On October 21 2011 12:55 Brett wrote: I'm all for homosexual unions which result in the couple receiving the same rights and benefits as a heterosexual couple, I just don't believe it should be called marriage... because it's not. Marriage, by definition, means the union of a man and a woman to the exclusion of all others, voluntarily entered into for life.
Not everthing has to be the same. Equal but different is fine by me.
By whose definition? See, the funny thing about words is that their definitions are not set in stone by universal decree. And what would bother you so much about the word "marriage" being defined as the union between any two consenting adults?
There's no denying that the word "marriage" has years of social value that you deny to homosexual couples when you give them the cold, stuffy label of a "civil union." You could make a lot of people happier by just giving them equal acknowledgement with the same title. Why not just do it? Your rhetoric all just ends up being a cover for heterosexism because the only reason to be concerned about the definition of the word "marriage" is if you're somehow concerned about being somehow tainted by the gays.
Do you realize that this argument is just "We shouldn't make gay marriage legal because gay marriage isn't legal"? This entire debate is over whether we should change the current legal definition of marriage.
On October 21 2011 13:19 Brett wrote: I already told you "why not just do it?". Because not everything has to be the same.
Errrm, that's not a reason. If making gay unions and straight unions have the same name makes a large number people happier, you have to provide some reason not to do it for your argument against it to have any reason at all.
What are the negative consequences of legally redefining the word "marriage" to include same-sex couples?
This entire debate is not about the definition of marriage at all. It's about equality for homosexual people. I am all for such couples having the same legal rights and benefits as heterosexual couples because the law should be blind.
What you are arguing about though is a notion of perception. You are arguing that everthing should be mashed up and called the same so as not to acknowledge any difference, and reduce the possibilty of highlighting difference. You are saying that the highlighting of difference, in this case by calling the 'unions' different things, leads to dislike, hate or discrimination of homosexual couples.
My view is that such a notion is nonsense. The difference is there. Pretending it doesn't exist doesn't change anything, it just pushes it underground. It's no different to continuing racism where the law (no longer) recognises any difference between people. Idiotic people who don't understand things different to them (homosexual couples, other races, whatever), and fear what they don't understand, will continue to feel the same, regardless of what you do to hide the difference.
In this particular case, in the process of pushing for homosexual unions to be called marriage, you are diluting the traditional definition of marriage as you go. And you're doing it purely because of perception, differences in which will always exist. That's not a good enough reason for me. There is value in tradition.
So you support the segregation of gay people?
"They're gay, they can't have what we have because we're not like them but we'll give them something about the same it'll be fine"
Don't be an idiot. It's not segregation at all.
In what way is it not?
They're not being separated from society in any way shape or form. They have their own ceremony, which results in a union called something other than marriage. A union which confers the same rights and benefits as marriage. This is no different to men having a "Buck's night" and women having a "Hen's night". That's not segregation.
If of course there is a law that prohibits any and all discrimination between a "marriage" and a "civil union" and that all (and I mean ALL) rights and responsibilities that apply to one must by law apply to the other, I think it would be fine. Barring that, I think the usage of the term "marriage" is the simplest and most effective way to achieve equality.
Currently, all of the rights and responsibilities of marriage apply to any two people who are classified as in a de facto relationship.
Well, there is one difference. You get to call yourself "Mrs" if you are married.
I am not the regular Australian teenager, but my opinion:
With gay people getting married, I don't really like it but it doesn't affect me and they should be able to do what they want. I am fine with it. I don't really like it if people are gay just to be controversial, though, but by no means do I think that all gays are like this.
But in terms of them adopting children, I do not think this is good. Even if you think that two same sex parents could give the same care to a child (I don't agree with this, but may be under informed), the social consequences would be a problem in my opinion.
I was bullied in primary school (elementary school), not much, but I was. At one point I didn't talk to anyone at all and just read books by myself at break times. But it was terrible and I think it had a big effect on me. I would imagine that if a person was the child of gay people, and they were at a point in school where other kids would know what being gay is etc. then bullying would be a massive issue.
You may have noticed that I wrote this post somewhat carefully, so if I upset anyone I don't mean it, we may have different opinions but we are entitled to them.
On October 21 2011 15:31 Xalonark wrote: I am not the regular Australian teenager, but my opinion:
With gay people getting married, I don't really like it but it doesn't affect me and they should be able to do what they want. I am fine with it. I don't really like it if people are gay just to be controversial, though, but by no means do I think that all gays are like this.
But in terms of them adopting children, I do not think this is good. Even if you think that two same sex parents could give the same care to a child (I don't agree with this, but may be under informed), the social consequences would be a problem in my opinion.
I was bullied in primary school (elementary school), not much, but I was. At one point I didn't talk to anyone at all and just read books by myself at break times. But it was terrible and I think it had a big effect on me. I would imagine that if a person was the child of gay people, and they were at a point in school where other kids would know what being gay is etc. then bullying would be a massive issue.
You may have noticed that I wrote this post somewhat carefully, so if I upset anyone I don't mean it, we may have different opinions but we are entitled to them.
Your first sentence is a bit contradictory =P. People 'being' gay just to be controversial? Thats a thing?
On October 21 2011 15:31 Xalonark wrote: I am not the regular Australian teenager, but my opinion:
With gay people getting married, I don't really like it but it doesn't affect me and they should be able to do what they want. I am fine with it. I don't really like it if people are gay just to be controversial, though, but by no means do I think that all gays are like this.
But in terms of them adopting children, I do not think this is good. Even if you think that two same sex parents could give the same care to a child (I don't agree with this, but may be under informed), the social consequences would be a problem in my opinion.
I was bullied in primary school (elementary school), not much, but I was. At one point I didn't talk to anyone at all and just read books by myself at break times. But it was terrible and I think it had a big effect on me. I would imagine that if a person was the child of gay people, and they were at a point in school where other kids would know what being gay is etc. then bullying would be a massive issue.
You may have noticed that I wrote this post somewhat carefully, so if I upset anyone I don't mean it, we may have different opinions but we are entitled to them.
How do you feel about mixed race children and the potential bullying they faced?
On October 21 2011 15:31 Xalonark wrote: I am not the regular Australian teenager, but my opinion:
With gay people getting married, I don't really like it but it doesn't affect me and they should be able to do what they want. I am fine with it. I don't really like it if people are gay just to be controversial, though, but by no means do I think that all gays are like this.
But in terms of them adopting children, I do not think this is good. Even if you think that two same sex parents could give the same care to a child (I don't agree with this, but may be under informed), the social consequences would be a problem in my opinion.
I was bullied in primary school (elementary school), not much, but I was. At one point I didn't talk to anyone at all and just read books by myself at break times. But it was terrible and I think it had a big effect on me. I would imagine that if a person was the child of gay people, and they were at a point in school where other kids would know what being gay is etc. then bullying would be a massive issue.
You may have noticed that I wrote this post somewhat carefully, so if I upset anyone I don't mean it, we may have different opinions but we are entitled to them.
No problem. I don't think people are gay because they want to be controversial. It's not a choice. It's a lot of stress in the majority of cases. If you think you got bullied....
Additionally, there is no reason to believe same sex parents would be worse parents on average. In fact, quite the opposite, sexual orientation has close to no bearing on their parenting (with the exception that their kids tend to be more accepting). You can take a look a few pages back for links. People only fear gay people because they don't understand them and there's a historical/cultural stigma. This is why we should work towards a better understanding, not just of gays, but of many other groups of people.
On October 21 2011 15:31 Xalonark wrote: I am not the regular Australian teenager, but my opinion:
With gay people getting married, I don't really like it but it doesn't affect me and they should be able to do what they want. I am fine with it. I don't really like it if people are gay just to be controversial, though, but by no means do I think that all gays are like this.
But in terms of them adopting children, I do not think this is good. Even if you think that two same sex parents could give the same care to a child (I don't agree with this, but may be under informed), the social consequences would be a problem in my opinion.
I was bullied in primary school (elementary school), not much, but I was. At one point I didn't talk to anyone at all and just read books by myself at break times. But it was terrible and I think it had a big effect on me. I would imagine that if a person was the child of gay people, and they were at a point in school where other kids would know what being gay is etc. then bullying would be a massive issue.
You may have noticed that I wrote this post somewhat carefully, so if I upset anyone I don't mean it, we may have different opinions but we are entitled to them.
Your first sentence is a bit contradictory =P. People 'being' gay just to be controversial? Thats a thing?
With the first sentence, I just mean that to me it feels wrong for gay people to get married, but if they want to do it and it doesn't affect me I don't have a problem with it.
As for people being gay just to be controversial, I would imagine that happens, but if you'd like to prove that no-one ever did that before, go ahead.
Edit: also about the mixed race children thing, racism is going down in my opinion, and has been for ages. Discrimination against gays is a lot more common.
Yes in hindsight I probably should think a bit more. My bad.
Don't apologize lol. There are similarities between same-sex parents and mixed race parents. You're right, racism has been going down, and that's the point.
On October 21 2011 15:31 Xalonark wrote: I am not the regular Australian teenager, but my opinion:
With gay people getting married, I don't really like it but it doesn't affect me and they should be able to do what they want. I am fine with it. I don't really like it if people are gay just to be controversial, though, but by no means do I think that all gays are like this.
But in terms of them adopting children, I do not think this is good. Even if you think that two same sex parents could give the same care to a child (I don't agree with this, but may be under informed), the social consequences would be a problem in my opinion.
I was bullied in primary school (elementary school), not much, but I was. At one point I didn't talk to anyone at all and just read books by myself at break times. But it was terrible and I think it had a big effect on me. I would imagine that if a person was the child of gay people, and they were at a point in school where other kids would know what being gay is etc. then bullying would be a massive issue.
You may have noticed that I wrote this post somewhat carefully, so if I upset anyone I don't mean it, we may have different opinions but we are entitled to them.
I think you are asserting two different (but not necessarily mutually exclusive) points: 1) A child, growing up with same sex parents, will suffer developmental problems that a child with a mother and father would not. 2) A child should not be brought up in circumstances likely to lead to bullying.
On the first, I would have thought that this is a scientifically testable assumption. It is perhaps better to base any such argument from current psychological research rather than anecdotally. I do not know what research is done though.
On the second, I am not very convinced on this point. This logic seems to suggest that ugly or obese parents shouldn't adopt children.
my stance is that I couldn't care less. But if it gets legalized in Canada there better be a straight pride parade or I'll cry for equal treatment. thats my only issue. Equal Treatment is fine, giving people special rights because they are a minority will cross my line. Good Luck Aussi's what ever the outcome somebody will be upset.
On October 21 2011 15:52 OmniEulogy wrote: my stance is that I couldn't care less. But if it gets legalized in Canada there better be a straight pride parade or I'll cry for equal treatment. thats my only issue. Equal Treatment is fine, giving people special rights because they are a minority will cross my line. Good Luck Aussi's what ever the outcome somebody will be upset.
There is a famous quote by an American judge that goes, "It is a wise man who said that there is no greater inequality than the equal treatment of unequals". Just some food for thought.
On October 21 2011 15:31 Xalonark wrote: I am not the regular Australian teenager, but my opinion:
With gay people getting married, I don't really like it but it doesn't affect me and they should be able to do what they want. I am fine with it. I don't really like it if people are gay just to be controversial, though, but by no means do I think that all gays are like this.
But in terms of them adopting children, I do not think this is good. Even if you think that two same sex parents could give the same care to a child (I don't agree with this, but may be under informed), the social consequences would be a problem in my opinion.
I was bullied in primary school (elementary school), not much, but I was. At one point I didn't talk to anyone at all and just read books by myself at break times. But it was terrible and I think it had a big effect on me. I would imagine that if a person was the child of gay people, and they were at a point in school where other kids would know what being gay is etc. then bullying would be a massive issue.
You may have noticed that I wrote this post somewhat carefully, so if I upset anyone I don't mean it, we may have different opinions but we are entitled to them.
I think you are asserting two different (but not necessarily mutually exclusive) points: 1) A child, growing up with same sex parents, will suffer developmental problems that a child with a mother and father would not. 2) A child should not be brought up in circumstances likely to lead to bullying.
On the first, I would have thought that this is a scientifically testable assumption. It is perhaps better to base any such argument from current psychological research rather than anecdotally. I do not know what research is done though.
On the second, I am not very convinced on this point. This logic seems to suggest that ugly or obese parents shouldn't adopt children.
On the first point, like I said, I am uninformed. On the second, not to offend anybody, but it is a lot more normal to be ugly/obese than gay.
On October 21 2011 15:31 Xalonark wrote: I am not the regular Australian teenager, but my opinion:
With gay people getting married, I don't really like it but it doesn't affect me and they should be able to do what they want. I am fine with it. I don't really like it if people are gay just to be controversial, though, but by no means do I think that all gays are like this.
But in terms of them adopting children, I do not think this is good. Even if you think that two same sex parents could give the same care to a child (I don't agree with this, but may be under informed), the social consequences would be a problem in my opinion.
I was bullied in primary school (elementary school), not much, but I was. At one point I didn't talk to anyone at all and just read books by myself at break times. But it was terrible and I think it had a big effect on me. I would imagine that if a person was the child of gay people, and they were at a point in school where other kids would know what being gay is etc. then bullying would be a massive issue.
You may have noticed that I wrote this post somewhat carefully, so if I upset anyone I don't mean it, we may have different opinions but we are entitled to them.
I think you are asserting two different (but not necessarily mutually exclusive) points: 1) A child, growing up with same sex parents, will suffer developmental problems that a child with a mother and father would not. 2) A child should not be brought up in circumstances likely to lead to bullying.
On the first, I would have thought that this is a scientifically testable assumption. It is perhaps better to base any such argument from current psychological research rather than anecdotally. I do not know what research is done though.
On the second, I am not very convinced on this point. This logic seems to suggest that ugly or obese parents shouldn't adopt children.
Obese parents shouldn't adopt children. If they can't even look after themselves, how can you expect them to look after their children properly. ><
On October 21 2011 15:31 Xalonark wrote: I am not the regular Australian teenager, but my opinion:
With gay people getting married, I don't really like it but it doesn't affect me and they should be able to do what they want. I am fine with it. I don't really like it if people are gay just to be controversial, though, but by no means do I think that all gays are like this.
But in terms of them adopting children, I do not think this is good. Even if you think that two same sex parents could give the same care to a child (I don't agree with this, but may be under informed), the social consequences would be a problem in my opinion.
I was bullied in primary school (elementary school), not much, but I was. At one point I didn't talk to anyone at all and just read books by myself at break times. But it was terrible and I think it had a big effect on me. I would imagine that if a person was the child of gay people, and they were at a point in school where other kids would know what being gay is etc. then bullying would be a massive issue.
You may have noticed that I wrote this post somewhat carefully, so if I upset anyone I don't mean it, we may have different opinions but we are entitled to them.
In response to your first point, this young gentleman says everything more eloquently than I ever could:
As for the second point, kids are bullied all the time for all sorts of different reasons: appearance, race, gender, personality, grades, etc. God, I was bullied all the time after school on the bus through all of middle school for being "too quiet" and Asian. How about, instead of saying that some parents shouldn't adopt/have kids for whatever reason due to the threat of those kids becoming a target of bullying, we instead teach our kids that, y'know, bullying is fucking wrong?
On the first point, like I said, I am uninformed. On the second, not to offend anybody, but it is a lot more normal to be ugly/obese than gay.
On the first, there's evidence suggesting parenting and child development is independent of orientation. And on the second, it is more "normal" indeed, as it is more common (damn fatty foods). But that doesn't dismiss the point. It used to be case that people of "other" races were beaten. But we've made a lot of progress in that regard.
Also to the point about the hetero parade. I had the same opinion. But talking to gays and lesbians, i found out that it's not really for me. It's for acceptance. It's to tell the other scared teens who are afraid of themselves and of others' reaction to them. They're different, and they want to state that it's ok to be different, and that it's even "normal." There's no point in a hetero parade, since it's already everywhere
I don't mind if gays get married, I accepted the fact that it would happen eventually a long time ago since there is such a large movement towards it. On the matter on gays adopting I don't have an opinion one way or the other, my dad on the other hand is heavily against it.
On October 21 2011 15:21 Regime wrote: it will not get passed in australia 99% of australians do not want anything to do with the gay men and women. they are almost shuned from society.
myself and every single person i know would vote no
Pretty sure you don't have to vote, it's your representatives in the relevant houses that do.
On October 21 2011 14:46 DropBear wrote: Ahahaha can you imagine the look on Tony Abbott's face if it gets passed!
Labor needs to push all this sort of stuff through before they inevitably lose the election, before it's too late and the world's greatest neanderthal takes over.
Worlds greatest neanderthal
Strange he was actually a rhode's scholar so he must have some intelligence hidden somewhere.
You've got to be kidding, really? Must have been a really bad year academically here lol.
I would consider voting Liberal if literally anyone else was their leader. They currently have no policy except criticising Labor's policy and the man is dangerous.
I thought Julia was against gay marriage? Maybe she's just having the vote for lols to piss off Abbott, she's already female, unmarried, childless and athiest why not add gay-friendly to the list
He isn't that bad, tbh. He is doing the smart thing, and letting labor self-destruct.
Labor is fucked anyway. Their traditional base, (blue collar workers) are being slowly taken over by the liberals (it helps that Abbott has the alpha male, family man persona), while their other base, the intellectual, progressive types, are going to the greens.
The next decade is going to be interesting in aussie politics.
Abbott is nowhere near as bad as most people make him out to be, but Turnbull would be a better leader. However it looks like that ship has sailed. Labor is in a horrible position as they try and pander to both ends of the political spectrum at once. I would associate 'progressive' with the Greens but certainly not intellectual. They are a joke of a party, their values are non-existant and god forbid the day where they have to control the Australian economy.
Regarding the main topic, I don't really care much about the progression of this bill/law as I've always believed that real social change happens in the collective psyche of the citizens, and in Australia this issue was decided a very long time before this thread was made and before this 'vote' was announced. Frankly I'm more concerned with the Carbon Tax and it's implications.
On October 21 2011 15:31 Xalonark wrote: I am not the regular Australian teenager, but my opinion:
With gay people getting married, I don't really like it but it doesn't affect me and they should be able to do what they want. I am fine with it. I don't really like it if people are gay just to be controversial, though, but by no means do I think that all gays are like this.
But in terms of them adopting children, I do not think this is good. Even if you think that two same sex parents could give the same care to a child (I don't agree with this, but may be under informed), the social consequences would be a problem in my opinion.
I was bullied in primary school (elementary school), not much, but I was. At one point I didn't talk to anyone at all and just read books by myself at break times. But it was terrible and I think it had a big effect on me. I would imagine that if a person was the child of gay people, and they were at a point in school where other kids would know what being gay is etc. then bullying would be a massive issue.
You may have noticed that I wrote this post somewhat carefully, so if I upset anyone I don't mean it, we may have different opinions but we are entitled to them.
All the scientific evidence that exists shows that being gay is not a choice or a decision, it's simply who they are. Occasionally some schmuck decides to be bi-curious for a short while, but that never lasts, and they don't exactly choose to get married during this period.
Also, a number of links and sources have been provided in this thread already showing that homosexual parents are just as good if not better than heterosexual parents at raising well-adjusted children. Please get informed.
Frankly, people who are opposed to this are either just squeamish and don't like change or differences they aren't used to, or actually have no idea what the hell they are talking about.
EPT
