Maybe it is question of priorities. I mean, obviously equality for homosexuals is high on Brian Greig list of priorities. For me however, any concern does'nt even exist. I've got better things to do with my time!

But I definitely do not want homosexuals imposing their values onto me.

Davo

Nobody is "imposing their values on to you". Gay and lesbian people and their families just want the same legal recognition that you have. Nothing more.

Thankfully, there are people (unlike you) who do care about issues that don't just affect their own lives.

Although I am gay, I can appreciate Davo's comments. I don't want anyone imposing heterosexuality on me. However, religious fringe groups set up these conversion therapy clinics, violating every form of psychology and social work ethics, in an attempt to convert gay people to heterosexuality. Sure, they claim to be acting in the interests of the "client". But then they would say that wouldn't they? They patronisingly see their duty as "rescuing" gays from the misery of homosexuality as they see it. Of course, being Aboriginal in John Howard's Australia ain't exactly a barrel of laughs. But strangely I've never heard of a Christian group trying to change Aboriginal people to being non-Aboriginal. Interesting.

Brian Greig derides our government for not including 'sexuality' in codifying legislation with a UN treaty, a step which would presumably preclude government 'discrimination' of alternative lifestyles. I would ask Brian if he then opposes the 'discrimination' of sexual persuasions aside from homosexuality. Bestiality is illegal in all Australian jurisdictions as far as I know. So is paedophilia. They are sexual acts that are regulted by the government, and one can be prosecuted for them, rejected employment on the basis of them and so forth. I'm not neccessarily comparing, but it is illustrative that someones 'sexuality' can of course be 'discriminated' against, as all laws pertaining to sex are value judgments at the end of the day.

A disabled person cannot but act to the fullest of their ability. A person of color cannot change their appearance. However, a second party's knowledge (be it employer or the government) of one's sexual orientation requires an outward manifestation of behavior to show them. Why should someones alternative sexual behavior be protected by Human Rights legislation? This is merely a round-about attempt to slide unpopular policies, driven by a tiny minority, into the public domain on 'rights grounds'. For instance gay marriage and age of consent laws (see Western Australia). This is exactly how the 'politically correct imperialists' overruled Tasmania's sodomy laws by way of UN/High Court intervention. What next: 'rights' protected polygamy?

Firstly, paedophilia (child molestation) is not a right. It is a violation of children's rights. It does not deserve legal protection any more than a preference for raping women should be made legal. It is so bloody predictable that someone always raises the issue of paedophilia when homosexuality is mentioned. I'm going to make a point of mentioning it when heterosexuality is discussed for a change.

Secondly, discrimination can (and has) occurred on the basis of perceived homosexuality. No outward manifestation, such as telling your employer, is necessary. In fact, many gays go to huge lengths to hide their homoexuality because of discrimination and possible job loss.

Anyway, why should gays hide their sexuality? Do straights take off their wedding rings when they come to work? Do they shutup about their opposite sex partners in general conversation? No. Why should gays have to act any differently?

Thirdly, it is gays' sexual orientation, not sexual behaviour, which is the issue here. The two may be linked but they are different. Gay men and lesbians are discriminated against whether they have lived with one partner for 10 years or if they are not in a relationship or even if they haven't had sex for years. It's irrelevant to bigots. They don't care if we have sex or not. For them, BEING homosexual is the problem.

Finally, as for polygamists they can speak for themselves. I don't know any, I don't know what they want and I don't know what the issue has to do homosexuality.

Ah! _DavidJS_ - you said everything I wanted to!

It's appalling that some people would try and associate animal molestation and child rape with consenting adults. And it's fatuous for _mcrWhite_ to argue that, "they weren't trying to make a link between these things", when that's EXACTLY what s/he was trying to do.

_mcrWhite's_ claim that gay law reform was an "unpopular policy" that was being pushed "by a minority", is also nonsense.

Every poll ever undertaken in Australia, at least in the last decade, shows majority support for gay and lesbian equal rights - as the election result in WA last weekend shows. The Gallop Government (which introduced wide reaching gay and lesbian laws, including equal age of consent, access to the family Court, access to IVF and adoption rights), was re-elected with an increased majority.

Even the National Party (a Conservative partner to the Liberals), increased its vote and picked up an *extra* seat, at the expense of the Liberals, on a policy of SUPPORTING the existing legislation and OPPOSING any rollback of the said laws.

The shrill minority is in fact people like _mcrWhite_ who endorse discrimination and oppose equal rights.

But human rights laws must never be intoduced on the basis of population size alone. It's precisely because gay and lesbian people are a minority, that they need legislative protection from harrassment and discrimination. Few people would seriously suggest that Aboriginies (only 3% of the population) are just a noisy minority who don't deserve equal treatment under the law. Democracy is not about the tryanny of the majority, it's about how we treat all people, particularly the vulnerable.

Of course, the key point to refute the silly claims of _mcrWhite_ is this:

As Greig points out in his article, most Western and many Eastern European and Latin American countries have national laws to protect people on the basis of Sexuality.

Has this resulted in bestiality and peadophilia being given free reign and protected status in any of these countries? No, of course not.

Kelpie
PERTH