The Forum > Article Comments > Why legalising same sex marriage will benefit health > Comments
Why legalising same sex marriage will benefit health : Comments
By Amanda Villis and Danielle Hewitt, published 17/8/2012A study in Massachusetts showed a significant decrease in clinic visits for non-heterosexual men for mental health reasons following the legalisation of same sex marriage.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Page 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- ...
- 12
- 13
- 14
-
- All
Posted by paddo_ron, Sunday, 19 August 2012 12:44:00 PM
| |
David G - I didn't pull that figure out of the air, the polls show that the majority of Australians support this reform. See - http://www.australianmarriageequality.com/wp/who-supports-equality/a-majority-of-australians-support-marriage-equality/
Do you have any polls/evidence to back up your opinion that YOU are the majority? Posted by Dr Amanda Villis, Sunday, 19 August 2012 12:44:40 PM
| |
Yes doctor, we know that the gay lobby sponsor groups to conduct polls, most of which are a joke but sadly many Australians have fallen for it. The recent Gallaxy poll asked a question of around 800 people.... MASSIVE opinion poll that one! Then all the gay websites wrote articles on how the majority of Australians want same-sex marriage. Actually the majority of 800 people surveyed by one particular group on behalf of one particular group were in support to be more accurate.
Well here is one for the doctor. The Nine MSN poll of May 2012 asked the simple and clear question "Do you support same sex marriage?" Approx 140,000 responded (Just a little poll that one). Nearly 78,000 people opposed SSM - That's 55% AGAINST! No doctor, I'm not suggesting that this poll is any more accurate than those organised by the gay lobby. I am simply telling you that polls have swung both ways in this debate, and the reason why I have never heard ONE gay person suggest a referendum is because they know that the majority of Australians would vote against SSM. Posted by CedarJ, Sunday, 19 August 2012 1:49:43 PM
| |
Plenty of polls not commissioned by Australian Marriage Equality have shown a majority of Australians support marriage equality. I'm not sure who the 'gay lobby'is.. Which group did you mean? Surely you are not suggesting only gay people are arguing for this important reform?
Posted by Dr Amanda Villis, Sunday, 19 August 2012 2:24:34 PM
| |
Lexi:
...Your personality flaw, (which I describe to you as a “Jesus complex”), is a pretty pathetic display of cowardice. You cannot go through life trying to save people from themselves Lexi; obviously you reserve that valuable lesson for a time in the future maybe! ...Now is the time that normal people must rise against the tide of indifference, and slam the lid shut on the morally deprecating march of the homosexual lobby. A group of misfits “bent” on destroying a perfectly good and pure concept of Marriage; one remaining in its original form, designed for the “majority” of normal heterosexual people, (mostly OUR young and virile). ...A concept of marriage designed for the “majority” Lexi. That is the majority which matters; not your sad concept of “imagined” majority: That “other” vaporous majority who you proffer as proof, for a non-existent consensus of captured opinion! Posted by diver dan, Sunday, 19 August 2012 3:10:57 PM
| |
@ doc A, I notice you didn't comment on the poll I provided in answer to your comments. Although I can see why you wouldn't want to comment on a poll of 140,000 people which revealed 55% or 78,000 were AGAINST same-sex marriage (do not believe in mimicking marriage) compared with the 800 questioned in the recent Gallaxy poll.
I don't see SSM as an important reform but rather a selfish misunderstanding of the real meaning of marriage. Many of us can see through the illogical arguments using words like "discrimination", "my rights", "equality" and so forth. They are words of little power in this debate anymore except for those who have refused to accept the answers to them over and over and over again. Posted by CedarJ, Sunday, 19 August 2012 3:44:16 PM
|
One can only assume those incapable of exercising scrupulous rigorous reason in argument also manage their practices and patients with similar incomptence.