Should Gay marriage be legal in Australia?

[Gargamel]

WhileI truly believe your polls are well intended, They are becoming somewhat redundant.

These are questions not answerable by simple polls, and require intense debate, as there are many points of view on each issue. Again, to narrow these down to black and white is wrong.

While these are valid topics, with the intent to show you are a mature person (and I believe you are, even for your age), they are bordering IMHO, on subtle trolling.

If you truly wish to discuss these topics, try finding a relevant article or current event that highlights the topic to foster discussion. This will also allow to you have multiple sources of differing view points.

Thats good advice in other avenues in life too.

[Cybermat47]

^^^^^^

Thanks for the advice.

[CCIP]

Well, in his defense, some of them did generate some pretty good debate!

(though usually after a requisite period of indignation and mud-slinging, but hey, that's almost every thread we get here.. )

[THE_MASK]

No .

[Cybermat47]

Originally Posted by sober

No .

Why do you think that?

[Skybird]

Should there be any sexes at all?

By social role model for children, is a homosexual man the same as a woman? Is a lesbian woman a man?

Is it indeed discrimination to call a women having children a "mother", as the EU gender legislation claims? Is calling fathers "father" and mothers "mother" discrimination? The EU says so.

Is it of importance and interest for society to make sure a future generation of children is being risen that is expected to pay future taxes and work and care for the elder? If it is, does that deserve special status and security granted for couples creating children - a status that is expressed in the form of marriage? Are these hcildren to be risen as sexual neutrons, or are they better served to be risen by one female woman - their mother - and one male man - their father? -

Why is it that the concept of marriage since millenia and in the overwhelming majority of cultures is based on the understanding of 1 man+1 woman? That is not just religious tradition. Biology had something to do with.

And so on and on. What friends I spend my time with, means nothing for society. adult people living together, means nothing for society. What is important - especially in our overaging, shrinking Western societies - is loving couples having children and rising them with love and attention. Status of these should be protected indeed, and priviliged. Two men or two women living together, means nothing for society, it simply is unimportant even if that fact hurts some egos. What do they expect special respect and equal status with families for? The destruction of the institution of families and the meaning of a loving home for children, already has created a social disster out there, and our societies reflect that in violence, lacking respect for each other, erosion of values, and an extraction of children from their caring family context as early as possible, even at the age of 1 year.

That is sick. Inhumane. And a declaration of moral bancrupcty of modern society committing suicide in slow motion.

Add to this gender engineering, and feminism. The idea that human get born as total tabula rasa and without any differences between boys and girls, because then the goal has been reached: no differences, total equality in all features and characteristics of two sexes. So, political ideology, feminism and gender engineering has an awful lot to do with the relativisation of marriage and family and the spotlighting of homo marriages.

Hm. I could swear we had threads on this issue in the past. Several ones. Did they ever end nicely? well, one reaps as one sows. True for this forum. True for Western society.

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Why is it that the concept of marriage since millenia and in the overwhelming majority of cultures is based on the understanding of 1 man+1 woman? That is not just religious tradition. Biology had something to do with.

Well, if we go that route, then arguably the historical institution of marriage has no less to do with cows, land, titles and children than it does with men and women. Everybody seems to conveniently forget that while marriage may have been co-opted by religious tradition, it arguably is, was, and always will be primarily an economic/social contract meant to secure assets and protect the genetic, economic and political legacy of people beyond the limits of their lifetimes. So yes, biology is involved here, but in the most abstract sense only.

Arguably modern society has already developed ways of preserving economic, political, intellectual and even genetic legacy of people that do not require 1 man and 1 woman. So why stick to that as the only possibility? We might as well go back to insisting that marriage be an "exchanging of cows" while we're at it, after all that's how people in many cultures have done it for thousands of years...

And let's not confuse marriage with procreation and sexuality, or sexuality with procreation for that matter. Marriage is a social contract. Procreation is a biological function. Sexuality is a set of psychological tendencies. The links between the three are very tenuous and have at no time in human history been perfectly aligned. We just like to pretend that in the "good old times" they somehow magically were.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Skybird

That is sick. Inhumane. And a declaration of moral bancrupcty of modern society committing suicide in slow motion.

While your other arguments have some modicum of reason, this is pure moral posturing, and not worthy of reasonable debate.

Hm. I could swear we had threads on this issue in the past. Several ones. Did they ever end nicely? well, one reaps as one sows. True for this forum. True for Western society.

Same debate, same arguments, no needed to run it all once again. I recommend we leave it to this reminder of our different positions.

So you give your arguments and then say it's been debated before and not worth debating again? If you truly feel that way, why make your arguments at all?