The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Against marriage reform > Comments

Against marriage reform : Comments

By Max Atkinson, published 21/1/2016

He begins well, reminding readers that reformers have no right to assume opponents are bigoted, and the mere fact that most people support same-sex marriage is not a reason to change the law.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 11
  8. 12
  9. 13
  10. All
Perhaps it could be that we let the churches handle marriage and welfare for Christians, and the State does marriage and welfare for the secular people. This would be a win for everyone.
Posted by progressive pat, Thursday, 21 January 2016 8:57:37 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
the mere fact that most people support same-sex marriage is not a reason to change the law.

It is if you do your research in a Gay Bar. What a load of crap.
Posted by Jayb, Thursday, 21 January 2016 9:01:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Always makes me laugh when religious people try to hijack reality.
Even in the Jewish-Christian-Islamic "tradition" you can't pin down what traditional marriage is.

Is it between one man and one women? Is it between one man and many women, how many women?

Many cultures in history have temporary marriages, unions between multiple partners and yes even gay marriage.

Dr. Jensen has his christian glasses on again, if fact he is unable or unwilling to take them off.

For most of human history we most likely had family structures similar to other primates and had no concept of marriage at all.
Posted by Cobber the hound, Thursday, 21 January 2016 9:01:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"..the mere fact that most people support same-sex marriage is not a reason to change the law, citing surveys which show most people also support the death penalty."

Absolutely true. And who says the majority supports homosexual 'marriage'? Polls? The media? The Left let's-wreck-the-joint mob? They are not the majority.

I saw a young comedian ask his audience who was in favour of same sex 'marriage'. Huge roar came up. When he asked who was against - nothing. He said "not game to say so, are you?". And that sums it up: the bullies scare the people who don't agree with them. The people who are behind this perverted rubbish are not a majority, but are small group of loud mouth thugs intent on bring down Western society. They can, and should be, put in their place by the majority.
Posted by ttbn, Thursday, 21 January 2016 10:19:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The Australian Constitution is an Act of the UK Parliament passed at the request of the Australian Colonies and adopted by plebiscites in the colonies.
The colonies, when established, had been given by the UK parliament the power to pass laws for "the peace order and good government" of each colony.

Those colonies asked the UK parliament at the turn of the 19th into the 20th century to transfer power to make laws on certain subjects to a Federal Government. Among those subjects were defence ( of course) and "marriage"
In 1900 there was doubt whatsoever as to what marriage meant. It was an institution established for the nurture and education of children, a union for life between a man and a woman.

An Court which purports to deem valid any other definition of the word as used in the Constitution is stepping beyond its powers.It is not a matter of religion. It is a matter of fundamental law of the land. Such a Court would be making law not interpreting it.

Change without a referendum would be a breach of the basic principle of division of powers ( into legislative, judicial and executive) which is the basis of our liberty. Rousseau recognised this. Lincoln summarised it as" All power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely." Hitler , Stalin, Pol Pot and Mao proved how right he was.

A referendum in favour of the change must be passed b a majority of voters in a majority of the States for any change to be legally valid.
Posted by Old Man, Thursday, 21 January 2016 10:21:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Homosexuals in recognised relationships already have all the same rights as married couples.

They just don't have the word "marriage".

They didn't want the word a decade ago. In fact they positively derided it and mocked the backwardness of traditional marriage.

So what's changed? What is it they want now that's different? In a word, "power". This is simply a method by the radical left to knock another pillar out from under the tried and true, conservative nature of our society. It seems to be working as noted in comments above where nobody is game to express their disagreement. Anybody who is against is derided. It's decidedly unfashionable. And the radicals will have stolen another word to add to "gay" or "queer" which used to mean other things.

The radicals are achieving true Islam, meaning "submission" and we can let them at our peril.
Posted by Captain Col, Thursday, 21 January 2016 10:39:48 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. ...
  7. 11
  8. 12
  9. 13
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy