Homosexuality in Australia (2 Viewers)

[John McCain]

I have no problems with them as I said, as long as they do not want to get married...

But why should your preference that they shouldn't be allowed to marry, override the preference of those who would like to allow homosexual marriage?

Why should we respect your opposition to marriage? What if I said all interracial marriage should be prohibited, would I be any less justified?

We live in a pluralist society, and where people are not harming another person, they should be allowed to do as they please.

 

[Senator111]

Fair point 'John McCain' - as I said I believe in their rights as a married couple, but to officially "tie the knot" I believe to be a sacred union between a man and a woman!

Single parents - obviously a different issue and a stupid assertion to relate it to being raised by a gay couple! Their are always circumstances to them!

 

[SeCKSiiMiNh]

Fair point 'John McCain' - as I said I believe in their rights as a married couple, but to officially "tie the knot" I believe to be a sacred union between a man and a woman!!

Well as long as homosexual couples have the same rights as heterosexual married couples, and the only difference is the title of their relationship, then ok.

Single parents - obviously a different issue and a stupid assertion to relate it to being raised by a gay couple! Their are always circumstances to them!

So what is wrong with homosexual parents then?

 

[Senator111]

There we go, we got some sort of concensus on the marriage.
We may not on the adoption but that is okay - debate is good!

I believe in a childs fundamental right to be raised by a mother and a father. I believe a child needs both forms of influence on life, where possible (in those single parent situations)

That is my conviction, and I shall stand by it. As long as you stand by yours, I'm happy!

 

[John McCain]

It's fine for you to hold that belief, problems begin when you demand legislation (which is to say, maintaining the legislative status quo) that restricts individuals from forming what they believe is a valid sacred union.

To give you an example, I oppose gun ownership and muslim immigration, I think they are both terrible evils, I dislike them and would advise and campaign against anyone supporting them financially or otherwise. But although I personally dislike these things, I support the rights of those who wish to purchase guns, and the right of anyone to move and relocate freely.

I don't make the mistake of allowing my personal preferences to facilitate the erosion of personal liberty and choice.

If you are opposed to homosexual marriage, you should campaign to convince them why it is a bad idea, or even offer them financial incentives to not get married, but to forcibly deny them the right to pursue their own will and happiness is unconscionable.

 

[John McCain]

Well as long as homosexual couples have the same rights as heterosexual married couples, and the only difference is the title of their relationship, then ok.

If the title is important to them, why should they be denied that title?

The issue of the title is an implicit undermining of their relationship, it is a refusal to acknowledge that their relationships are fully equal to heterosexual relationships, fuck that.

 

[Senator111]

As I said John McCain, I support their rights as if a married couple just to not be married. I fully support legislation etc as you said I do not believe in oppressing things - I would vote against such a thing is I was an MP or a Senator, but that would be my position!

I don't know I have the passion on this issue to campaign or finance any campaigns. Other issues take priority for mine!

 

[Sprangler]

Well as long as homosexual couples have the same rights as heterosexual married couples, and the only difference is the title of their relationship, then ok.

Gays deserve the title. Christians didn't invent the idea of marriage and they shouldn't own it in Australia.

I believe in a childs fundamental right to be raised by a mother and a father. I believe a child needs both forms of influence on life, where possible (in those single parent situations)

Why do you believe that, back it up, cite sources, studies showing that parents of the same sex are unfit etc.

 

[Senator111]

Sprangler all it is is my personal belief - it is not my strong point by a long shot. I have not looked into it therefore cannot site references etc etc

It is purely my personal conviction - nothing else to it.

 

[John McCain]

As I said John McCain, I support their rights as if a married couple just to not be married. I fully support legislation etc as you said I do not believe in oppressing things

You're missing the point, which is that in no way should their actions be restricted because of your preference, and it is oppressive, it's a bare faced insult to the right of others who would wish to view and honor their marriage as fully equal to a heterosexual one.

You support the legislative restriction on them having a formal marriage, that is to call a spade a spade, which is to say their right to be wed and recognised as a 'marriage' by the government, and by any church which would choose to have them.

You stand in opposition to individual choice and liberty. Read my previous posts with the understanding that I knew exactly what your position is, that you merely oppose a certain title being granted, and every post I've made has been formed based on a full understanding of your position.

Why would you forcibly deny them this title? Try to separate your beliefs in what is right, and your belief in an individuals ability to choose to err and the freedom to pursue vice that harms only themselves, if that is their preference

 

[Senator111]

I am not going to bend over backwards for them and lay down the red carpet - of course I will stand up for what I believe is right - and my voting record if a law maker should reflect what I say, correct?

If you were an MP and a bill came up stating that we place no limits Muslim immigration? You would vote No, according to your stance? If not that would be contradictory!

Therefore saying I am oppressiing choice and liberty is wrong, simply standing by my convictions - you can go live in the country that allows drugs to be used at free will - as it is not taking away a persons choice.

 

[John McCain]

Don't you feel slightly unethical, supporting restrictions on something that could bring someone much happiness, when you've implicitly agreed that it causes no harm to anyone else to allow them to have their relationships recognized as a full marriage?

How does placing restrictions on who can call themselves 'married', increase the amount of happiness and well-being in the world?

If it causes no harm, and has the possibility of making someone happy, aren't you a bit of a cunt for restricting this?

Yes obviously I would support abolishing all restrictions on immigration, and legal regulation and sale of drugs by private companies, both those policies are excellent ideas.

If you wish to debate those other ideas, I can direct you to the appropriate threads where they have both been discussed extensively.

 

[John McCain]

Just fyi, current Australian law allows some of the worst drugs to be used freely.

If you don't like this, you can go live in Iran.

 

[Senator111]

Then that would be at odds with your own convictions - I believe in sticking to my convictions and going from there.

Let me make it clear, I would move no legislation from the floor restricting it, but if such legilastion was to come through - my vote would be aginst it.

I believe tradition plays a big part for me, I can see your point, but I just don't agree and believe an officially recognised union should be between a man and a woman.

So, you are saying you are against Muslim immigration - and if legislation was moved to ban any restrictions on Muslim immigration - you would vote in favour of lifting the restrictions, even though you said you would campaign and give financial aid to campaigns against it?

 

[John McCain]

I am pro-freedom above all else, always and forever.

I'd only prefer less muslim immigration because islam tends to be extremely conservative, and muslims will vote and lobby for socially conservative policy. I'd prefer no immigration by anyone who holds conservative politics.

To take these ideas to their logical extreme, by your logic I should support the forced exportation of any Australian who holds conservative politics, or at least the removal of suffrage for these people and the outlawing of conservative political parties, since my conviction is that Australia would be better without these influences.

Convictions must be rationally justified, and for me it comes down to 'what policy will cause the greatest increase in human well-being', that is the least that can be said to be ethical.

 

[Senator111]

Well I'll respect that as I will say always, I may not agree with you but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

I mean I'll always follow my convictions, as you said within reason. I mean I'd love to abolish welfare (unemployment benefits) Im happy to keep Aged, Carers and Disability pensions. But that would just be unethical and would hurt people to much - therefore I would not advocate this!

I guess we'll just agree to disagree!

 

[John McCain]

I don't agree to that.

 

[Senator111]

Oh well, I'm sure you can get your debate fix elsewhere! As for me, I may make the occasional comment in the thread now - but my view is now known and has been discussed and their is no longer need for me to post - until something else comes up in discussion, possibly later!

 

[SnowFox]

Oh well, I'm sure you can get your debate fix elsewhere! As for me, I may make the occasional comment in the thread now - but my view is now known and has been discussed and their is no longer need for me to post - until something else comes up in discussion, possibly later!

Your views are cockeyed and old.

 

[Senator111]

Your views are cockeyed and old.

If you put it that way, I couldn't care less. I don't care what everyones view is as long as they decide their own and stick by it!