. Civil unions are just as binding, they still give you the title of "married" and they don't involve the bullshit Church.

d. As much as I disagree with the Church and its lunatic followers, I have to accept that the church is an institution that is very old and that has a defined moral code or what have you, that governs it. Marriage between a man and a man is strictly forbidden by the Church. I don't agree with forcing the Church to change their laws, as much as I think they're bullshit laws. If you don't like the way they do business, it's fairly easy to ignore them.


So in terms of gay marriage - I am all for the creation of a civil law that allows homosexual couples to be married by the state. I can't agree with forcing the Church, regardless of how despicable it is, to change their beliefs.

They don't necessarily want to be married by a Church, just as a heterosexual couple can get married not in a Church. Secular marriage != civil union/defacto relationships, at least when it comes to taxation benefits, next-of-kin rights, etc.

No one is asking the Churches to change their beliefs and force gay marriage on them.

 

[Napstar]

They don't necessarily want to be married by a Church, just as a heterosexual couple can get married not in a Church. Secular marriage != civil union/defacto relationships, at least when it comes to taxation benefits, next-of-kin rights, etc.

No one is asking the Churches to change their beliefs and force gay marriage on them.

I wasn't saying they all necessarily want to be married by the Church. I'm saying that there are some that would want to be, and that there are some radicalists on the pro-gay marriage side that would call for the complete overhaul of Canon law to make church marriage of homosexuals legal. There are many devout Christian homosexuals that would love to be married by the Church, in the eyes of their God. We can't make this happen unless the Church has a drastic change of mind. For me personally, I can't work out how you can reconcile being a devout Christian with being homosexual.

I can't agree with forcing the Church to change ... HOWEVER, should the state recognize same sex marriages as legal, we might find that some more moderate churches, like the Anglican church, will probably facilitate the marriage of homosexuals within their institution.

I understand that a civil union does not afford ALL the same benefits of a secular marriage, depending on where you are (California being a prime example), but it's either a matter of;\
a. Ratifying the definition of civil union so that it affords the same rights and titles as a "normal marriage"
b. Abolishing civil unions altogether and making the marriage of homosexuals legal by the state (court officiators, etc) and affording that union the same rights and titles as a "normal marriage"

 

[Kwayera]

I wasn't saying they all necessarily want to be married by the Church. I'm saying that there are some that would want to be, and that there are some radicalists on the pro-gay marriage side that would call for the complete overhaul of Canon law to make church marriage of homosexuals legal. There are many devout Christian homosexuals that would love to be married by the Church, in the eyes of their God. We can't make this happen unless the Church has a drastic change of mind. For me personally, I can't work out how you can reconcile being a devout Christian with being homosexual.

Lol neither, but then there's a point that Churches operate tax free, which I consider as being incorrect. Maybe Churches that abide by the law (in the case that gay marriage was made legal) would retain tax-free status, and those that chose not to would be taxed?

I can't agree with forcing the Church to change ... HOWEVER, should the state recognize same sex marriages as legal, we might find that some more moderate churches, like the Anglican church, will probably facilitate the marriage of homosexuals within their institution.

I understand that a civil union does not afford ALL the same benefits of a secular marriage, depending on where you are (California being a prime example), but it's either a matter of;\
a. Ratifying the definition of civil union so that it affords the same rights and titles as a "normal marriage"
b. Abolishing civil unions altogether and making the marriage of homosexuals legal by the state (court officiators, etc) and affording that union the same rights and titles as a "normal marriage"

This is the solution that makes the most sense, to me.

 

[Napstar]

The tax exempt thing shits me, because they're not a charitable organisation that don't run for profit. They receive an income.

 

[DavidBenGurion]

Kwayera sure does defend homosexuality a lot

If you smell wot im cooking.

 

[Kwayera]

Kwayera sure does defend homosexuality a lot

If you smell wot im cooking.

Oh there's photos of me.. somewhere..

 

[kokodamonkey]

Oh there's photos of me.. somewhere..

haha oh those ones off fb

 

[Iron]

Gays, pls, am I the only one bored with this constant homosexual fascination? It's like a horrid gaping wound and we marvel at the puss that always bursts out when we jab the scab!

Can we just shut up and accept that there's actually no such thing as homosexuality? Just self-centered little bitches who havent found the right gurl yet? The lust they burn with for the same sex is essentially no different than the lust that they burn with for themselves.
There.
Dirty linen Ironed.

I trust that this ends the matter.
Also, I dont care to discuss lesbians. I dont know why, I just dont feel qualified

 

[murphyad]

Iron, you are a prime example of the process of 'immaturation'.

 

[DavidBenGurion]

jab the scab!

If you don't want pus, then ease the squeeze!!!!

hahahahaha. me so funny! :rofl:

 

[HumanDichotomy]

Iron, you are a prime example of the process of 'immaturation'.

Rep.

 

[Tangent]

I kind of have to agree.

Several reasons why I don't understand why gays want to get married by the Church

a. Even if it is made legal, the Church officiators can still refuse to marry you. Just like they can refuse to marry a couple if they don't attend those stupid premarital counselling sessions with the priest, or just like they can refuse if you're not a Catholic but you want to get married in a Catholic Church. Canon law or whatever is still separate from our civil law.

b. Why do you want to get married by an institution that calls for your death? The Church doesn't accept you mang. It won't for a long time. Why want it? Even if you're a Christian gay, you're still not accepted.

c. Civil unions are just as binding, they still give you the title of "married" and they don't involve the bullshit Church.

d. As much as I disagree with the Church and its lunatic followers, I have to accept that the church is an institution that is very old and that has a defined moral code or what have you, that governs it. Marriage between a man and a man is strictly forbidden by the Church. I don't agree with forcing the Church to change their laws, as much as I think they're bullshit laws. If you don't like the way they do business, it's fairly easy to ignore them.


So in terms of gay marriage - I am all for the creation of a civil law that allows homosexual couples to be married by the state. I can't agree with forcing the Church, regardless of how despicable it is, to change their beliefs.

Why support marriage equality in Australia?

• Australia is falling behind other comparable nations in formal relationship recognition. Canada, Spain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Norway, Sweden, South Africa and six US states grant the right to marry. The United Kingdom, New Zealand, Denmark, Switzerland, Finland and several other nations provide a civil union or registered partnership scheme.
• Same-sex couples have all the rights and responsibilities of married couples – but not the right to marry. In 2008, significant reforms granted same-sex de facto couples and their children all the same rights and responsibilities as married couples in federal law, including in social security, family law, child support, taxation, superannuation and Medicare. It is disingenuous and unfair to maintain a distinction between married couples and same-sex couples, particularly as same-sex couples have all the same obligations – such as the obligation to declare their relationship to Centrelink if receiving a social security payment.
• Marriage is a portable status recognised around the world. Being married allows same-sex couples to have their relationship recognised with greater ease when they move or travel overseas in countries which recognise same-sex unions and marriages. De facto or cohabiting couples do not have the same comprehensive recognition overseas as they do in Australia.
• Australia recognises many types of local and overseas marriages – except same-sex marriages. Australia has long recognised a variety of marriages, including Aboriginal customary marriages and marriages from overseas. Overseas same-sex marriages are the only type of foreign marriage between consenting adults that are specifically banned from recognition in Australia. Even polygamous marriages which are not permitted in Australia are recognised for the purposes of family law and divorce (Family Law Act 1975, s 6).
• All love is equal. Discrimination in the Marriage Act sends the message that same-sex relationships are inferior and do not deserve the same respect and recognition as other couple relationships between consenting adults. Same-sex couples should have the same choices available to heterosexual couples for the recognition of their relationships. It is about equality and human rights.
• A majority of Australians support giving same-sex couples the right to marry. A 2009 Galaxy Poll found that 60% of Australians support giving same-sex couples the right to marry, up from 57% in 2007. In our consultation with over 1,300 lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in NSW, over 86% favoured same-sex marriage. Many participants emphasised the importance of the right for same-sex couples to be able to choose how their relationship is recognised and have equal opportunities for relationship recognition.
• Marriage is a civil institution. The requirements and process for getting married in Australia are determined by secular laws which govern everyone – civil marriage is not a religious institution and couples can choose to marry without a religious ceremony or celebrant. Permitting same-sex marriage in law would not compel any religious institution or celebrant to perform one, but would allow same-sex couples formal recognition under laws which apply to all citizens.

Taken straight from the GL rights lobby website

 

[ptrgrgry]

Homosexuality is a social construct.
It essentially defies the purpose of mankind - reproduction.
Whether you believe in God or not, you'll agree that the purpose of a human is to eat, excrete, sleep and reproduce. And primitively ululate every once in a while.

Geee... as an advanced society I thought we'd evolved past the eating and pooing stage!

 

[Tangent]

Geee... as an advanced society I thought we'd evolved past the eating and pooing stage!

Some were left behind, and tried finding their way by walking around in circles.

 

[Napstar]

[/LIST]


Taken straight from the GL rights lobby website

Dude why quote me and spew that shit?

I'm not disagreeing with giving homosexual couples the same rights as heterosexual couples, read my posts.

I'm saying I disagree with any notion of forcing the Church to orchestrate or accept homosexual marriage.

 

[Tangent]

Dude why quote me and spew that shit?

I'm not disagreeing with giving homosexual couples the same rights as heterosexual couples, read my posts.

I'm saying I disagree with any notion of forcing the Church to orchestrate or accept homosexual marriage.

Yeah i saw that. I thought my argument was still stood, seeming that you posted that post in response to civil union.
I do agree with you about forcing the church to marry same-sex couples.

 

[Iron]

Iron, you are a prime example of the process of 'immaturation'.

You mean purification.

Also lols Nebs. Good one buddy. Sometimes Nebz is powerful clever and super hilarious, sometimes needlessly malicious and downright vulgar, but always somewhat sadly detatched

And yeah, srsly, i'm over the gays. I just reject it now. It's nothing more than vanity. Totally invalid. The damage these people have done to the family and broader societal values of selflessness is inestimable. Should no longer be entertained by the broader community. We should call a spade a spade and weed out this festering cyst from our once healthy community
There I said it.

 

[Silver Persian]

Gosh Iron, what a startling and forseen departure from your usual position in these debates.

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

You mean purification.

Also lols Nebs. Good one buddy. Sometimes Nebz is powerful clever and super hilarious, sometimes needlessly malicious and downright vulgar, but always somewhat sadly detatched

And yeah, srsly, i'm over the gays. I just reject it now. It's nothing more than vanity. Totally invalid. The damage these people have done to the family and broader societal values of selflessness is inestimable. Should no longer be entertained by the broader community. We should call a spade a spade and weed out this festering cyst from our once healthy community
There I said it.

So... wait... are you saying you don't like gays? I can't tell.

 

[Iron]

Gosh Iron, what a startling and forseen departure from your usual position in these debates.

I know you m8. I sense your doubts. You know it's true.
Did you really exhaust your search for the right gurl, or was it just an initial moral weakness that led you down a lazy and mediocre spiral of sin? I wonder.