Marriage Equality Bill progresses by a considerable margin

The Marriage Equality Bill has passed through its select committee stage, and by a considerable margin.

I am pleased to see that most MPs aren’t listening to the bigoted views of a few rowdies armed with out of date facts, figures and dodgy polls.

A Parliamentary Select Committee has recommended that a bill to legalise same-sex marriage be passed into law.

The Government Administration Committee said the private member’s bill should progress, but with an amendment to make it clear that no minister was obliged to marry someone against their own beliefs.

The committee report said: “The bill seeks to extend the legal right to marry to same-sex couples; it does not seek to interfere with people’s religious freedoms.”

Sensible stuff. 

The committee received 21,533 submissions on the bill, 2898 of which had unique content. Of the submissions, 10,487 were in favour and 8148 against. The committee acknowledged that New Zealanders held “sincere and strong beliefs” about the importance of marriage. “The passion with which submitters made their arguments to us was palpable.”

This is where mass submissions get silly…most are simply copies of a form submission and therefore largely meaningless.

The bill’s second reading will be held on March 13. The legislation passed its first reading by 80 votes to 40.

A considerable margin.

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • [This is where mass submissions get silly…most are simply copies of a form submission and therefore largely meaningless.]

    You mean that submission form from Family First “told” people to go and do?

    To me if that was the case then I would just see it as One Submission and One Voice for that Copy and Paste job.

    Seeming this is already on my Facebook page – I shall paste my views the Bill here too:

    I see the Marriage Amendment Bill is back from Select Committee and recommends that the Bill should become law. It is of note that the Bill has to pass Second and Third Reading in the House before it goes before the GG. After that the Bill becomes an Act thus law.

    I noted a comment from Green MP Kevin Hague that the majority of opposing submissions came from and used the Family First ‘Submission Guide’ pretty much word for word – so copy paste job.

    Thanks Bob for making Christianity in NZ look even more foolish and giving a further stigma on drone activity and unable to think creatively or freely. Submissions are meant to be where you give your original words, thoughts and research to the Committee, not go copy/paste something en-mass by “followers” that was written by one particular individual!

    Between you and Colin Craig, no wonder why even practising Christians will now refuse to identify out in the full public realm (including census forms) as a Christian unless they want to be stigmatised from the secular world thanks to the pair of you (and others) creating and reinforcing that Stigma.

    That stigma being: Bible Thumping, Fundy, Bigoted stone age, intolerant, uncompassionate, loud mouthed, simplistic, self righteous nut jobs

    Rather than the: humble, compassionate, tolerant, patient, progressive, selfless, creative, loving and forgiving that some of us truely are. Okay some of us are loud but that is from either protecting ones identity, being actual selfless in teaching/mentoring/listening/problem solving/leading, or just our nature as you get the quiet and loud ones.

    To the rest of the world out there, there are Liberal or (rather progressive (being the right word)) Christians who are nothing like their rather fundy counterparts… You will just find we are the quiet ones usually are unless our backs are riled up

    Now waiting for the Bill to pass Second and Third Readings…

    • LesleyNZ

      I thank God for someone like Bob who is prepared to stand up and be ridiculed and mocked. This is to be expected when you stand up for what you believe in – especially if what you believe in is against the current tranisent liberal thinking – especially the humble, compassionate, tolerant, patient, progressive, selfless, creative, loving and forgiving liberal Christianity. The thing is Ben you know Jesus was not tolerant of sin. He died on the cross because of mankind’s sin. The conservative fundys put on the Armour of God. Bob is one of them – that is why he is not afraid to speak out and against that which he believes is wrong.
      Ephesians 6:10-18
      10 Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. 11 Put on the full armour of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. 13 Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. 14 Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, 15 and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. 16 In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 17 Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.

      18 And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the Lord’s people.

      • Gayguy

        When you have finished misrepresenting Gods words, I think there is a haters meeting you are late for. Poor Bob needs someone to pass him tissues as he cries.

        • +1

        • LesleyNZ

          You don’t like the TRUTH do you. Interesting how people like you get nasty when the argument gets weak or they don’t know the facts.

          • Gayguy

            What truth? There is nothing factual that the anti gay right people say. You lot lie like anything to push hate. So please do not pretend that you have truth on your side.

          • LesleyNZ

            I never pretend. They are not lies.

          • Gayguy

            To you maybe. To anyone else with a brain, well your “truth” does not stack up.

          • unsol

            But it’s not the truth Lesley, it is merely your version of it. I have no issue with you believing what you do and in many ways I can understand it as I have been there. But it is not the truth. It is indicative of brainwashing by a controlling Church stuck in the dark ages that has done nothing but contribute to hate, conflict, trauma, destruction & loss of lives.

          • LesleyNZ

            Not my version – this is what is in the Bible. Nothing to do with dark ages.

      • Lesley I think you just gave the intepretation of that actual Liberal porgressive Christian while the conservative will act as a catalyst as we see for the first time in Census 2013 Christianity as a measure below 50% of the population and putting on thr armour God? More like further relegating it out of society which is actually rather sad…

      • james smith

        Paul’s words again. Not God’s, not Jesus’.

  • James Gray

    I agree. Anybody that feels strongly enough to attempt to influence legislators should at least be able to elucidate their point of view in their own words.

    • berenddeboer

      2,898 have unique content. So the other 18,500 were Family First submissions? Reading comprehension fail 101.

      Does anyone know what mass forms in favour were submitted?

      • James Gray

        Yes, that is an omission. Perhaps I should have clarified that I was agreeing with the silliness of the mass submissions part.

        While I support same sex marriage, I dislike form submissions from either side. As I said, if one feels that strongly, they should be able to explain the logic they themselves used to arrive at that conclusion, rather than parroting the ideas of somebody else who happens to share the same opinion.

      • Random66

        “The committee received 21,533 submissions on the bill, 2898 of which had unique content.

        Of the submissions, 10,487 were in favour and 8148 against.”

        The above information has been copied from the attached NZ Herald article and it would seem their maths is somewhat confusing. 21,533 submissions received in total, 10,487 were in favour and 8148 were against. That of course leaves the amount of 2898 which ‘had unique content’. Well were those 2898 for or against? The answer would be interesting because it must alter the fors and against numbers. Also it woud imply that the for’s had plenty of ‘copy and paste’ submissions so this is not just something that can be attributed to the Family First campaign.

  • As far as I’ve heard, the committee didn’t even give a breakdown of how many were “mass submissions”, so how the heck do you know??

    I know a few people that submitted and they put a lot of time and effort into their submission.

    This attempt to demonise those against this redefinition is what is getting silly.

    • Because it was broken down by the Herald. Can;t you read, or hasn’t the Pope yet told you how to think in response to MPs voting 80-40?

      • Ok, I missed that. Probably because what you said didn’t match the text from the Herald, which you quoted (which also didn’t make sense to me):

        The committee received 21,533 submissions on the bill, 2898 of which had unique content. Of the submissions, 10,487 were in favour and 8148 against.

        If only 2898 had unique content, then I’d expect the other 18,635 (if they were mass submissions) to be pretty much the same. But they break down to being almost evenly split (ie 10,487+8148=18,635). And, they don’t include the apparent unique content submissions in the breakdown, ie 2898 of the submissions.

        But just say the remaining 18,635 were actual mass submissions, did you notice there were more by those in favour of same-sex marriage?

    • You might as well give up on this one LM. Start getting the ammo ready for Gay Adoption.

      • berenddeboer

        Gay adoption is INCLUDED in this bill.

        • That’s new to me – obviously. There has been such a focus on gay sex and gay parenting, but I’ve seen nothing about gay adoption.

          • Random66

            Clearly things are starting to get downright sneaky now then.

          • TomTom

            Um no, it’s that under the current adoption laws, any MARRIED couples can adopt, so if you got married then you eligible to go through the adoption process no matter if you’re both the same sex.
            There is a seperate bill that either has been or hasn’t been drawn out of the box (can’t remember) that will expand on who can adopt – which will included civil union partners.

          • Random66

            ahh..so this Bill really is the trogen horse to the true goal. Am I now correct in thinking the only real legal difference between entering into a Civil Union or a Marriage would be the right to adopt then?

          • Gayguy

            And the conspiracy theories begin.

          • Random66

            I wouldn’t have said conspiracy, I was thinking more along the lines of motive.

          • Gayguy

            Call it what you will, at the end of the day the only motive is equality for all before the law.

            Simple as that.

          • unsol

            Gay men & women can already adopt, they just cant adopt as a couple. And even if it was a sneaky inclusion, what is the problem? Heterosexual men are the greatest threat to women & children in this country….Graham Capill, the unfunny comedian are just the infamous samples of an insidious issue that few are willing to address.

          • Random66

            The problem is that such a significant by-product of this bill was kept under wraps from the public at large knowing. One can only assume that it was kept secret because there would be a very real concern that public support would turn against this bill. After all while many may accept what two consenting adults get up to is their business they may not be quite so understanding when an innocent child is thrown in the mix simply to meet the adults needs.

          • Gayguy

            No it wasn’t. It has been discussed openly in the house, on telly etc…. is it the fault of those talking about it openly if some were not listening?

          • unsol

            “an innocent child is thrown in the mix simply to meet the adults wants”

            That is the case for all adoption, fostering & well anytime anyone decides to have a child whether naturally or through IVF.

            Gay men & women wanting to adopt children in this country should be the least of your worries….if you are sincere in your compassion for the 20,000 children who are abused, neglected & maltreated in NZ….mostly by heterosexuals….every single year.

            In fact just today a young single mum told me about the abuse her ex boyfriend suffered as a child….while his whole family (PI & european) kept quite. His very big tall step father used to take him to the car yards when he was 5 & beat him with chains in front of his workmates. And no one battered an eye.

            So dont you dare try & tell me that a minority of people who dont even feature on the radar of child abuse in this country pose a threat to children who need an escape route from such homes. You are better than that Random.

          • LesleyNZ

            I know Graham Capill – he will have a lot to answer for!

          • james smith

            nuff said!

    • Mitch82

      Stop playing the victim.

    • Gayguy

      The only argument against this is one of hate or a total failure to grasp an understanding of the history of marriage.

  • Michael

    Churches have always separated “Civil Marriage” and “Religious Marriage . That’s why most churches don’t consider a marriage as religiously valid for the purposes of the church until solemnised by a Priest, Pastor, or other leader.

    • berenddeboer

      Not true. Only the Roman Catholic Church has something separate.

      But it appears the other churches will now have to reconsider, and I suggest no longer participate on this thing that someone who holds the Bible as the authoritative standard can no longer recognise as marriage.

    • Andrei

      Civil marriage is a relatively new thing, it was in the hands of the Church for much longer in Christendom.

      And when performed in a Church in NZ today the Priest or Minister acts as the civil celebrant

      • berenddeboer

        And clearly that civil part has to stop, as what you are doing as a celebrant has nothing to do with Biblical marriage.

  • cows4me

    So how long before religious organisations come under legal challenge because a couple of gays are shown the door, bets anyone. Jeez it’s just not cricket is it, only half the battle has been won, think it’s over, ha ha. Until all us bigots are brought to heel and made to worship at the glorious gay lifestyle altar the battle for “equality” will continue in earnest.

    • I am sure I have read someone on the Bill that there is a clause allowing Religious leaders not to marry someone if it goes against their beliefs

      Here was a comment on it: The Government Administration Committee said the private member’s bill should progress, but with an amendment to make it clear that no minister was obliged to marry someone against their own beliefs.

      • Andrei

        I’m sure we were told that when civil unions were introduced that marriage as we know it would remain sacrosanct.

        Funny how things turn out with politicians promises

        • Just repeating the comment Andrei. Fickled things democracy and time are

      • cows4me

        Yeah I realised that Ben, that’s why I only said half the battle had been won. Deep down I bet many gays are very happy with this decision, it gives them something to rant, yell and use the old favourite “bigot”.

        • Personally I am not sure whether the majority would or it is some deep misconceived fear by Social and Neo Conservatives.

          I suppose we will have to wait and see on that one as only time would only tell

      • berenddeboer

        Ben, I hope that religious leaders clearly tell their flock to return to marriage as it was in the Bible: without the state, and without asking the state for consent.

        • That is interesting ask and debate in itself. In short that can simply not be done as the State aparatus is that powerful. The best way to change or beat it from within. So convince me why I should switch from liberal Christian Follower who has no arguement with the State with this Bill to a conservative Christian Follower going into opposition against the State in regards to this bill. Remember you are also asking to change my identity to do such a switch

          • berenddeboer

            Ben, you’re not a Christian if the Bible is not your authoritative guide determining every aspect of your live. If you interpret the Bible according to the culture around you, why bother being a Christian? The Bible says what the culture around you says, and every verse and every interpretation can be thrown out at whim.

          • I suppose God will determine my final judgement when I finally leave this world or realm from my time here being a Christian.

            But Christian I definitely am although to some here they would see different – thus it might be wise to maybe ask Biblical stance questions then?

      • Jonathan P

        Thats fair enough.
        As I see it its no different to a club, you need to meet requirements to be in some clubs and if you don’t meet the churches requirements they shouldn’t be forced to allow you in or be married. Im all for gay marriage but against anyone forcing churches etc to wed them.

    • berenddeboer

      It took about 10 years in Holland. They got the exception in 2002, they’re getting rid of it now with a “has been long enough”.

    • Gayguy

      There has been an amendment suggested by the committee that in the law change it is clearly stated that clergy will not be forced to act against their religious views.

      So idiots like yourself have lost that argument as well.

      • cows4me

        Idiots such as myself know this Gg. Since when has the law meant anything to the gay agenda? Religious institutions will be forced to tow the equality line, the radical gays simply can’t help themselves.

        • Gayguy

          Ahhh yes the great gay agenda that the idiots believe exist.

  • J.M

    Terrible news.Disappointed to see NZ politicians make a decision which is detrimental to the country.

    • Is it though? Can you expand how passing the bill would be more of a detrimental to our society than an Economic Bill such as taxation, welfare, health and education fiddling. And on social issues how is this Marriage Ammendment Bill more detrimental than the recent Alcohol Reforms in controlling alcohol or even prostitution…

    • Gayguy

      The only people who will see this as a bad thing thing are the haters.

      • starboard

        is that all you can say gay..the haters..maybe we just despise homosexuality..its out right to disagree.

    • How is it detrimental? Evidence? Link please?

      • Rodger T

      • J.M

        As discussed, whilst I don’t think gay sex should be a crime, homosexuality should not be encouraged as it weakens our society. Gay marriage encourages homosexuality as it makes people think that homosexuality is normal.

        • I know a few gay blokes that could pound you into the pavement, they don;t seem too weak to me.

        • Gayguy

          What a load of garbage.

  • LesleyNZ

    No doubt Nikki Kaye will now keep her AKLD Central seat. That is what it is really all about. Most politicians will say it is about human rights – but it is not really. The word “normal” is no longer. I remember George Gair, all those years ago, saying gay marriage will never happen………………….. well there we go. Marriage will always mean the union between a man and woman – as it has been since the beginning of time. As for the select committee – how did some of these MP’s get elected?

    • Lesley I might recommend 3 years of Social Anthropology at Auckland Uni to see how “Normal”is actually fluid and changes or rather evolves over a period of time. NOTHING is static in this universe from beginning to end. The only thing static is that kind of conservative thinking that truely gets no one any where to the point the the dinosaur and extinction analogy start floating around. What does not simply adapted gets and this is blunt and I am sorry – wiped out from time

      • Andrei

        Doesn’t Social Anthropology teach about cultures that have disappeared when they have taken wrong turns or come up against cultures that are stronger than themselves?

        • I dont quite think Northern Ireland would appreciate having their cultures declared dead nor disappeared. Stage 3 and post-grad Social Anthro will often look at modern day cultures as well as past cultures

      • LesleyNZ

        The only thing static is God’s word – it is historically true and future proof true.

        • Gods word might be static but the interpretation from man and the visible church is most certainly not. I am on the tablet at the moment but there was a conference some time in the first millenium that would and has constructed what we now know as the modern day Bible.

          Lost in translation, politicking and later the English language apply from that case

          • Of which this where Social Anthropology could go for an investigation

        • Gayguy

          And God does not hate, and Christ never condemned homosexuality.

          All condemnations in the Bible are by humans, not the Lord. So poo on this hate that people spout in Gods name.

          • Hey. Was wondering when you were going to pop up in this forum :-)

          • Gayguy

            Well you know me, never miss a chance to kick the haters when they are down. ;0)

          • BJ

            Look long and hard in the mirror

          • Gayguy

            I know how hot I am, I do not need to check, but thanks for the suggestion.

          • LesleyNZ

            That is not very nice.

          • Gayguy

            Given how vile and evil you lot are, I care that you think that because?

          • LesleyNZ

            God hates sin – all sin. Homosexuality is a sin.

          • Gayguy

            God does not hate. Humans hate.

          • BJ

            No Mate – only you hate.

            There is no-one that comments on here that is full of such venom but you. You must loathe yourself big time. You are the one that displays great hostility, such unnatural emotion, such calculated intense dislike and extreme aversion for those that you wish you were like – but you’re not , you’re different and you will never be the same and you are the one that hates yourself and you project that loathing onto others. I accept your different – thats ok – but you will never be equal in marriage to the joining of man and woman – never never ever ever equal ever.

          • Gayguy

            How cute, one of the unnatural haters is having a tanty.

            What are you going to do when marriage equality becomes law. My bet is your hate filled head will explode. That will be fun.

          • starboard

            youre such a fuckwit

          • BJ

            Hate is not in my vocabulary and I am quite honest with myself about that but I note it features highly in yours. It is a poisonous destructive self loathing emotion that sits nicely with no hope. No hope Gayguy – that sounds about right.
            My issue with interfering with the definition of marriage is that it is the only complimentary relationship (man AND woman) as the basis of the balancing act (creative tension) of humanity. Without that cooperation at the grass roots level – everyones ‘head will explode’ but the self centred like you obviously have no sense of obligation to future generations at all.

          • LesleyNZ

            Don’t mean to be smart Gayguy but you are ignorant about the Bible. How much have you actually read. God does hate. God raised Pharaoh up for one reason – to harden his heart. Check out these verses. Say it very clearly (verse 13 -“Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”) :
            Romans 9:10-26:
            10 Not only that, but Rebekah’s children were conceived at the same time by our father Isaac. 11 Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: 12 not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.”[a] 13 Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.”[b]
            14 What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! 15 For he says to Moses,
            “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
            and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”[c]
            16 It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. 17 For Scripture says to Pharaoh: “I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.”[d] 18 Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden.
            19 One of you will say to me: “Then why does God still blame us? For who is able to resist his will?” 20 But who are you, a human being, to talk back to God? “Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’”[e] 21 Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?
            22 What if God, although choosing to show his wrath and make his power known, bore with great patience the objects of his wrath—prepared for destruction? 23 What if he did this to make the riches of his glory known to the objects of his mercy, whom he prepared in advance for glory— 24 even us, whom he also called, not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles? 25 As he says in Hosea:
            “I will call them ‘my people’ who are not my people;
            and I will call her ‘my loved one’ who is not my loved one,”[f]
            26 and,
            “In the very place where it was said to them,
            ‘You are not my people,’
            there they will be called ‘children of the living God.’”
            http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%209:10-26&version=NIV

          • Gayguy

            When you are finished pretending to know the lords mind (also a sin) you can rejoin the debate.

          • LesleyNZ

            Who do you think are – you are getting a bit uppity!

          • Travis Poulson

            There you go Lesley, you are forbidden to rejoin the debate until Paul the teacher grants permission.

          • LesleyNZ

            Teacher? Oh well – that explains everything! Bossy boots.

          • Gayguy

            Just pointing out your silliness is all.

          • Mr_V4

            Linking to the Bible, I’ll give you one thing you are certainly an optimist.

          • LesleyNZ

            Eternal optimist – yep!

          • grumpy

            Exhibit one!

          • Gayguy

            Good to see you putting yourself up as an example of hate. Well done you.

          • So is pride….do you wear makeup? Nice clothes? Wash and keep your hair dressed nicely?

            How about gluttony? Is your BMI perfect or could you perhaps eat a bit less…

            Gossipping is mentioned int he bible more than homosexuality…that is a sin as well…have you whispered about your neighbour?

            I agree Lesley…ALL sin…but since no one is without sin…and if anyone claims they are without sin, i’ll show you a liar…best they keep that to themselves and God…for only he forgives sin and no one else.

          • LesleyNZ

            Agree – totally – but this doesn’t give Christians license to continue
            willfully sinning – including myself. (Christians who believe that Jesus died
            for their sins.) Continual wilful disobedience i.e. continuing in sin, brings
            one’s salvation into question, because by their fruit you will know them. That doesn’t mean we are to be judgmental, but it does mean to be “fruit
            inspectors”. There is a difference between the two.

          • Gayguy

            And remember, Christ never said a bad word about gays, so you sin by saying mean things about us queers. Add that to your list of sins.

          • LesleyNZ

            What mean things? I would never call you queer.

          • Gayguy

            You would deny us the same rights as you. Not a very nice thing to do.

          • LesleyNZ

            That is where I differ – Marriage has never been a “right”.

          • Gayguy

            People who have the right do tend to see things that way.

            It is one of the tricks used to keep those they disapprove of from having the same rights as they do.

          • LesleyNZ

            I have no rights – privilege is the word I use.

          • Bunswalla

            It’s OK Lesley, fruits can’t bear fruit, if you know what I mean

          • unsol

            WO you are being an apologist for both sides. You use derogatory terms when referring to gay men & concede that homosexuality is a sin yet argue for marriage equality.

            Homosexuality or same sex attraction & relationships are not sin. No where in the bible does it state as such.

            But even if it were a sin, it the standard for marriage is no sin then no one should get married.

            Which I assume is what you intend to imply re reference to us all being sinners.

          • LesleyNZ

            Romans 1:21-32 List of sins including homosexuality. God gave them over to the sinful desires of their hearts. This is what is happening today. Also refers to worshipping other Gods and creation itself – reminds me of the Green Taliban and funeral for a tree. Verse 22 especially applicable in today’s world:
            21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.
            24 Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. 25 They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.
            26 Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural sexual relations for unnatural ones. 27 In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error.
            28 Furthermore, just as they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, so God gave them over to a depraved mind, so that they do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they have no understanding, no fidelity, no love, no mercy. 32 Although they know God’s righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

          • Sin is between us and god alone…it is not for me to judge. I don;t make the rules…my reference to all of us being sinners is really for those who keep carping on about being gay as a sin to stop and think about their sin. Jesus asked those who were without sin to cast the first stone…

            Yes, I am full of sin…as are we all…some of it is wilful and some is temptation, but thankfully, for me at least I have accepted the plan of salvation and I am saved, sin and all…it isn’t a free pass, but at least I am not being consumed by sin…

            My point about all sin is that it matters not what your sin is…lying, cheating, rooting, stealing, gossiping…the penalty is the same…there is not order or ranking of sin…it is equal. And since we all have it there really is no point in finger pointing…

            Therefore we must all get on as we can…and that means tolerance and that means human constructs such as marriage be made to conform to society.

            In the end we all answer to god…and that is where final judgment lies.

          • unsol

            yes we are all sinners but that does not mean to say that everything we do is sinful.

            You referred to gossiping as being a “sin as well” implying that same sex attraction & relationships are sinful.

            But yes you a right to point out the sheer hypocrisy of Lesley et al who try & put homosexuality – if it was a sin – as the mother of all sins.

            Doesnt matter out far out from the cliff you fall, you are still falling…

          • LesleyNZ

            You are twisting here unsol. Have never said homosexuality is the mother of all sins.

          • BR

            So why have you chosen homosexuality as the sin to promote? What is so special about it?

            Bill.

          • unsol

            You state that as if it were fact. Which it is not.

            Fact isnt open to interpretation, unlike most of the Bible…..unless of course you plan to be consistent & adopt all things declared as sin at the same time God apparently condemned same sex relationships….such as stone women who dare to speak (which I assume in modern times includes women who comment online!), or anyone who mixes fibres, plants crops side by side, fails to build a parapet around their house etc etc.

            How you can still make such claims as if you were God Himself is beyond me.

            It is a long way to fall from a self-proclaimed pedestal so I’d be careful about spending so much time judging others and imposing your ideas of morality & sin on them.

            There are only 3 facts in the Bible: love God, love your neighbour & remember that God hates pride & self-righteousness so the measure you dare to judge others will be used to against you.

          • LesleyNZ

            You have to understand the relationship of the Old Testament with the New Testament. The old Messianic laws were done away with with the coming of Jesus Christ. The above are Bible verses quoted from the New Testament. God’s words not mine. It is you who have taken this as a judgement.

          • Bunswalla

            Explaining is losing….

          • LesleyNZ

            Losing what?

          • james smith

            Actually most scholars agree that they are Paul’s words…not God’s.

          • unsol

            To the Corinthians who were way off the right course & who were raping their male slaves……that is the context of the homosexual = sin that most people like Lesley always conveniently ignore. Nothing in the Bible refers to consensual loving committed same sex relationships & more specifically, the Bible doesnt meant Lesbians at all!

          • LesleyNZ

            All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for
            correction, for training in righteousness; 2 Timothy 3:16

          • unsol

            I do understand the relationship between the Ot & the NT & the context with which both were written. The difference being my views come from theologians, not Ministers.

          • LesleyNZ

            Same. Which theologians though?

          • Random66

            Hate is certainly in God’s vocabularly. Christ and God are one and the same.

          • Gayguy

            No it is not. Hate is in the human vocabulary.

          • Random66

            Nope. God’s word as inspired by the Holy Spirit was written so that mankind would understand clearly who he is, what he has done and what he expects. Whip out your bible and check for yourself what he ‘hates’.

          • Gayguy

            If you think that the Bible has not been tweaked by those writing it you are rather naive.

          • BJ

            It’s certainly in yours

          • Gayguy

            Whats the matter darling? Not feeling loved?

          • Jimmie

            Hey, stop trying to ‘know the lord’s mind’ as you so eloquently put it further up the comments…..

          • Gayguy

            I am just accurately saying what is true, as opposed to rewriting the Bible to suit hate.

        • Bunswalla

          Which god is that Lesley? There are thousands of them.

          • LesleyNZ

            One true God – same one that Dr Ben Carson believes in.

    • Gayguy

      No it won’t. Very soon marriage will mean a union between 2 consenting adults regardless of gender. And then all the haters heads will explode and NZ will be a better place.

      • Once the third reading has happened we can go back to economic issues that affect actually everyone collectively and individually?

        • Gayguy

          I did not realise that the Government had stopped dealing with everything else except this one issue.

          • By the looks of the conservatives and Family First it would seem that Govt and the nation has stopped completely in regards to dealing to this issue

          • Gayguy

            Yes, it must be one hell of a scary place in that bubble they live in. Or as John Stewart calls it “Bulllshit Mountain”

          • I see my long comment at the top of the comments division for this particular post will attract the most negative votes tonight. Nothing unusual for a lone voice stating his beliefs and opinions.

            However your replies provide a nice amount of :-D

          • Gayguy

            I am sure I will get my share of down votes too. But it is always nice to have the company. ;0)

          • LesleyNZ

            Nothing wrong with Family First or being conservative.

          • Gayguy

            So you say.

          • Dont mind conservatives. But Family First I wouldnt associate them with a barge pole the length of this galaxy. Fascist is where I would easily lug them and they should put their resources where it counts more. Least Owen Glenn put his money where his mouth is in regards to family poverty and child violence. All FF do is whip up hysteria and be professional whingers against the State

          • LesleyNZ

            Really? I don’t see Family First like that. I appreciate the time they take to tell us about the current issues.

          • grumpy

            Why not – you have?

          • Gayguy

            Not quite true, but then I expect nothing less from you lot.

      • LesleyNZ

        According to you but not others who don’t agree. NZ a better place – let’s wait and see.

        • Gayguy

          Leave. Problem solved for you. Go live somewhere else that is more in tune with your morals. Like Iran perhaps.

          • LesleyNZ

            Now you are being silly.

          • Gayguy

            No I am not. People like you bitch and moan about how NZ is going down the drain with all these gay rights and left wing destroyers… so the simple solution is if NZ is turning sooo bad – leave.

          • starboard

            no, why dont you poofters pack up and mince off to San Francisco where bumfuckery is cool. After all..YOU are in the minority.

    • BR

      You can hear the mocking laughter from the left whenever it is suggested that kiddy fiddling will eventually be accepted as normal natural behaviour.

      Watch this space. The child sex perverts are out there. The question is: How many are there? What kind of a political force could they become, aided and abetted by the left?

      Bill.

      • Go study your politics again as you just broad brushed Lesley and every Social Conservative who are in the Left Wing department as well as Social Liberals with that statement…

        • BR

          Study them yourself. No conservative of any measure would do the left’s dirty work for them and support such grotesque idiocy as homosexual marriage. Two men marrying each other used to be the stuff of Monty Python.

          Bill.

          • Gayguy

            Perhaps you should educate yourself. More conservatives in the US are coming out to support marriage equality.

            It is only the haters who are objecting so much.

          • LesleyNZ

            They have to – every vote counts.

          • Gayguy

            Rather cynical.

      • Mitch82

        Hey.. let’s scare everyone into the right-wing hot tub with the old chestnut tactic of accusing the opposition of pedophilia.

        Yawn.

      • mick le prick

        Yeah the perverts are in the Catholic church

        • Travis Poulson

          Really? all the news about “the perverts” in new Zealand have been about teachers, not catholic priests.

      • Gayguy

        Spreading lies again I see.

        • starboard

          better than spreading your arse cheeks ya filthy specimen

  • Rodger T

    Oh ma gawd, marriage equality,

  • Lion_ess

    Good to see all the God botherers out in force tonight – must be a full moon. Howwwwl.

    • LesleyNZ

      You might appreciate the “God-botherers” – later on in life.

      • Lion_ess

        Thanks for the kind thoughts Lesley, but I’m very comfortable in my space without the layer of fantasy-driven hypocrisy.

  • Jonathan P

    I really do fail to see what every ones objection to Homosexual marriage is.
    Its not like heterosexuals have got it right, marrying and divorcing left right and center.
    Or is it just because they’re different and don’t fit in with what YOU believe is right.
    If your GOD wants to get angry at homosexuals let him but who are you to judge.

    • LesleyNZ

      Absolutely agree with what you said about heterosexual traditional marriage. However the marriage definition I believe in is never going to be the same as homosexual marriage.

      • Gayguy

        It will be, by law even.

      • Jonathan P

        And nor should you have to, you don’t have to agree with it nor do you have to like it but you will have to accept that it may/will be law. Leave the judgement to your god.
        As an aside, the old definition of marriage was done away with I would say years ago. A coupling between a man and woman able to bear a child. People have been having children for many many years out of wedlock as have people been married without producing children.

        Allowing homosexual marriage isn’t going to end the world, the people who are making things seem bad and evil are the people who don’t like it, the religious extremists (not labeling you as one) will be the ones to cause troubles, not the gays themselves.

  • Mr_V4

    Of course no one dares addressing why the state should have anything to do with “marriage” in the first place?

    It should be a private contract between individuals like it was for the ancients ….

    • unsol

      Hear hear. Marriage was originally nothing more than a civil union to secure property, wealth via heirs….until the Church then the State got their claws into it.

  • mick le prick
53%