Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Amen to that. Though given my twisted sick sense of humour much of the "debate" was sheer popcorn worthy. I mean just watching the No campaigners grasp at straws was kind of hilarious. Especially when I witnessed that it was having the effect I knew it would on the youngsters. Most teens I know from work went from indifference to yes voters simply because they were appalled at the No arguments.
It's allowing not just the term, but all the legal privileges and protections that come along with that "word."
There is no cost. When a parent overdoses on drugs and a young child has to call 911, that is damaging. When a parent yells at, degrades and demeans, and ridicules a child, that is damaging. When a parent sexually abuses their child, that is damaging. Homosexuality harms no one.
You're the only Australian I've heard that from, and I've talked to more than a few about the subject.
You keep claiming this, but do not provide evidence.
This is untrue. I've worked with children who have homosexual parents, and they lack this "warped concept" of what a mom and dad are.
Homosexual parents do not create gender dysphoria. Role models do not create gender dysphoria. Though it isn't fully understood what causes gender dysphoria, there is sufficient variety of parental combinations and features among those with gender dysphoria to easily disprove it can arise from having homosexual parents.
You can hold an opposing view point. No one is telling you that you can't. However, homosexuals do not have a detrimental effect on others, and comparing it to second-hand smoke is a poor example because homosexuals will not cause damage or harm to your body like smokers potentially can.
What rights are being taken away from you?
Where are people being told to question their sexuality? Or, is it rather they are being told it's ok if you do question it?
I've basically had their life stories and very souls beared before me. Having "warped views" of gender roles just isn't a concern. If anything, their parents deserve praise, and not ridicule, for taking the initiative to get help for their children that they need (as well as having to courage to accept there are probably areas they are going to need to work on as well - there sexuality not being one of those areas).
How does it distort it? In what ways does it distort it? And, of course, gender roles are varied from place to place and time to time.
This just isn't true. We psychologically evolved for companionship and sex, but there is nothing to indicate we that psychologically we need both sexes.
You opinion, not an evidence based conclusion.
In what ways does it disadvantage you?
No one is telling you to go have sex with a woman and marry her. No one is telling you to condone it, or forsake your religious beliefs regarding it. You are free to believe as you will.
Yes, but it should be noted it was a mail-in vote. Millennials never knew the dependence on mail like older generations did. It's likely those who voted no, asides from being passionately against it, were older and more used to mail, while those younger ones--those who overwhelmingly and mostly support SSM--may not have bothered. Because many didn't vote, we don't have a solid answer as to the overall percentage of how the entire nation actually did stand. But I get the impression that regardless the majority is in favor, and not necessarily by the 60-some percent that voted yes.
True. But the mail in vote did not capture the entire collective view of all Australians.
Hey, I come from a family full of professional educators. In all levels and a couple even in the private sector. They are far more concerned with the Government constantly emphasising the arts whilst doing nothing to encourage the STEM interests in their students. Present and future. I have seen much of the curriculum and I have yet to see any real evidence of your hand wringing being true.
therefor let us freak out about nothing
So sick of the damn baker, but whatever you think of the case, the baker hasn't lost any rights due to same sex marriage.
And how do you know what people who didn't vote wanted?
So if his conscience had said, "I won't bake a cake for a negro"; would that be ok? Or perhaps not bake a cake because they are Autistic, or Blind? Where do you draw the line?
Should we apply the same rules to indoctrinating kids with religion, after all. "They don't even know who they are, let alone what they are at such a young age." Should religion not be evaluated in adulthood?
My daughter is in a gay relationship, they have a lovely daughter who is an absolute delight. They meet with heterosexual friends, meet dads all the time. I'm her granddad.
The same way that many heterosexual couples who have struggled to have children procreate.
I would argue that ALL (Barring people who were incapacitated on the day) who felt strongly against the legislation will have voted, similarly those who were for the legislation will have made sure they voted.
So, then despite your claims, you can't actually name any such things happening though you say they are happening.
The issue of the baker was settled decades ago when it was ruled those businesses of public accomadations cannot discriminate, for any reason, including religious. And, yes, the reasons given for keeping black people out and not serving were very similar, and also quoted from the Bible, just as they are today against homosexual couples.
Kids become sexually curious during their pre-teen and teenaged years. It's not being "confronted" about it, but rather educated and taught about it. And it's not too early to teach them when they are sexually curious, because failing to teach them results in teenaged pregnancy, the spread of STIs, and it also doesn't help them to deal with peer pressure and being pressured into having sex even if they are not ready/willing themselves. It's not just "ok kids, this is how to have sex," but rather such programs teach about sexuality, including the fact that not everyone is heterosexual.
Yet most people know their sexual orientation many years before they are an adult. And even many, many adults do not know what they want, nor fully comprehend the ramifications of their actions.
It's not just my views, but also the views of those who have also worked with them, such as their therapists who helped developed treatment plans and goals.
In my field, sometimes the parents are responsible, sometimes they aren't. In the case I was referring to, they aren't. Actually, one of their moms is actually quite adamant when it comes to saying please and thank you, yes sir, no mam, and speaking loudly and clearly and making eye contact.
Even in cultures that made no distinction between hetero/homosexual, such things just didn't happen.
Evolution and reproduction (both sexual and asexual) are very intimately interwoven into each other.
They do. And, even if they never did, it wouldn't be a problem since they don't even come close to making up half the population.
There is no basis or grounds to assume those that didn't vote are against SSM. It's kind of like how in American elections, only a minority of eligible voters even bother to vote, meaning our elections here never capture the voice of the public, but only of those who do vote.
You sound surprised?
Okay first of all, if you provide a service to the public you have to serve the public. You can't just randomly decide who you're not serving. The very first thing you're taught in retail is, the life of the customer buying your product is none of your damned business. I doubt very much said baker blinked when serving a satanist couple or a divorced couple unawares. Because he's a hypocritical douche who just wanted an excuse to be a jerk to gay people. And worse, hid behind Jesus like a coward.
Pharisee much?Kids don't know about themselves which is exactly the right time to tell them. Sexuality is taught at a young age in order to boost self esteem, allow children to get to know themselves and how to say no effectively when they are not ready. They are taught how to have safe sex, how to avoid sexual abuse (AHEM!) and why some people are different from themselves. Teaching sex ed to children is essential to providing an outlet for sexually abused children to protect themselves and to teach young children that it exists. Contraception and the like usually comes a little bit later, like in early High School, just before the onset of puberty and those hormones. But sure, let's just keep kids in the dark, allow sexually abused children to suffer in silence until they learn better and let their peers be their teacher. Won't someone think of the children, indeed!
Ehh, not really. Folklore from my own ancient culture, just from the top of my head.
Okay first of all, procreation is not the only reason nature has sex. There are entire schools of dolphins who have gay orgies just for the hell of it. Secondly, sexuality evolves for many different reasons. Procreation isn't the pinnacle actually. In many social species,of which we are one, a portion of their population does not reproduce at all. For whatever reason. Sexual selection, survival strategy, natural selection etc. It's hypothesized that gay people cropped up as a way for a tribe to have someone to protect and care for infants if the parents died. And given how often this happened, it was pretty damned useful. Fun fact, this strategy is observed in many social species, including Meerkats and many species of ape.
Only those on the electoral role were invited to vote and if one really wanted to vote, they had the option of signing up for the electoral role. If they were barred because they are not Australian citizens, then they can't vote. That was literally the only thing holding people back. So of those people who voted, I can say without a doubt, every single one of them was a legal Australian citizen who gets a say in how our country is shaped. Those that opted out, I can't really say the same thing confidently. Maybe some of them are, maybe they weren't. So of the ones that did not opt out intentionally in this vote but still failed to vote, one can surmise that their voices actually do not matter. Since they are unable or barred from helping to make decisions for this country. Either because they are illegal immigrants or criminals or whatever else bars one from getting a vote in any election this country holds. Those are your so called "No voters" who didn't vote.
