Hmmm.. I fail to see why anyone would attempt to show the 'negative social impact' of homosexual behavior from the 'god bothering religious right'. They need do nothing more than refer people to the actual reason they believe what they do, and it's Leviticus 18 and Romans 1. I see so much energy being expended to defend the practice, or to condemn it, when it boils down to whether u believe the scriptures or not.
Why would u seek to show that 'adultery has a negative social impact' when the commandments clearly condemn it ? I mean we all KNOW that if a partner sleeps around that SOMEone is going to get hurt.

It seems this thread has resolved into 'God bothering Gay bashers' and 'Christian hating Gays'. Each side attributes 'hate' to the other side, and if the tone of the thread keeps up much longer, it might be difficult to find anything of redeeming value in it. All will be lost in a morass of seething mutual hatred.

I suppose the 'right' and folk like mr Cameron are doing what they do for political reasons, trying to persuade non Christians of the 'menace' of homosexual law reform. In the same way the gay lobby is going at it hammer and tong to produce a different result.

It boils down to this. If a conservative government has enough power, they will most likely attempt to shape the law as they see fit, and that may well mean a reduction of existing gay 'rights'. So, gays will be whining about 'imposing' views on them. Similarly, if the gay agenda gets up, Christians will be feeling exactly the same.
This is a no win situation, but it IS the reality of a democratic society. So.. maybe it would be good to try to reduce the amount of 'rabidity' and look more to a degree of understanding that 'this is how it is' and do ones best to participate in the struggle as one sees fit, preferrably without endemic recrimination of others.

BOAZ_David: Despite your emotive language and simplification of the issues, you've got it right that ultimately this is a futile debate. Gay rights activists/supporters will not change their opinion or give ground any quicker than conservatives/Bible-bashers/opponents of gay rights will. Ultimately, these sorts of debates are only ever "resolved" by who has the numbers in parliament to vote something through or vote it down. That is indeed the reality of the democratic society.

Where I take issue with you, however, is your statement that "if a conservative government has enough power, they will most likely attempt to shape the law as they see fit, and that may well mean a reduction of existing gay 'rights'. So, gays will be whining about 'imposing' views on them. Similarly, if the gay agenda gets up, Christians will be feeling exactly the same."

Looking at this from a purely unemotive, rational perspective, the reality is this: legal denial of the existence of long-term same-sex relationships - which is still happening at a state and federal level - directly and adversely affects the couples involved. You or George Pell or Fred Nile or whoever may believe that these relationships are wrong, immoral or against the will of God/contrary to the scriptures, but the people involved in these relationships - the people who know their relationship is every bit as valid, meaningful and productive as their heterosexual counterparts - actually suffer when they don't automatically inherit their partner's superanuation upon death, or when a deceased person's family can legally cut a partner out of their will even when that person has specified them as a beneficiary, or you are denied the opportunity to make decisions about your partner's medical treatment or, as has recently happened, you are denied a war pension when your partner of 37 years, a man who fought to defend Australia, dies.

If, however, these laws were reformed and legal parity were achieved, gays and lesbians would no longer be denied their rights, while at the same time the people who opposed these reforms also would not directly and adversely suffer. You can still wake up in the morning, read the Bible, sing at Hillsong, you can even keep posting to forums like these stating your opposition to homosexuality, but the quality of your life - and the quality of your relationships - is in no way reduced or impeded by implementing equality. We are not imposing on you in any way, shape or form. But when religious dogma filters into the legislature and affects decisions on law and law reforms, that is indeed an unfair and unwarranted imposition of a certain belief system on everybody, and people do directly suffer.

I think in general our system of democracy works on the inverse of the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people - that is, the smallest amount of unhappiness for the smallest amount of people. On this alone, on a practical level, gay law reform must take place, and that is why it has taken (or will take) place in every state in Australia and in an increasing number of western countries around the world.

This thread breaks down to a basic level. On one side are people who believe that adults should be free to live their lives as they see fit. That they should be able to live that life style without fear or favor from the community at large. So whether you hetero, gay, bi or asexual, whether your a theists or a atheists. Live your life not mine. If your not interfering with other people I don’t care what you do or think.

Then there are those who feel that their narrow minded views should hold sway on the rest of us. Whether from the left or right of the political spectrum I don't care your not telling me how to live my life. Our community can be held together by very broadly base rules that the vast majority can live with. Nearly every culture in history has come up with ones that are very similar. Guess what we have not reached that point yet there is a way to go and the zealots at both ends will be dragged kicking and biting all the way. BOAZ_David so far we have not see a zealot lefty on this site but when we do be assured I will be pointing the finger at them to.

Penguin.
Actually, I was trying to be as dispassionate as possible. You speak quite strongly about 'Christians are not effected' if the gay agenda gets up, and 'Gays are denied their rights, and are SERIOUSLY effected by such denial of rights' (words to that effect).

The point you are missing, is this. We are members of a community, and we exist with a perception of how things should be, as we all do.
If that 'cosmic balance' is upset, and suddenly the world as we knew it does not exist, we find the same sense of delusion as our aboriginal brethren feel about their own sense of loss.
The point I'm making is that it DOES effect us, severely, and as I've pointed out elsewhere, such things NEVER stop with 'equality'. Dont you remember the feminist movement, after they felt they had achieved 'equality' there were a number of radical voices which shouted "Now we have the power, and we want it all" so to speak. I can't give you a reference or source, but the tone of such remarks have been riveted on my soul from the day I heard them.
This persuaded me (thats just one example) of the truth of my often mentioned 'rule' :) that there is only one rule in life, "Rule or be Ruled". This applies to territory, race or culture.
Its just 'how things are'. The nature of the beast. The most inexplicable aspect of that though is that each 'side' cannot for the life of them understand the other. Each things they have the high moral ground and that the other has none.

One cannot take how things 'presently' are in our post 60s sexual revolution west and suggest that this is how they are in other places or should be, because firstly they arn't, and secondly people will laugh at us for our social arrogance and cultural imperialism.

I don't mean to sound rude or arrogant or uncompassionate. But we identify as solidly and completely with the Biblical passages on this matter, as you guys identify with your own views. Probably more so, because we see it as divine in origin.

You may not mean to sound arrogant BOAZ, but you do. Claiming your argument is more sound because it's "divine in nature" has to be one of the most arrogant things I've ever read.

Believing that the collective loss felt by indigenous Australians about their heritage and identity is a "delusion" is also supremely arrogant, but it's no big surprise that you have this perception.

The threat people like you derive from feminism, gay rights, indigenous rights etc would be laughable if it weren't so disturbing on closer inspection.

As I've said before, when the inevitable happens and gays and lesbians are afforded their full rights in Australia (even if it doesn't happen for another 10-20 years), your views will be totally exposed for all their antiquated quaintness.

Cheers,

QP

PS - For clarification: "Affect" and "effect" have no senses in common. As a verb affect is most commonly used in the sense of “to influence” (eg, how denial of rights affects gays and lesbians, Christians are allegedly affected by justice and common sense). Effect means “to bring about or execute”, eg some religious-based institutions exist to effect homophobia. Cheers.

Chook (penguin)
thanx for your helpful spelling assistance. I must confess I have lofty ideas but the ability to express them with pedantic attention to spelling and grammer has not always been my strongest point. Still, I was doing 'machine shop' in my 'Aspendale Tech' days, and with an english teacher like Mr Arder, whom I avoided like the plaque, well here is the result. I can't choose 'effect' or affect for the correct context. Never mind, there is more to life than that.

ABORIGINAL RIGHTS
Let me clarify one point, it looks like my expression failed dismally on that issue also, by delusion, I was not suggesting 'they are deluded' about their loss of rights, the OPPOSITE is true. They are tragically disenfranchised and socially marginalized. My aim was to say how dissappointed they are with their lot. Thanx for pointing that out. I happen to be married to an indigenous person (not of Australia)so I share the sense of feeling of our own indigenous people.

ARROGANCE. It is not 'arrogance' which descibes our position it is simple faith in the simple gospel. The Word of God is our guide. If you want to 'blame' someone, Blame the Almighty, He is the one who gave it to humanity. We might be 'deluded' (correct usage this time) about that matter, but we surely are not arrogant.

All corrections to my poor english are welcome.