On Marriage Equality

via Andrew Sullivan

A candid and incredibly moving speech from Maureen Walsh, one of two Republicans to help pass the marriage equality bill in the Washington State House yesterday:

I’d like to see Bob McCoskrie argue against this.

  • Andrei

    Or why the West is finished as in when trite Oprah Winfreyish emotionalism is equated to great oratory or thought.

    And that people seriously believe the Governments can legislate a male/male, female/female coupling as “equal” to a male/female pair.¬†

    Males and females go together because they create children and this is why the other pairings are not and cannot ever be “equal” no matter how many laws are passed or pieces of paper are issued by the Government.

    This is unbelievably silly – the product of an empty headed generation of people with nothing better to concern themselves with

    • Onenine7

      Yes. But us silly headed people do listen. And if you had listened it is about equality of rights not the similarity of the “pairings”.

      Yes the relationships are different, just as my religious views are different to yours, and my skin may be a different colour, but because we are not the same, does not make us unequal.

      You invested several minutes lite ing to this brave woman yet you heard nothing

      • Andrei

        And if you had listened it is about equality of rights not the similarity of the “pairings”.

        Fine sounding words but what do they mean?

        What rights are being  withheld that will be conferred with this novelty, pray tell?

    • Groans

      Nicely said.  Giving homosexuals rights is like visiting an alcoholic with a 40oz bottle of Jim Beam under your arm.  May appear nice (to turn up with a present) but is absolutely stupid behaviour.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/James-Jenkins/593642943 James Jenkins

        You are not “giving” a Homosexual rights…you are¬†respecting¬†the EQUAL rights of fellow¬†HUMAN¬†BEINGS….¬†rights¬†they already HAVE by virtue of being Human….like you.

  • Lifeanddeath

    Life can not be equal to death.
    Homosexual relationships are not forbidden. But they cannot and will never be equal to heterosexual relationships. You cant legislate life.

    Emotion mixed with legislation leeds to loss of freedom. I do not want to lie to my children and be forced to tell them that a homosexual relationship is equal. It is not. It is a choise of two people, but it is also resulting in a unnatural outcome. Death. Statistic will prove me right.

    Heterosexual relationships usually result in creation of life.

    • Anonymous

      I know of plenty of heterosexual relationships that have not, and will never result in progeny.

      Do we prevent them from pursuing personal happiness too?

      • Homoerectus

        ¬†No. That’s called freedom of choice. But do not legislate what is equal and what not. People knew for centuries what was the core of every society. FAMILY. Why is homosexuality and every decadent lifestyle pushed via media and emotional videos like the one above. I don’t stop them from being together and living a life they have chosen to live, but please do not declare this equal to a lifestyle where people come together to create children, and contribute to enrich our society with valuable members of the societiy, why others have chosen to enjoy the hedonistic egotrip, until they catch HIV or other illnesses or STD’s and end up commiting suicide (read statistics). This might not be true for all homosexual, but it is the majority of homosexuals who are the highest risk group for the above diseases.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/James-Jenkins/593642943 James Jenkins

      That is an¬†irrelevant¬†side factor that doesn’t change the real issue of human rights one bit…try again.

  • Doug_S

    A very thought provoking speech. I have to admit that I have a tolerance issue with homosexuality i think in part due to my upbringing and my own personal experiences. I like many men have no issue with female homosexuality but just can’t entertain the thought of male homosexuality. I’m not entirely sure why and am not inclined to want to delve into it but I do consider myself enlightened after watching this video. I am prepared to be open minded about it for the reasons Maureen mentioned…

    So you know..I am not catholic or have any other religious affiliation I am a worldly wise person with a good kiwi red blooded upbringing perhaps I need to get in touch with my feminine side..NOT

    • Euan Rt

      Well hello there Doug-lass.

    • Richard B. (formally poorman)

      “……I’m not entirely sure why and am not inclined to want to delve into it…..”
       
      Did you mean delve into why you don’t like homosexuality,
      OR delve into homosexuality?

      • Euan Rt

        I think more than delve Richard. Doug says he. “likes many men”.

      • Doug_S

        Delve into why I don’t like homosexuality in men is what I meant. I don’t apologize for my opinion and I am open to criticism and welcome it. There is no need for snide comments like the one below to test my sexuality. I was honest with my views and have taken the time to share them in the hope that I may learn something.

      • Euan Rt

        Sorry, no intention to offend Doug.

      • Doug_S

        No offense taken Euan. I would have taken the piss out of me also..post was lacking somewhat as Peter has pointed out. 

    • Peter Wilson

      You state, “I like many men…”

      Yet can’t entertain the thought of male homosexuality.lmao

      • Bafacu

        I believe the missing comma would fix it up! ie “I, like many men, etc”¬† All clear now?

      • Doug_S

        Ah yes, my poor grammatical skills..a simple comma will have prevented all sorts of chuckles. 

  • Guest

    we’re all equal on this rock

    even you twisted fucks from the dark ages

    worry about something important for a change you homophobic fucktards

    • Anonymous

      Spot on G.

    • Groans

      Sorry but I don’t consider you my equal

      • Guest

        because you disagree with me or because you’re assumed i’m homosexual?

      • Groans

        To Guest.¬† Your views aren’t equal and you don’t substantiate them.

      • Anonymous

        But you don’t substantiate your views either

      • Guest

        To Groans. *yawn*

      • Anonymous

        You doth protest too much……………

  • Anonymous

    It `aint compulsory ,it does`nt float my boat either but I`ve never had gays knocking on my door trying to convert me like the religious cunts that come around selling their brand of fucking bigotry .

    • Anonymous

      they don’t have to knock on your door… their brand is sold on tv shows.

  • Anonymous

    Just live and let live – the whole ‘family values’ argument is in the toilet whether or not gay people are allowed to get married. Who cares as long as they’re not hurting anyone?

    Why do people think that the 1950s were the pinnacle of human existence? Maybe they were, if you were white, middle class, and employed. My thoughts? If minorities weren’t so forcefully shunned, down trodden, and hated back then, they wouldn’t be so forcefully pushing their agendas now and we wouldn’t need to be bending over backwards to apologise and compensate for what happened.¬†

  • Richard B. (formally poorman)

    Well, I’m not Gay.

    But, I did have sex with a bloke once who was.

  • Anonymous

    >Homerectus wrote:

    >No. That’s called freedom of choice.Actually no, homosexual people do not choose to be gay, they are born that way.>¬†But do not legislate what is equal and what not. Should we rather have the self appointed self rightous bigots deciding for us? I think not.>People knew for centuries what was the core of every society. FAMILY. True, fortunately my definition of family differs radically from yours.>Why is homosexuality and every decadent lifestyle pushed via media and emotional videos >like the one above. I don’t stop them from being together and living a life they have chosen to >live, Homosexuality is neither a lifestyle nor a choice. It is however a reality which the media should occasionally reflect.>but please do not declare this equal to a lifestyle where people come together to create >children,In a world of seven billion people I’ve long ago stopped attributing worth to people purely on the grounds that they can reproduce.>and contribute to enrich our society with valuable members of the societiyWhat value? Indigents who can breed? Gay people contribute to society same as any other group (Including breeding strangely enough)>, why others have chosen to enjoy the hedonistic egotrip,Once again, it isn’t a choice. >¬†until they catch HIV or other illnesses or STD’s and end up commiting suicide (read >statistics).Do tell the millions of hetrosexual people infected with HIV (including prepubescent children) how they ¬†shouldn’t worry because it’s a gay disease.>¬†This might not be true for all homosexual, but it is the majority of homosexuals who are the >highest risk group for the above diseases. Or not.

    • Lifeanddeath

       They are not born like that, as many studies have shown. Maybe there is
      a genetical code for some, but the majority comes from broken families
      with a total imbalance of the male female relationship, abusive
      mother.father, rape victims, abuse victims, one parent-only-families,
      etc. The family background and the caused psychological damage is
      detrimental for developing into a homosexual. Of course you can always
      find a friend you know, who0 knows another friend who knows a perfect
      gay couple, who are sooooo lovely, etc…

      It is a choice to ignore facts and live on with this illness and believe
      ideological agendas of some politicians and pressure groups who have
      forced us and our kids to believe their fairy tales, creating the
      RELIGION OF TOLERANCE, based on their sick ideology of a society without
      values. We can see the outcome of that on K-Road and Queen Street,
      after 1am, sometimes earlier.

      You have brought up no arguments on the other points, but just repeated
      ignorant individual viewpoints on how you see family, society, world
      population and STD statistics, suicide statistics, life expectancy of
      homosexuals. Basically you are denying the truth.

      This is however typical for many homosexuals. They are always very happy
      on tv and camera, unfortunately this is not reflected in their lives,
      Most of the gays I know are deeply unhappy and their lives usually end
      up very often before they reach their 50th birthday, depending on
      medications they receive of course.

      • Anonymous

        Actually they are born like that, as many studies have shown, and constitute a pretty constant percentage of the human population, and come from a variety of backgrounds.

        It’s been many decades since the reputable medical establishment has regarded homosexuality as an illness.

        Of course it’s helpful to maintain the delusion that it’s somebody’s fault, rather than a natural occurance, easier to discriminate then.

        Gay people are marginalized because they are gay, they are not gay because they are marginalized, many if the societal ills are as a result of that marginalization as self rightious self appointed pricks¬†think it’s good and noble to bully innocents into self denial and suicide, all justified on the glorious myth that being gay some sort of choice.

        It’s illogical on one hand to claim it’s a choice and then on the other hand list the negative social results.

        Far more rational to conclude that there is no choice, and the negative consequences are being imposed upon them.

      • http://www.facebook.com/people/James-Jenkins/593642943 James Jenkins

        Oh bullshit. Produce these “studies”…and maybe even one not from a¬†Fundamentalist¬†sudo University or similar.

    • Steve P

      “…they are born that way.”
      Straw man. The issue at hand is not the legalisation of homosexuality. (And even if it were, it would *still* be a straw man: if pedophiles and rapists could show that they were “born that way”, would it be ok to let them ply their trade with impunity?)

      Representative Walsh gives an impassioned speech about sharing your life with someone, but… what has that got to do with marriage? She herself even talks about trying to find a boyfriend, not a husband.

      • Anonymous

        The “choice” aspect of homosexuality is used to justify depriving people of legal rights and obligations normally afforded spouses. The Abrahanic religions did not invent marriage and family, they merely sought to codify what existed already.

        The true strawman is the emmotive comparison of homosexuality (a relationship between two consenting adults) and rape (a relationship where power and control is exerted over one who has not consented.)

  • Stevo

    EVERYONE has the right to marriage Рmarrying their opposite sex.  Simple really.

    • Steve P

      Exactly. Gays have the same (thus, equal) right to marriage as anyone else; there are no laws prohibiting gays from getting married. Gays are not “deprived of their rights”, nor are they “victims of inequality”.¬†

      What gay marriage activists are seeking is not a claim to a right that others have that gays don’t, they are seeking the creation of a *new* right, a right that currently nobody has: gay marriage.So the debate should be in terms of what justification is there for the creation of this new right? Any such argument on the basis of “fairness”, “equality” or “rights” is merely begging the question.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/James-Jenkins/593642943 James Jenkins

      Where did that “right” come from…? And how come the Christian church used to conduct gay marriages and the concept wasn’t considered strange?

  • James Gray

    My view is we should get eliminate all forms of state sanctioned “marriage”, but allow couples (or groups, if that’s how they want to live) to enter contracts of commitment to each other, which they may refer to as marriage, or anything else they see fit.

  • Hank Dutton

     

    There is no consensus in the scientific community for the
    so-called ‚Äúhomosexual gene‚ÄĚ. Even the activist researchers have said this. See
    link below. Who (or what) you chose to have sex with is a choice. A pedophile hoses. (He chooses wrongly).

    http://americansfortruth.com/2009/05/13/american-psychological-association-backtracks-on-gay-gene-claim/

    Further, don’t call it a civil rights issue:

    ‚ÄúAs a Black woman who happens to be an alumnus of the University of Toledo’s
    Graduate School, an employee and business owner, I take great umbrage at the
    notion that those choosing the homosexual lifestyle are ‘civil rights victims.
    Here’s why. I cannot wake up tomorrow and not be a Black woman. I am
    genetically and biologically a Black woman,‚ÄĚ she wrote in a column in the local
    Toledo Free Press.

    “Daily, thousands of homosexuals make a life decision to leave the gay
    lifestyle evidenced by the growing population of PFOX (Parents and Friends of
    Ex Gays) and Exodus International just to name a few,‚ÄĚ she added.

    After the column’s appearance, Dixon was promptly suspended last month, and
    now, in the most recent development, fired from her position by faculty for
    what they described as values that “do not accord‚ÄĚ with the University of
    Toledo.

    http://www.christianpost.com/news/employee-fired-over-anti-gay-column-32356/

    • Andrei

      After the column’s appearance, Dixon was promptly suspended last month, and now, in the most recent development, fired from her position by faculty for

      what they described as values that “do not accord‚ÄĚ with the University of
      Toledo.

      The inquisition ain’t got nothing compared to the left when it comes to dealing to heretics who stray from the reservation of Liberal Orthodoxy and top of the tree is “Gay Rights” not even being a black woman will save you from the wrath you will incur if you utter anything in contradiction to that agenda.

  • Onenine7

    Marriage is a legal status not a religious one.. If the law says you can marry your cousin then its fine.. And it is in this country.. Although the comments above make me wonder about the outcomes…So here is the news for you close minded fucks, we let Hindus marry and they don’t even believe in your god, Druids get married all of the time, and if you are as tolerant and accepting as you wonderful lord Jesus said you should be, you’d just let it go.. What’s the worst that could happen, some more happy people.. Good grief we can’t have that

    • Hank Dutton

      Be as ‚Äútolerant and accepting‚ÄĚ as Jesus? The woman caught in
      adultery was not told to ‚Äújust let it go‚ÄĚ, Jesus called it a sin and said to
      sin no more. He did not condemn her either.. You’re projecting what you want
      Him to say.
       

      • Anonymous

        What jesus had to say is about as relevant as what Harry Potter has to say on marriage.
        Marriage was around before christianity was dreamt up and the musings of fictional characters from the past and present hold no water.

  • Peter Wilson

    It’s like a lot of things we’re too scared to confront. Do we really feel other cultures – where they stone people to death for adultery – are equal to ours. Or that children of single parent families are not disadvantaged, or that Maori disadvantage is an excuse for bashing kids.

    Far easier to say we are all equal and worthy of respect. Homosexuality. We all know it’s wrong, but it’s here, accept it. Don’t forget, it may afflict your own family.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/James-Jenkins/593642943 James Jenkins

      Sorry ¬†but we “know”no such thing. “Wrong”…by what standard? Says who? It occurs in nature as a¬†natural¬†variant¬†in 1500 known¬†species¬†and counting…therefore its natural and not a choice…therefore its outside the context of morality which requires a choice be possible¬†before¬†any judgement on whether something is “right or¬†wrong” can be passed.

      • Steve P

        Are you sure you want to go down that path? Because it leads to a *very* slippery slope…

  • Euan Rt

    I am amazed how intolerant and tetchy people are in the 21st Century on a matter that is soooo last century. I describe myself as a fundamental christian. I do not condone or agree with homosexuality, but I am not the one who sits in judgement on the issue. The church has made some grievous errors in the past, putting people to death for believing that the world is not flat; and also for believing that the earth is not the centre of the solar system. Give it up and stop throwing stones. The bible says women should wear head coverings yet I expect most of you accept that there were reasons for Paul to say that at the time, but are no longer applicable. I believe if we as christians are more concerned with encouraging people to seek God rather than make demands on them, we would be far more tolerated. Please, intolerance is no virtue.

    • Andrei

      Nobody is sitting in judgement on homosexuals Рwhat people are doing is protecting a venerable institution called marriage and objecting to its fundamental purpose being re-written for reasons which remain a mystery to everybody with functioning brain cells.

      In what way are anybody’s rights being denied by restricting marriage to people who are procreative?¬†

      Nobody can answer this.

      • Euan Rt

        Two things to consider: 1) Who owns this venerable institution of marriage? 2) There seem to be plenty of people on this post even who seem to be suggesting    that Gay people are having their rights denied.

      • Andrei

        “There seem to be plenty of people on this post even who seem to be suggesting ¬† ¬†that Gay people are having their rights denied.“/blockquote>
        Yes there are but they cannot articulate what these “rights” actually are

      • Groans

        It’s tough fighting the dullards Andrei.¬†¬†Looks like¬†a case of throwing your pearls before the swine.

      • Anonymous

        Sorry Andre, but restricting marriage to people who are “procreative” would also rule it out for a lot of heterosexual couples. Or perhaps in your view marriage should be restricted to the young and demonstrably fertile? ¬†Your marriage restrictions should be framed more carefully before you suggest everybody with functioning brain cells should agree with you. ¬†

      • Andrei

        ”¬†restricting marriage to people who are “procreative” would also rule it out for a lot of heterosexual couples.”

        Another intellectual pygmy who reasons – because some heterosexual couples can’t or wont reproduce we should consider heterosexual couples equivalent to homosexual and gay ones who universally can’t reproduce. (Known in the trade as an¬†inconvenient¬†fact).¬†

        This of course is the talking point issued from party central to be used to divert when the issue of reproduction being intimately associated with marriage is bought up

        In fact Canon Law from which our marriage laws were derived forbade marriage by people who knowingly were infertile Рit tended to take a   lenient view on this matter and assume that both the male and female who stood before the Altar were fertile which in about 99% of the cases they were.

      • Anonymous

        No Andre, I reflected your own reasoning back at you and asked for clarification – and I didn’t insult you in the process.¬†

        I suspect you and I actually hold very similar views on marriage, but very different ones one the appropriateness of derisive remarks to other posters. I trust your views on adultery are equally as vehement. Mine are. 

      • Euan Rt

        For someone who claims to not be sitting in judgement, I see an awful lot of judgement coming from you. You say you don’t judge homosexuals – but you do just by the position you are taking. You have judged me inferring that I can’t have functioning brain cells if I don’t tow your line, and now I see you have judged Fifi and called her an intellectual pygmy. I humbly suggest you have some anger issues if you were not already aware.

      • Andrei

        Fair enough if you think I’ve been rude though beginning with a “sorry” and a misspelling of my name seems like a put down too.

        But if you have grey matter use it

        What is marriage for?

        What it does is it¬†publicly¬†bonds a man and a woman, me and my wife say, ¬† and it says Andrei any children that arise from this union are your responsibility, , not Euan’s, fifibelle’s but you and your wife’s.¬†

        And it is your responsibility to see that they are housed, clothed and fed and so forth.

        And you can bring them up according to your ways and customs.

        It is that later part of the deal that makes marriage an anathema to the left and that is why they have spent the last forty years undermining it Рthey want your children and mine not bought up in the ways and the customs of their parents but ion the ways and the customs of the left.

        That is what Gay Marriage is really about, the weakening the links between marriage, parents and children and turning it into a big nothing.

        Because Gay “Marriage” actually serves no societal purpose whatsoever unlike its traditional counterpart which helps to ensure that children are bought up by their biological parents who take the ¬†responsibility and rewards for doing it.

      • Anonymous

        Sincere apologies, the mis-spelling was a genuine oversight, not in any way intended as a put-down. 

      • Euan Rt

        I can assure you that I am far from the left, and yes I am all for the entitlement of parents to set their own family values. I agree also that marriage is a public declaration allowing a bonding of a couple. My problem however is your insistence that gay people do not have the same right to have the same opportunity to make the same sort of public declaration. I think that children are a product of a marriage and not the reason for the marriage. Children to me are part of a family and for me that is a separate institution to a marriage. They usually go together but both can exist without the other.

      • Andrei

        And you wonder why a quarter of the kids in New Zealand are being bought up on the DPB

        And you wring your hands in despair every time an innocent is murdered at the hands of his/her mothers latest boyfriend

        Oblivious to the fact that you have utterly trashed the very institution designed to minimize and prevent these things.

        What more can I say.

         

  • jay cee

    interesting debate people. what i read somewhere is that people choose their sexual orientation at the same time as they choose the colour of their eyes and whether to be left or right handed.
    good speech in the clip by a loving “mom” well put.

  • Gaysnothappy

    What happens if you isolate two homosexuals?
    They will die and leave no children behind. It is also possible that they commit suicide or die of a disease, caused by anal sex. (men)

    If you do not want to procreate, you are sick or have chosen to follow the spiritual path and obstain from sex. Thats just a fact and please do not start an emotial debate.

    Homosexuality should be treated and can be treated if homosexuality is caused in childhood, through abuse, imbalance of male/female relation, traumatic experiences, no involvement or exposure of one of the parent in early childhood.

    Statistics show that homosexual practices include in most cases, large number of sexual partner, without protection, anal and other forms of harmful sexual pratcices, over 50% of gay males have had exposure and consumption of feces of multiple partners.

    • middleagedwhiteguy

      You seem to know an awful lot about gay men.  Or at least, you think you know an awful lot about gay men.

      • Gaysickness

         Yes. I try to research and not always believe everything the media proclaims as truth, despite civilisation telling us a different story for centuries and centuries and despite the well known facts of mental and physical illnesses resulting of abnormal sexual activities and the so called love of same sex couples.

        The next step is to proclaim pedophilia as “born” normal behaviour.

        It is sick and needs treatment and children need to be protected from people suffering this illness.

        Every gay man and woman know that this is true, but they force themselve to live a life of lies, either to please their ego or to conform with the gay philosophy of life.

    • groanswhilebumming

      you need to get out more fatty

  • Auto_immune

    What’s so wrong about¬†affording a¬†gay or lesbian person¬†the ability to point¬†to their spouse and¬†legally¬†say¬†that¬†is my¬†husband/wife?

    • Anonymous

      Because AI, in the christians idiot manual it says it is a bad thing ,what consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes , apparently.

      • Peter Wilson

        Give us an opinion on consenting adult incest then.

      • http://www.whaleoil.co.nz Whaleoil

        This Christian doesn’t say that.

  • Chris

    None of this would be an issue if we understood the correct role of government. The Government should not be involved in marriage, civil unions, parings, partnerships, relationships, whatever you want to call it between whoever wants to do it etc.. Infact they dhould not be legislating the private choices of anyone so long as they are not harming others.

    Simply this whole issue is nothing more complex than one group of induviduals using force to make another group of induviduals live in a manner they deem appropriate. If it was left to the induvidual rather than the state then the induvidual would be free to do what and whoever they like without their rights being trampled.

    I am a Christian; I don’t really think homosexuality is a good thing. But that is my personal view and I would never seek to force others to live as I see fit. What someone does with their own life is of no consequence to me. We must all understand that if we do not stand up for our rights in common and defend one another it could be your group in the firing line of the law next. We cannot afford to be divided on issues like this and like adults we need to learn to disagree and tolerate.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/James-Jenkins/593642943 James Jenkins

      Well said. You are a far better and consistent Christian than the rest of the hate filled bigots here spewing their own personally brewed bile while having the gall in claiming to be “Christlike”.

  • Doug_S

    Ok, Ok, Ok..I have tried to take the low road and make an effort to understand. Enough of this PC bollocks! Jesus and Gay people have no place in the same conversation. This is not a religious issue and never has been. It”s a dumbing down of our basic principals. Don’t give me that live and let live crap along with it’s here so live with it crap…I’m sure Charles Darwin would have an opinion in that regard.

    I am sick to the fucking eyeballs of society telling me and my children this is normal behavior amongst consenting adults. So, poking your pole up some other dudes dirt box is ok? Really? or strapping on a rubber double ended bloke for the carpet munchers and dealing to each other in some pseudo male act is also ok? 

    FFS give me strength..there is nothing natural about this shit and is at best devious acts to satisfy ones own sexual pleasures. Someone please tell me, two consenting males poling each other in the dirt box and then smoking each others pink Havana is behavior becoming of your average Joe?? How the fuck do you explain this to children when confronted by little Johnny’s two mums or two dads…99% of parents would employ subterfuge to avoid explaining the real truth behind the lewd acts lurking in the bedrooms of these people.

    The eternal PC bullshit is no mechanism for changing my view or the values I instill in my children. I will not be sucked in by anyone or anything trying to devalue the laws of nature. Modern society is no excuse for acceptable sexual deviance and immoral acts that we are supposed to accept as “normal” or “acceptable” behavior.¬†

    Being “Gay” is a fashionable excuse for being effeminate or masculine in either sex and describes a place or choice someone might take to fit into a social box invented by the extreme liberal. It’s bullshit of the first order. Be gay I don’t care..keep your deviant shit o yourself and don:t tell my children it is ok because it is not. Bring on the tirade…go blow each other or munch each others carpet…either way natural selection will eventually eliminate you.

    • jay cee

      ok so you don’t like or understand homosexuality and or lesbianism,fine you are entitled to your opinion. no one is asking you to like it or understand it. what those among us who don’t have a problem with it or what they do or don’t do in their bedrooms is don’t sit in judgement on them. live and let live.
      as for “GAYSICKNESS” post, you cannot equate paedophillia with gays. as children cannot legally or be deemed mature enough to give consent.

      • Peter Wilson

        Ok, so you don’t understand that what you’re going is wrong. How can we expect to understand it, no more than we can understand any mental illness and how the mind works. It’s a bit like adding to global warming, we know it’s wrong, and we shouldn’t be doing it, but what is the alternative, it’s like we were born for self destruction.

  • Steve P

    One thing about this gay marriage question is that it perfectly illustrates the hypocrisy and incoherence of modern progressive liberalism. The Women’s Lib movement sought to “liberate” women from, inter alia, the “patriarchal oppression of marriage”. Now we have another minority group claiming to be oppressed by being excluded from, er, being able to oppress themselves…¬†

  • Mark

    I’m sick of this¬†homophobic¬†shit.. some of our greatest Kiwis have been gay.. Mr Klark, Ms Carter.. look at what they did for the country.

    • Thorn

      Don’t forget Kosh.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/James-Jenkins/593642943 James Jenkins

    The rights that Gay people are being denied are their¬†inalienable¬†,natural and individual ones to their life,liberty,property and pursuit of their own happiness….they are being denied them by state force…the law of the land while all others are not.THAT is what is wrong with banning gay marriage. Gay marriage does not¬†violate¬†the same¬†rights¬†of anyone else so is no business of the¬†state¬†and therefore there is no reason for its repression.

    • Steve P

      All I see is emotive hand-waving. 

      “The rights that Gay people are being denied…” Gays have the same marriage rights as everyone else, they are NOT being denied any rights.¬†

      “…inalienable¬†,natural and individual ones to their life,liberty,property and pursuit of their own happiness…”, marriage is not a civil right; it is not protected under the Bill Of Rights Act (“pursuit of their own happiness”? Are you trying to be ironic?)

      “Gay marriage does not¬†violate¬†the same¬†rights¬†of anyone else so is no business of the¬†state..” Contradiction in terms. If marriage is not the business of the state then why even have this discussion? Any two people, or three people, or 127 people, or man and his daughter, or man and his sheep, or man and his collection of motorcycles could declare themselves married and it would be a “real” marriage.

      How about coming up with an actual, reasoned argument?

  • Greg M

    Here is my elegant solution. Abolish marriage.
    Replace it with¬† the ” relationship contract”, gender and religion neutral.

    • Peter Wilson

      Except that married people probably believe marriage was invented as an institution of partnership between a man and woman. They might also think the status of marriage has been earned over many years and anyone else seeking that status is carpetbagging. Kind of like a breach of trademark by people claiming the status of something they have not contributed to.

  • M3N78L

    Don’t worry guys, science to the rescue. Gay scientists have isolated the christian gene, thankfully we expect a vaccine any time now.

  • Anonymous

    here is my bit to the debate.marriage was clearly defined long long ago as between a man and a women…………so let any other form of patnership that people want to commit to come up with there own name for that commitment that they want between themselves….problem solved…and on a similiar not people who want to change the tennants of a church to allow them to do wot they want….well the easer and more loving thing to do is surely to go out and form your own church around the things that you believe……why on earth would u want to be part of something that isn’t you in it’s rituals…don’t get it¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬†¬† viva la different

    • Peter Wilson

      Well said! Let them create their own marriage-type institution and not piggy back on the committment and effort of others, whose lifestyle they have walked away from in any case.

    • Anonymous

      Marriage is a secular institution which grants people secular rights and responsibilities.

      Not all religious “Marriages” are recognised by secular law.

      Gay people seek access to equal secular rights (and responsibilities).

98%