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

pharmaboy

Eats Squid
Not for one second.
Regrettably you are correct and I just made the mistake of finding out that neo nazis are real, and quite proud of their complete and utter lunacy. Actually, that poster is probably the most sane stuff on their irrevocably bizarre and mad place on the web, and let me assure you, that's saying something.

Maybe that rock is best left facedown on the ground
 

pink poodle

気が狂っている男
Regrettably you are correct and I just made the mistake of finding out that neo nazis are real, and quite proud of their complete and utter lunacy. Actually, that poster is probably the most sane stuff on their irrevocably bizarre and mad place on the web, and let me assure you, that's saying something.

Maybe that rock is best left facedown on the ground
Plenty of those dick heads around your home town sadly. Often happy to walk the streets their uniforms, a very romper stomper look.
 

Spike-X

Grumpy Old Sarah
Devils advocate
There's really no need. He already has plenty.

Is it about sexual preference or biological facts?

Marriage is a fairly traditional thing, I know stacks of couples who aren't married, have houses and families together, and it doesn't seem to harm them, it isn't short term, they are lifetime partners and see no need to "marry".
But they have the choice to do it if they want to.

From what I have read of the opposing view on social media ( definately not what tony Abbott, Bernardi thinks) the view is that defacto is close enough to marriage as to make no real difference.
If couples make that decision for themselves, that's up to them. Other people shouldn't be making it for them.

Second, that it's between a man and a woman (ostensibly for procreation), I've never thought about it as a sexual preference thing, simply male and female and a fairly traditional institution.
If marriage is strictly for procreation, why are there no laws against infertile couples, or couples who are too old to conceive, or who simply don't want to have kids, being allowed to marry?

I remember a couple of gay males on another forum that I used to spend a bit of time on talking about this stuff, and they were pointedly against gay marriage because it represented institution
They have no more right to decide that for couples who do want to marry than do the bigots.

and secondly the argument wasn't worth having and more likely to cause division.
That seems to be a cowardly approach to me.

Because I know a couple of families effected I will vote yes, but that doesn't preclude me from being empathic to another view
I have no empathy at all for the view that some people don't deserve the same rights as everyone else.

Having bigoted views is one thing. Attempting to impose them on the rest of the populace is just shit. Like I've seen it said elsewhere, "Telling gay people they can't get married because you don't approve of homosexuality is like telling me I can't have a doughnut because you're on a diet."
 
Last edited:

Beej1

Senior Member
Mixing with people of different opinions should be valued, but it only works well when there is a real mix not group think with one swimming against the tide
I agree with this. Healthy and vigorous debate is a good thing.

Except when religion is involved. Because it's rarely healthy I find. Mainly becaise it often tends to become such a heated and lengthy argument about something that is the world's biggest make believe story and its characters.

It's like a forum of a thousand posts arguing about the treatment of reindeer forced tow a guy around the planet at relativistic speeds one night a year.
 

Flow-Rider

Burner
Just thought I'd share some history on Plebiscites. A lot has already been discussed on here but our political system should have been ashamed of itself for letting some basic human rights be decided by a pleb..

There have only been three national plebiscites in Australia:
1916: military service conscription (defeated)
1917: reinforcement of the Australian Imperial Force overseas (defeated)
1977: choice of Australia’s national song ('Advance Australia Fair' preferred.)

They've had a few different individual ones across the states in the past though.
 
Last edited:

stirk

Burner
There isn't any reason in support of perpetuating discrmination that could gain approval. MY LIFE shouldn't be decided by a fucking national opinion poll.
Enough said right there duck. This thread is a bloody good example of how people will debate and complicate the argument, start side arguments about religion and gods and sodomy only the devil knows what else will come up, when the very core of this whole debacle the government has created is very fucking simple.

Some human rights in this country are not equal.

It's time to fix one long overdue inequality.

Get on with it, stop arguing about it as there is no argument to be made against marriage equality as far as I'm concerned.

Australia is so backwater in many ways.

I'm saddened it's come to this shitshow.
 

stirk

Burner
I'm seeing intelligent people in this thread who are all for the equality picking each other's points of view apart for accuracy, imagine what the not so intelligent populous are doing.
 

Flow-Rider

Burner
I'm seeing intelligent people in this thread who are all for the equality picking each other's points of view apart for accuracy, imagine what the not so intelligent populous are doing.
They need to just let it go through and let the anti-discrimination laws deal with the rest. Isn't one of the Christians beliefs to follow the laws of the land.
 

Spike-X

Grumpy Old Sarah
Isn't one of the Christians beliefs to follow the laws of the land.
Yes, except when they decide they shouldn't have to, then they whine about being persecuted and discriminated against for having to follow the same rules as everyone else.
 

moorey

call me Mia
They need to just let it go through and let the anti-discrimination laws deal with the rest. Isn't one of the Christians beliefs to follow the laws of the land.
Yes, except when they decide they shouldn't have to, then they whine about being persecuted and discriminated against for having to follow the same rules as everyone else.
That, and most Christians I know believe that biblical law A: should set the law, and B: should trump the law. All religions believe this, I'm just highlighting Christianity due to it being the most popular flavour here.
 

stirk

Burner
They need to just let it go through and let the anti-discrimination laws deal with the rest. Isn't one of the Christians beliefs to follow the laws of the land.
Ha! Nice try :heh: The Christmas creation was based on rebelling against the law! Until it suits them.
 

floody

Wheel size expert
The only two elements necessary for a marriage between two persons (of binary sex) are intention, and consent. Not procreation or any other guff that gets put out there.
"Do you wanna?"
"Yep"
Job's on.


I would say for the first circa twenty five years of my life I never once heard or read a single person outlining their sincere, heartfelt, deeply considered view on what the word marriage constituted. Well, that's not totally accurate. Maybe a priest or celebrant, or my RE teacher, in the course of their ceremonial duties or as part of the script, but otherwise nobody. There was just none of this "for me, marriage is [droning noise]" stuff.
 
Last edited:

The Duckmeister

Has a juicy midrange
The point that I would note is that this is an MTB forum - totally devoid of politics, religion, ethics, sexuality, ideology, etc. unless we go completely off topic. Bike riding is not related to any of these issues and yet those vocal among us seem all pretty much in favour - or at least not against - same sex marriage. I don't know what that means but I find it interesting.
Just as well this is in the "Off Topic" bit then! :caked:

I don't make a "thing" about my sexuality either on these forums (except for this thread, where it's in context) or elsewhere, for the reasons above - it is simply not relevant to anyone else in my public life. Which ultimately cuts back to why the current situation we're facing is so fucked up. We as a society should not have to vote on the life choices of people who are irrelevant to the rest of us, and whose choices have no effect on society at large.

"You may never bring yourself to take me as I am,
But in case you haven't noticed, I don't give a fucking damn!"

These song lines sit quite comfortably with me; I don't give that much of a shit any more what people think about me (hell, I ride XC, 600mm handlebars, fixed seatpost, 3x and 26" - all the untrendy stuff for crying out loud! :tongue1: ), but I must say that although very little has been said in my specific direction, the overall trend through this thread of "they should just get the hell on with it" has in its own way been comforting, indicating that the section of our little community who has chipped in here is a lot more forward-thinking and accepting than the arsehats who supposedly represent us (they seem to have forgotten the meaning of that bit of their job description) in parliament.
 
Last edited:
Top