That gay marriage thing........

[johnny]

Stupid woman I work with was spouting off today, ranting that her church will be FORCED to marry 'the gays'.

Lol, here we go; on one hand I don't think churches should be forced to marry people that don't conform to the rules of their club. Forcing them to do something against their morals and beliefs seems similar to having them stop people from getting married because of their morals and beliefs. But on the other hand, where do you draw the line? Does that mean that we can allow churches to refuse marriage to interracial couples? Of course not. So I don't know how to think about that issue.

And equally as many non religious organizations doing it....and not funneling money off to the Vatican or syphoning it of as 'administrative' costs (up to 90%) like some were caught doing.

OF course, but you can't punish the good because of the bad. That's throwing the baby out with the bathwater and causing harm by taking away the services those good churches provide to the very needy.

 

[pharmaboy]

Edit - sorry, utopia is on tv......

 

[moorey]

Great, I'll see you there! :hug:

Yeah, but I'm just a blasphemous heathen. You're a blasphemous heathen AND a sodomite....pretty sure you'll be First Class, and I'll by just stuck in Economy. out:

 

[moorey]

Lol, here we go; on one hand I don't think churches should be forced to marry people that don't conform to the rules of their club. Forcing them to do something against their morals and beliefs seems similar to having them stop people from getting married because of their morals and beliefs. But on the other hand, where do you draw the line? Does that mean that we can allow churches to refuse marriage to interracial couples? Of course not. So I don't know how to think about that issue.



OF course, but you can't punish the good because of the bad. That's throwing the baby out with the bathwater and causing harm by taking away the services those good churches provide to the very needy.

When the churches do it in the name of humanity, not Christianity, and don't use the money to convert the poor, desperate, needy, hungry, scared and lonely, I'll think differently.

Churches aren't the only places to get married, last time I checked. If you're gay, and your church is anti-gay, and you still want to get married there...then you need to have a good hard look at yourself. You're just as god made you, and god hates how he's made you, but you still love him..... That shits fucked up right there.

 

[johnny]

When the churches do it in the name of humanity, not Christianity, and don't use the money to convert the poor, desperate, needy, hungry, scared and lonely, I'll think differently.

You talk about churches like they are a monolithic group that all act in the same way. If you were talking about a group of people you'd be considered racist. You have an anti-church bias regardless of individual variance that is very reminiscent of behaviours you condemn in others.

Many organisations, such as the Salvation Army, like those that assist the homeless and drug dependent, etc. etc. that do not proselytise at all but you view them the same way as missionaries and evangelicals. That's unfair and discriminatory. Why is ok for you to have that attitude against religious people but other people can't have that attitude to black people?

 

[stirk]

It just makes me sad that this is an issue still after so many years of debate for fucking nothing but political gains and religous appeasement, oh and maybe some intolerant bogans who may not even vote.

Fuck religion, and intolerance and the Govt for being arseholes when there is alot more going on that needs their attention.

Just make it law and move onto real issues, how is love between two people regardless of how they identify something I need to vote on. We are governed by douchbags.

I'd rather vote on how our State and Federal Govt and Council manage our resources and utility services, town planning, rail and road infrastructure, full of dodgy deals they are, we need more toll roads and trains that don't fit the existing infrastructre. Maybe then the country wouldn't be fucked over by the highest bidder and 'hidden' tax revenue.

Whatever sex/gender/intenty marriage is priority 0 compared to the real things these 'people' in power should be focussing on.

 

[Tubbsy]

The Salvation Army haven't an unblemished record on this issue unfortunately .

https://andrewpstreet.com/2016/12/0...my-regarding-their-statement-on-safe-schools/

 

[moorey]

You talk about churches like they are a monolithic group that all act in the same way. If you were talking about a group of people you'd be considered racist. You have an anti-church bias regardless of individual variance that is very reminiscent of behaviours you condemn in others.

Many organisations, such as the Salvation Army, like those that assist the homeless and drug dependent, etc. etc. that do not proselytise at all but you view them the same way as missionaries and evangelicals. That's unfair and discriminatory. Why is ok for you to have that attitude against religious people but other people can't have that attitude to black people?

Jesus, don't get me started in the Salvation Army and their record. I'm not going there. Feel free to google though. They make Mother Theresa look like, well, Mother Theresa.

I do get what you're saying, I just disagree. No race has crippled humanity like religion collectively has.
I'm not against religious people at all. I'm from a strong religious upbringing, have qualifications in biblical studies, and have taught RE. I'm against religious organisations and their belief that they have the monopoly on morality and that everyone else should follow the laws of their particular god.

But I digress, and don't want to railroad this thread any further.

 

[pharmaboy]

Again, having a public discussion and a ballot on whether we can find it within ourselves to let some folk have the same opportunities as us, well, I have no words. It's just like saying we can have a vote as to whether people with a lisp are allowed to be radio announcers or fat people can go to the beach or people who ride Giants are allowed on trails. Equal opportunities are supposed to be a universal right in a liberal democracy, not something you negotiate and play rock-scissors-paper for.

So if it's a universal right, why is it better that a group of a couple of hundred people vote on it as opposed to 15 million?

that's what I don't get - how is parliament a superior way rather than the populace. ( given that no matter how you cut it, someone has to vote on it)

 

[johnny]

The Salvation Army haven't an unblemished record on this issue unfortunately .

https://andrewpstreet.com/2016/12/0...my-regarding-their-statement-on-safe-schools/

No they are not but again, they are not a monolithic organisation either. I've been helped by the salvos when I was in the army and never once was I talked to about religion, they just helped. I've personally watched them do just that with homeless and drug affected as well as families that suffer because of violence, gambling, substance abuse, etc. without a skerrick of proselytisation. I donated a 5 figure sum to the salvos for that exact reason.

There are also those who do proselytise but even if the recipient of help says thanks for the help but keep the bible the helpers keep the bible and continue with the help because that's what their belief leads them to do. These are the people that won't be able to sustain their activities if they are treated the same way as the ostensibly religious organisations that are fronts for money and power.

 

[Tubbsy]

Yep, know what you're saying. David Marr in the article I posted a bit earlier makes a point of highlighting the difference between individual people, including religious ones, and the big business of church like the Catholic Church.

Unfortunately in the heat of debate when the two are conflated it can get a bit personal.

 

[link1896]

It just makes me sad that this is an issue still after so many years of debate for fucking nothing but political gains and religous appeasement, oh and maybe some intolerant bogans who may not even vote.

Fuck religion, and intolerance and the Govt for being arseholes when there is alot more going on that needs their attention.

Just make it law and move onto real issues, how is love between two people regardless of how they identify something I need to vote on. We are governed by douchbags.

I'd rather vote on how our State and Federal Govt and Council manage our resources and utility services, town planning, rail and road infrastructure, full of dodgy deals they are, we need more toll roads and trains that don't fit the existing infrastructre. Maybe then the country wouldn't be fucked over by the highest bidder and 'hidden' tax revenue.

Whatever sex/gender/intenty marriage is priority 0 compared to the real things these 'people' in power should be focussing on.

Man you sprout so much fake news.


Sorry. Seriously now, Abbott really believes his position is correct, with zero regard for even his sister. Tells you how much of an evil sod he is. The right wing loons have stolen control of the agenda and the party, Malcolm is now but a passenger. Is this the nail in Malcolm's coffin? His press conference this afternoon was like a bumbling backbencher who had his first time in the limelight and was stuck for words.

We're crying out for some leadership and it's just not there. It seems it's not to be found anywhere. I can see how fucking loons like Trump can gain power when there is a vacuum.

 

[Knuckles]

You talk about churches like they are a monolithic group that all act in the same way. If you were talking about a group of people you'd be considered racist. You have an anti-church bias regardless of individual variance that is very reminiscent of behaviours you condemn in others.

Many organisations, such as the Salvation Army, like those that assist the homeless and drug dependent, etc. etc. that do not proselytise at all but you view them the same way as missionaries and evangelicals. That's unfair and discriminatory. Why is ok for you to have that attitude against religious people but other people can't have that attitude to black people?

Even vegans need somebody to look down on.

 

[johnny]

So if it's a universal right, why is it better that a group of a couple of hundred people vote on it as opposed to 15 million?

that's what I don't get - how is parliament a superior way rather than the populace. ( given that no matter how you cut it, someone has to vote on it)

Yeah that's a really good point and one I've been thinking about as well. I don't have a good answer because of the way our political system works and people are allowed to speak their mind. However I can't get past the point that there shouldn't even be any discussion, in parliament or elsewhere regards equal rights. It's the same as allowing the women the vote, there's nothing to discuss.

I do take your point and I don't have a good answer other than pollies are there partly to lead and on fundamental matters such as this they shouldn't be outsourcing their responsibility to the general public.

 

[moorey]

Even vegans need somebody to look down on.

That's why god gave us Histers...and CX

 

[stirk]

No they are not but again, they are not a monolithic organisation either. I've been helped by the salvos when I was in the army and never once was I talked to about religion, they just helped. I've personally watched them do just that with homeless and drug affected as well as families that suffer because of violence, gambling, substance abuse, etc. without a skerrick of proselytisation. I donated a 5 figure sum to the salvos for that exact reason.

There are also those who do proselytise but even if the recipient of help says thanks for the help but keep the bible the helpers keep the bible and continue with the help because that's what their belief leads them to do. These are the people that won't be able to sustain their activities if they are treated the same way as the ostensibly religious organisations that are fronts for money and power.

Well said. I think there are more good poeple out there helping others for nothing other than good will which stems from their beliefs. Religion and faith has good and bad sides to it, like any organisation.

Yesterday I had a young lady talk to me while walking to catch my train, she smiled at me and said "you have a good day friend, know that Jesus loves you" It took me by surprise but I felt fine with it as she was just saying hi in her own way and passing on her compassion regardless of who I am or what I might believe in.

I'm ok with religious people but disagree with religion in general, just don't knock on my door on saturday morning, towel drop.........

 

[johnny]

Again, no words.....



Australians have 15 days to register to vote in the same-sex marriage postal plebiscite.

The ABC has learnt the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) will tomorrow announce that the last day Australians will be able to register to vote is August 24, 15 days from Wednesday.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-...l-plebiscite-15-days-to-enrol-to-vote/8791312

 

[stirk]

Man you sprout so much fake news.

I need to take a leak....



Like the Liberal party leaking credidbilty and voters.

 

[The Duckmeister]

So if it's a universal right, why is it better that a group of a couple of hundred people vote on it as opposed to 15 million?

that's what I don't get - how is parliament a superior way rather than the populace. ( given that no matter how you cut it, someone has to vote on it)

Yeah that's a really good point and one I've been thinking about as well. I don't have a good answer because of the way our political system works and people are allowed to speak their mind. However I can't get past the point that there shouldn't even be any discussion, in parliament or elsewhere regards equal rights. It's the same as allowing the women the vote, there's nothing to discuss.

I do take your point and I don't have a good answer other than pollies are there partly to lead and on fundamental matters such as this they shouldn't be outsourcing their responsibility to the general public.

Those couple of hundred people are supposed to represent the greater populace who elected them, which is something too many of them seem to have forgotten. It's pretty obvious the majority of the population believe everybody should have the right to get married, so the fuckwits up there should just get on with what we're paying them to do.

 

[moorey]

Again, no words.....



Australians have 15 days to register to vote in the same-sex marriage postal plebiscite.

The ABC has learnt the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) will tomorrow announce that the last day Australians will be able to register to vote is August 24, 15 days from Wednesday.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-08-...l-plebiscite-15-days-to-enrol-to-vote/8791312

Naturally, the angry conservatives will rally the troops to register, while the 'slacltivist' centre will just update their Facebook profile and 'like' a few posts. This is going down in a ball of fire. Please prove me wrong, Australia!:tsk: