Beer Garden

[Nort]

Good job there's no examples of countries where religious conservatives have messed things up by holding too much power otherwise your whole argument of trying to point to extreme situations would fall apart.

Ah there it is, you finally stopped beating about the bush.

So this really isn't about equality for you, but evening some perceived score with the religious.
This is all about saying a big fuck you to everyone.

Read again, it was the point of how you are trying to cherry-pick overseas examples when ignoring the fact there are plenty on your own side.

And you called me a bad person and said I should feel bad.

You accused the majority of Australians of supporting a paedophilia agenda. That should make you feel bad.

[rev]

Cherry picking?
You mean picking out examples that suit the argument I’m making? Oh you mean like the yes campaign does?
Like they did by using other countries having legalised as an example we should follow?
What’s wrong with pointing out the negatives of what’s happened in those countries? Scared of the truth are you?

I did not accuse the majority of Australians of anything lmfao.
Even if I did who the hell are you Nort, their self appointed spokesperson?

[rev]

Never before have I seen such an example of incognisant projection as Rev in this thread.

Never have I seen so many “educated” individuals in the one place refusing to even acknowledge the consequences of rushing through same sex marriage simply to be politically correct.

Every example I’ve given is factual, not my fault your heads in the sand mono.

Rather then actually doing it properly, so there are no negative consequences, so called educated and intelligent people want to skip a proper process and have it rushed through.

Better check your emotions.

[bits]

Rather then actually doing it properly, so there are no negative consequences, so called educated and intelligent people want to skip a proper process and have it rushed through.

Rushed through? This isn't even in front of Parliament, what is being rushed?

Proper process? Isn't that exactly what is happening?

The idea has been debated for years, we have now dwelled on the chosen definition of 2 consenting adults for months.
It takes less time to debate much bigger laws than marriage.

Lets not forget the man and women thing only got added to the marriage act in 2004. It is a 13 year old law we are about to alter slightly.

It is marriage, not nuclear armament.

[mshagg]

Which argument is it today Rev?

Is it that yes voters support rights for pedos? Is it lack of religious freedom? Is it about free speech for no voters? The slippery slope towards legalising bestiality?

Oh no. I see you've moved on to expressing concerns regarding haste of process.

Things are moving a bit too quickly huh? Despite this being a voluntary survey conducted over a number of months. That must then be tallied. And presumably a report prepared for government by the ABS. For the coalition to take to cabinet and decide what the best approach is - which might not even guarantee support, or even a conscience vote. And even if they do agree to move on the issue, a bill must be drafted that makes everyone happy. And introduced to parliament. And probably kicked around in committee.

The world must be such a terrifying place...

[Goodsy]

It also needs to be deep enough to double stack the freight cars, or does that not happen on the Belair line?

[rev]

Rather then actually doing it properly, so there are no negative consequences, so called educated and intelligent people want to skip a proper process and have it rushed through.

Rushed through? This isn't even in front of Parliament, what is being rushed?

Proper process? Isn't that exactly what is happening?

The idea has been debated for years, we have now dwelled on the chosen definition of 2 consenting adults for months.
It takes less time to debate much bigger laws than marriage.

Lets not forget the man and women thing only got added to the marriage act in 2004. It is a 13 year old law we are about to alter slightly.

It is marriage, not nuclear armament.

Since it got added in 2004, what does it matter if it gets altered again to simply be recognized by state as a civil union between two adults, regardless of gender, faith or ethnicity? Why are the "yes" brigade in here opposed to that idea?

The idea has been debated for years? Ok so tell us how it will affect Christian/jewish/muslim schools and religious institutions in general?
You can't tell us anything besides a "nothing will change" stock standard answer with no basis.


But basically, waaaah waaaaaah Rev wont agree with us blindly, lets attack him, waaaaah waaaaah.

[rev]

Which argument is it today Rev?

Is it that yes voters support rights for pedos? Is it lack of religious freedom? Is it about free speech for no voters? The slippery slope towards legalising bestiality?

Oh no. I see you've moved on to expressing concerns regarding haste of process.

Things are moving a bit too quickly huh? Despite this being a voluntary survey conducted over a number of months. That must then be tallied. And presumably a report prepared for government by the ABS. For the coalition to take to cabinet and decide what the best approach is - which might not even guarantee support, or even a conscience vote. And even if they do agree to move on the issue, a bill must be drafted that makes everyone happy. And introduced to parliament. And probably kicked around in committee.

The world must be such a terrifying place...

You're an idiot.

[Nathan]

To everyone, ask yourself if you really need to continue to engage Rev on this topic.

[rev]

Ms Berry's caution came after Brindabella Christian College asked parents to vote no in the postal survey on same-sex marriage with a warning the school may no longer be able to teach Biblical views on marriage and family should the Marriage Act change.
http://www.canberratimes.com.au/act-new ... yl17m.html

Christian dad fights for right to remove children from LGBT classes at appeals court
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/chris ... classes-br

Lesbian: I use math class to teach young kids about homosexuality so I can ‘hide’ it from parents
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/lesbi ... so-i-can-h

Ontario gov’t tells court: No opt-outs for LGBT lessons, it’s embedded in all subjects and grades
https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/wynne ... tq-classes

Anti-gay pamphlets broke law, Supreme Court of Canada says
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/201 ... _says.html

U.S. anti-gay activist faces mischief charges after arrest on university campus
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/04/14 ... 50172.html

if they were pro-gay pamphlets which were anti-Christian, or against other religious beliefs, would there be a problem? of course not. Not in this commie dictatorship being established.

Tasmanian man refuses to apologise for anti-gay pamphlets, tribunal urged to act
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-07-08/t ... ts/6605142

Why should he apologize? Having an opinion is an offense now? Having different views and beliefs is an offense now? Sounds more and more like a democracy doesn't it? Not that I agree with the ridiculous idea that gays are more likely to die in a car crash.

Christian preacher arrested for saying homosexuality is a sin
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religio ... a-sin.html

Jewish school faces closure for refusing to teach its young girls transgender issues despite its religious ethos being praised four years ago
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ssues.html

Christian faces court over 'offensive' gay festival leaflets
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/christi ... 83628.html
South Wales police admitted evangelical Christian Stephen Green was then charged purely because his pamphlets contained anti-gay quotations from the Bible.

But some in here said the religious wont be affected, it's just about gays gaining the same rights as straight couples..like insurances, and next of kin stuff..

Christian student kicked off Sheffield University course for anti-gay Facebook post
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/ho ... 02781.html
His alleged "crime"?
Felix Ngole, 38, was a second-year masters student at Sheffield University when he shared a Facebook post saying "I stand with Kim Davis" - the American county clerk who was jailed for refusing to issue marriage licences to same-sex couples.
He also commented on the link quoting a bible verse from Leviticus calling homosexuality an "abomination" in September 2015.


ANOTHER CHRISTIAN PERSECUTED BY GAY LEFT
http://www.heraldsun.com.au/blogs/andre ... 0ffbb3a6ee

But it's not an attack on Christians, say some in here.
It's ok for corporations to express their support for gay marriage, but nobody is allowed to express their support for traditional marriage.
What a great, wonderful democracy we live in.

Christian Pro-Family Activist Arrested for ‘Biblical Hate Speech’ in Canada to Cheers from LGBT Activists
https://www.voiceofthevoiceless.info/ch ... -activists

Yep, the Bible is now hate speech.
But Mono said that all this pro-gay pro same sex marriage stuff isn't an attack on the religious and their rights/freedoms. Must be true since it was said on S-A right...

Christian florist who refused to make gay wedding arrangements to take case to U.S. Supreme Court
http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/02/17 ... eme-court/




You want to copy what's happening overseas, but you don't want to talk about the negatives that are part of the package of SSM.
Yeh, maybe for some of you who are hopelessly indoctrinated it might be better to take Nathan's advice and keep your heads buried in the sand.

[mshagg]

You're an idiot.

Hey you're the one expressing concern that the most drawn out legislative change in recent history is being "rushed through". When was the last time that government checked in with every single Australian adult for their thoughts on an issue? the republic?

Excellent riposte, nonetheless.

[SRW]

It was clear at least ten pages ago about Rev and this topic. There's no point attempting debate with someone who's either not engaged in good faith or is so devoid of reason that debate is infeasible from the outset. I'll say it again: it's as fruitless as arguing with the preachers in the Mall who prompted this discussion.

[rev]

It was clear at least ten pages ago about Rev and this topic. There's no point attempting debate with someone who's either not engaged in good faith or is so devoid of reason that debate is infeasible from the outset. I'll say it again: it's as fruitless as arguing with the preachers in the Mall who prompted this discussion.

Ahh, run and hide now with some poor character assassination. I like how Mono lets slide the veiled personal abuse directed at me(since those doing it are on "his side"), just like he let the racism from GHS slide a while ago.

What's wrong, presented with facts of what's going on overseas(you guys want to copy other countries in legalizing SSM, and say Australia should get with the times) as a result of SSM(and safe schools hitched on that bandwagon), and suddenly nobody wants to talk anymore?

So easy to expose you as clueless hypocrites on this subject.

[monotonehell]

Ahh, run and hide now with some poor character assassination. I like how Mono lets slide the veiled personal abuse directed at me(since those doing it are on "his side"), just like he let the racism from GHS slide a while ago.

The only reason I'm letting everyone's abuse stand is so others can see what people really think and the kinds of things that they decide are appropriate on a public forum. To remove anything at this point would be to hide people's ugly sides, and make any retaliations look out of proportion.

Also I'd get accusations of "stifling freedom of speech". It's a lose-lose situation.

[SRW]

Ahh, run and hide now with some poor character assassination. I like how Mono lets slide the veiled personal abuse directed at me(since those doing it are on "his side"), just like he let the racism from GHS slide a while ago.

Given you called someone an idiot just a few posts ago, you don't seem to be demonstrating either an abhorance or an understanding of personal attacks.

The only reason I'm letting everyone's abuse stand is so others can see what people really think and the kinds of things that they decide are appropriate on a public forum. To remove anything at this point would be to hide people's ugly sides, and make any retaliations look out of proportion.

Also I'd get accusations of "stifling freedom of speech". It's a lose-lose situation.

I agree with your approach being the only available, but as at least one voice in the scenario of letting forumers decide what's appropriate conversation - I've found the mental health jibes and other personal attacks throughout this thread pretty unpleasant. This topic has long since boiled over, but for future discussion I hope as a forum we can better reflect an ethos for playing the ball not the man. Not as a rule for mod enforcement, just an etiquette to keep each other in check.