so hold on, you are against gay marriage? are you also against civil marriage as it effectively has nothing to do with god pretty much?
you do know that gay marriage will be the biggest boost to the economy since digging rocks out of the ground
so hold on, you are against gay marriage? are you also against civil marriage as it effectively has nothing to do with god pretty much?
you do know that gay marriage will be the biggest boost to the economy since digging rocks out of the ground
Yeah, but won't we all get the Aids if that happens?Originally Posted by q-money
Will they have seperate drinking fountains?
I listen to talkback radio.
pretty sure the member is only against gay marriage because he knows plague is expecting him to pop the question soon and he's just not sure if he's ready to be tied down
Homophobe.
That made me laugh well done
Was more interested in keeping it to the subject at hand the hypocrisy of the lefties rather than the Members personal views but since you asked happy to oblige.
Marriage is a part of my religion. My religion clearly defines its opinion on same sex activities as a no no. There is no dispute in its stance. I am not overtly fussed on those who do partake in these activities. Each to their own and their choice to turn their back on god. They will be judged by god on judgement day for their sins either way
My religion respects and believes the union of marriage as being a sacrament bond between man and women. It is our right for following the word of god.
Those who choose not to do not receive the same entitlement and they can **** off for all I care trying to get the laws of this country changed to recognise their sin as legal/normal
But "the church" doesn't run this country.
Thank god.
What is or who is god?
Is that some hippy looking dude from space?
Religious values are the starting point for the laws of the country and the values in our society.
This quite possibly the best post you've ever written.
I disagree 100% with your stance but respect the fact you have one.
What no one has ever been able to explain is that who exactly 'owns' the word 'marriage'?
Is is the church or is it the state?
Because if it is the church then they get to define it.
If it's the state then by all means take it to a vote.
Does anyone know this for certain?
Also the worst bit about the whole debate back when it went to parliament the other year was the Libs not allowing a conscience vote and the absolute spineless behaviour of the big talking higher ups in the ALP who all voted no.
**** them all.
Oh and praising you for a good post isn't hard coz geez you carry on a bit sometimes.
Our legal system is based on Common Law. A legal framework that can trace it's history back to pre-Christian England and Germany. Even in the first effort of codifying the laws of England by Alfred the Great he used the existing laws of the Three Kingdoms of England which was generally copied from old Saxon Law (The law in Germany)
The only reason why there is a perception that modern law is based on religion is because the early legal texts were written in a style similar to Mosaic Law. Remember we are talking about an era when only the extremely wealthy and the clergy could read and write so things had to be kept ****ing simple.
And throughout English history, the Monarch being the supreme judge, many of the important texts on law usually came at a time when a Monarch was really really opposed to the Church. (John I, Henry VIII and so forth)
Last edited by Skirt Boy; 18-12-2014 at 10:52 PM.
Conscience vote could see a political party lose office if they voted in favour of it and it got up. People get pretty wound up on shit like this abortion etc
As for who owns marriage **** is that a good question in the line of how long is a piece of string.
It is not exactly answerable definitively one way or another. Religion will claim they have had ownership of it for two thousand years of use. The state of Australia is just over 110 years old if federation is your starting point and 220odd if you use the first fleet settlement as a starting point.
The Marriage act of Australia which is the legal thing that needs altering if gay marriage was to be legalised is circa 1961 from the internet
Vote Quimby
Jaliens gives me the horn
Yeah this is why I find the debate interesting.
Regardless I think that all couples (hetro/gay/de facto) should all have the exact same rights in our society. If we get that far then I think re-defining the word won't seem as big an issue.
(Cue the South Park 'butt buddies' episode).
thou shall not ride a bike on a footpath. leave them holy for walking
well ****en dun, god you ****. thanks for all the cancer and stillborns you ****wit. you sure showed us for having some **** who didn't exist break a stupid ****ing law so you can punish me, even thogh i'm not descendent oh him since he never existed.
why don't you drown us all you donkey-raping shit eater? surely we're more ****ed up than noah the old ****. stop the boats. p.s. how the **** did sloths get on thhe boat? penguis? polar bears?
why is ther only "record" of animals known to desert tribes of the day on the boat? how come none of them died on the way back to their natural habitat? surely a lion would be like "i cbf chasing these fast as **** zebras, i'm just gonna snack me this here badger"
imagine following a book written about a desert bloke who may not have even existed, which absolutely was written by only second and third (or worse) hand accounts, some 100 or so years after he may or may not have died. imagine still believing it 1900+ years later. wouldn't you feel like a dumb ****?
we will loose
p.s. do u talk into your hands m8?
we will loose
Religion has thousands of years of history. It is a subject that people who embrace it feel incredibly passionate about. Your asking them to neglect this and disregard the word of god just to accept Adam and Steve being married and committing what is clearly defined in the book of god as a sin.
Your pushing shit up a hill
Oh I don't doubt for one second that it's a big deal. That's why I think that if we at least give all couples the same rights in our supposed non church influenced society then the god squad get to keep their term 'married' and the govt at least doesn't treat these alternate couples as outcasts.
Remember as well sex before marriage, contraception and abortion are also pretty frowned upon by the church yet they 'seem' to be fairly well accepted in society now. Yes the fringe still has a prob but I don't deal with the 1%ers.
Much bigger issue is that if there is a God then why did he give us Gypo's?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote