There is no bill threatening "equal marriage".

Marriage is between one man and one woman, freely entered into for life. No homosexual relationship, and no polyamourous relationship can be that - in its attempt to emulate or replace marriage, it must break the very structure of what marriage is.

Whatever form homosexual, polyamourous or other relationships take, marriage they are not.

Well done, Bill! Keep up the good fight!

Vanna wrote: "Read between the lines ......"

I am extremely well read and don't need directions to particular sites; maybe vanna should stop reading between the lines and read literally.

I have seen the slipperly-slope of abortion and other laws.

I responded to her all-embracing claim "children born through IVF is a feminist abominatiom", with the example of the heart-break of a hetero-sexual married couple who cannot naturally conceive, and I cannot see how they could view their use of their eggs and sperm via IVF as an abomination, although the Catholic Church does.

In my opinion no child should be deliberately "produced" by IVF (or naturally) without a father and mother, known to the child and ready to undertake parental duties. So no IVF for homosexuals.

As soon as someone is pro-heteros or anti-homos, out goes the cry "homophobic", but I'm anti-theft and murder - does that make me crimephobic?

"but I'm anti-theft and murder - does that make me crimephobic"

But if you happily kill bug's in your garden and decide that your neighbours who do the same thing (maybe a different variety of bug) should not be allowed to it does suggest that you have a problem.

Murder and theft both do real harm to others, gay and lesbian couples having the same legal rights in a relationship to those enjoyed (or not) by hetrosexual couples does no harm to anybody else.

All of the claimed harm to children of growing up without one parent of each gender is mirrored by very regular circumstances in hetrosexual marriages but without nearly the level of concern. Mum's have died in childbirth, from disease etc throughout hustory, dad's have died in workplace accidents, in war's or had job's that have kept them away from home for moths or sometimes years at a time.

Divorce is more common now but it's been with us for a long time and often with good reason.

Homophobic may not be a good word to describe the obsessive desire to control the sexual aspects of the lives of others. Can you suggest a more appropriate word for it?

Spousal relationship's can be difficult enough and seem to be for enough people regardless of their sexual orientation that this focus on denigrating homosexuals and pretending that homosexual relationship's somehow take something away from hotrosexual one's seems like an absolute farce.

BTW if you check vanna's posting history it seem's very unlikely that vanna is a "she".

R0bert

L.B.Loveday

IVF is indeed a slippery slope, and it is also likely that heterosexual couples seeking a child through IVF will become a minority of the "clients" of IVF clinics in the future.

There are already single women undergoing IVF to become a single mother, and I tend to think that the baby is similar to a living toy for such people.

As well, the child will likely spend most of its time in a taxpayer funded day care center.

Homosexual marriage will only affect a few, but the long term issues of IVF are more than most can reconcile or want to think about.

Robert

Do you ever feel you are wasting your time here?

Thought you'd enjoy the following video.

Warning to the easily confused, the following video is chock full of irony.

http://www.youtube.com/user/DarkMatter2525#p/u/1/tpz8PMcRJSY

suzeonline,
Your short-sighted logic ignores the fact that a man and a woman engage in sex in the natural and biological designed (evolved) way. Marriage was originally designed for the young bride and groom to be committed to each other for life. Until they are married there is no way of determining their fertility, and even fertile couples sometimes have problems conceiving. So the claim that infertile and aged couples in my view should not be married is an exception.

You use guilt by association - no where does Christ sanction murder, impure sexual acts or child molecters as Christian. These persons are not Christian nor are part of His kingdom people. As Christ said, "nothing impure or deceitful will enter in to Christ's kingdom."

God established principles that children never be deliberately brought up fatherless or motherless as the gay lobby desire. Marriage was established for family its security and provision. Human behaviour cannot in every case be accepted and sanctioned because it happens by default.