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 > Senate harmony on marriage glosses over the deep divisions in rainbow politics > Comments

Senate harmony on marriage glosses over the deep divisions in rainbow politics : Comments

By Lyle Shelton, published 24/2/2017

That there are far reaching consequences of redefining marriage is further reason why a people's vote is the fairest way to settle this debate.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 14
  11. 15
  12. 16
  13. All
AJ, the problem with your response is that the " slippery slope fallacy" is not a fallacy.
I can remember when the gay lobby was pushing to legalise homosexuality and one of the arguments against that was that once it was legal, that would lead to promotion of the gay lifestyle,which would indoctrinate children. Ie, a slippery slope argument.
And of course that's exactly what happened. Gay Mardi Gras, the push for gay marriage, the promotion of gay lifestyle through Safe schools programs, the portrayal of gay lifestyle in the media.
Decades ago adult incest would never even be mentioned, yet now we have support groups and advocates and in a few countries, including Australia, we already have one form of incestuous marriage, which is avunculate marriage.
So to dismiss the issue just because it doesn't fit with your " equality" argument is disingenuous to say the least.
Posted by Big Nana, Saturday, 25 February 2017 11:16:09 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
Big Nana, something I never expected from you! That our DNA can be altered after birth? And errant rubbish put out by those who just can't let go of their bigotry? Next you'll be claiming that left handedness also imprinted in our DNA in the womb, is just more after birth learned behaviour?

Yuyustu, Most Gay folk don't split hairs they way you seem to want to? But see the modern interpretation of being gay, the same as being homosexual!

Our sexual orientation is decided in the womb and by our DNA! And I take it you don't have a problem with our genetic code, with all its inherent variations, being the mindful deliberate work of an all knowing creator?
Alan B.
Posted by Alan B., Saturday, 25 February 2017 11:18:36 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
Now to address the issue of equity.
The whole argument for same sex marriage is that all people are entitled to equality in marriage. That all consenting adults should have the right to marry who they wish.
So, how does that face up to the wishes of polygamous groups or adult incest partners who wish to marry?
Why don't they have the same rights as everyone else?
Just because you think the whole issue is gross and repulsive doesn't mean a thing because plenty of people think homosexual relationships are gross and respulsive.
Either marriage is kept as it has always been and gays find another word for a legal Union or the whole concept is opened up to everyone so all consenting adults have the same rights.
Posted by Big Nana, Saturday, 25 February 2017 11:21:54 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
AJ, I suggest you do some research on epigenetics. Changes to DNA response can happen before, during or after birth and this has been known for some time.

"Epigenetic changes alter the physical structure of DNA. One example of an epigenetic change is DNA methylation — the addition of a methyl group, or a "chemical cap," to part of the DNA molecule, which prevents certain genes from being expressed. Another example is histone modification.Jun 24, 2013"

As for people being born gay, well no, studies with identical twins has proves this is not necessarily true and many studies show that environmental factors may lead to homosexuality.
Posted by Big Nana, Saturday, 25 February 2017 11:33:52 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
Big nana,

It is, if one cannot provide a credible mechanism by which the slippery slope will occur.

<<… the problem with your response is that the " slippery slope fallacy" is not a fallacy.>>

The page I linked to should have explained that.

Did these people, who predicted the so-called promotion of homosexuality and indoctrination of children, provide a credible explanation as to how this would occur? If not, then it was still a fallacious argument, and the fact that they allegedly turned out to be right could, therefore, be put down to a fluke.

And are you suggesting that homosexuality should never have been legalised?

<<Gay Mardi Gras, the push for gay marriage, the promotion of gay lifestyle through Safe schools programs, the portrayal of gay lifestyle in the media.>>

How is something like the Mardi Gras a bad thing, and how does Safe Schools “promote” homosexuality? You make it sound like homosexuality is a ‘condition’ to be discouraged. No one chooses their sexuality.

<<Decades ago adult incest would never even be mentioned …>>

Until you can explain how homosexuality is harmful, any comparisons with incest are a false analogy.

<<So to dismiss the issue just because it doesn't fit with your " equality" argument is disingenuous to say the least.>>

Where have I done this?

<<The whole argument for same sex marriage is that all … consenting adults should have the right to marry who they wish.>>

No, that’s not the argument. Some relationships would have adverse societal effects. Like polygamy. Get over the polygamy already. It’s old and it doesn’t work.

<<Just because you think the whole issue is gross and repulsive doesn't mean a thing because plenty of people think homosexual relationships are gross and respulsive.>>

Correct. This is what I remind homophobic people of.

<< As for people being born gay …>>

Twin studies do not disprove the claim that people are born gay. Twins grow up in the same environment. Things can happen in the womb too. But even if homosexuality were purely the result of environmental factors, how would that justify discrimination?
Posted by AJ Philips, Saturday, 25 February 2017 1:20:55 PM
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
Phillips:

You argue that polygamy has adverse effects on people but that is not the reason that governments do not allow it. They do not allow it because they only support marriage between one man and one woman. Dysfunction can occur in any type of marriage so that cannot be a reason for limiting the types of marriage they endorse. They do not give any reason why they do not endorse other types of marriage – they simply draw the line at one man and one woman. They are entitled to draw the line where they see fit.

Your attempts to discredit other types of marriage are irrelevant because governments do not make their decision based on any of those factors only on the factor of the make-up of the relationship. They only allow relationships of one man and one woman.

“Attempts compare gay people to polygamists, relatives, pets, or inanimate objects is a false analogy”

There are no attempts to make comparisons. They are just being shown as examples of other types of marriages which are not allowed. No one is making judgements about their relative value as relationships except you. Certainly the government does not make comparisons and they are the ones who decide which relationships will get certificates and which will not.

“It has everything to do with sexuality... satisfied in.”

The government do not give out marriage certificates to anyone on the basis of romantic and sexual satisfaction. This is hardly a responsibility of government.

“The fact that straight people cannot enter into same-sex marriages either, is a technicality.”

How is it a technicality? Couldn’t the same be said for all homosexual marriages as well?

“Because you said earlier that same-sex marriage advocates need to present a good argument if they want the changes made. Remember?”

But you said the argument was successfully made. So which is it? Is it already done and dusted or do you have to convince 100 per cent of people? Your behaviour does not match your rhetoric.
Posted by phanto, Saturday, 25 February 2017 2:54:59 PM
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. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. ...
  10. 14
  11. 15
  12. 16
  13. All

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