Find the situation incredible and also find I am intolerant of intolerance. Will have to rethink using ANZ for new corporation. How difficult/consequential would it be for you to shift allegiance from ANZ.

Sent $50 contribution and hope all others do likewise (or more - according to means). Annual sub OK for me but I'd let newcomers in free for first year - it's hard to read some rude, disrespectful and plain ignorant crap that a few commentators submit - but - that's our people.

Don't let the bastards beat you!

It is VERY offensive to homosexuals. Tough biccies! It could be argued to the VHREOC that in so publicly quoting it..I am 'vilifying' gays.. I'm not..I'm showing what a holy document says about that subject. The Bible is vilifying gays..

"GOD is vilifying Gay behavior. If you wish to argue with Him... be my guest."

Yeah....well go get him...AL....I'll wait right here:)

You can be Gay, but not in Melbourne where this bigot lives.

Hiding behind your bible........well isn't that convenient.

YAWN!

BLUE

Beef's suggestion is a good one - it means we'll still get people with passing interest in single issues issues contributing to forums, and bring in fresh debaters, while the regulars pay their way.

BTW I made a donation through the website a few hours ago but have not received an e-mail acknowledgement - are others experiencing delays?

OLO had full right to publish an article in opposition to gay marriage.

There have been plenty of articles on OLO in support of gay marriage.

There have also been plenty of writers (mainly academic) without one good thing to say about heterosexual males, and apart from Bill Muehlenberg, I have yet to see an article written by an academic with one good thing to say about heterosexual marriage.

I couldn’t care whether Bill Muehlenberg is religious or not, he is one of few writers in Australia prepared to say something positive about heterosexual men and heterosexual marriage.

[Deleted. The writer makes untrue claims about payment for articles as well as wanting to argue about previous moderation decisions. No-one gets paid to publish on this site.]

Dear Rose C... thank you for the smiley :)

We don't have to debate "The Bible" but we DO have to debate the issue of free expression.

The Bible is believed by many and not by many others. Irrespective of one's opinion on how it came to be.. the much BIGGER issue is whether, in arriving at such an opinion, you are thereafter allowed to express that opinion as a matter of personal conviction...'that' is what I take enourmous issue with. Here is an example from the link I gave before.

Good old Canadian (Alberta) inHuman Riech Commissars.

Read more: http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/columnists/story.html?id=ceebc006-06cc-4aa8-ad1a-5e3f7f5c8229#ixzz1DGTS4Xbo

//It is not specified what the AHRCC might consider "disparaging," but simply reading in public -- as in a sermon -- the Biblical admonitions against homosexual acts is not precluded. Indeed, the scope of the AHRCC order is so wide that it effectively says that Rev. Boissoin may not speak publicly on homosexuality ever again, unless he changes his opinion.//

See that last bit ? That is how FAR the gay lobby wants to take this.. it is bare faced MIND CONTROL or at least a damn good go at it.

*Unless he changes his opinion*

That is so diabolical as to be utterly evil.

The overlay of so called "Human Rights" and it's "Commissions" are exactly as I've always said they are.. nothing more than a socialist overlay (cancer) on free society.

We could arrive at the point where influence of the HRC's etc will be such that the Bible (remember.. we open parliament with the Lords Prayer) is regarded as 'evil' because of what it declares about gay behavior.