We don't know why we punish ourselves reading some of these opinions. Ena is so right, they seem so full of hate and that hate seems to be based on the bible and how people intrepret it.
God will judge everyone when that person's time comes, really who are we mere humans to base our beliefs on a book that varies and is used to rule people's lives. If it was a book of love and truth, surely every religion would preach exactly the same text. Every Church, every christian. We dislike how in the name of God people justify what Govt legislations should or shouldn't be allowed to do, instead of basing legislations on equal rights.

In answer to others who have mentioned that children should not be raised by same-gender couples, we know of a few children raised in those relationships and they are top students and wonderfully productive citizens. Oh and guess what, they are not gay, not that that would matter. Oh and we know people who are gay who were raised in the perfect family unit, go figure.

The Perfect family unit for so many is based on empty unsubstantiated "facts" as to why it is the best way to bring up children. Surely before you place a Mother and Father in the perfect family environment "mold" or corner, you would consider a family the best type of family only based on the love, respect, encouragement and security they provide a child, not on their gender of relationship to the child. You will find Mother/Father families are not always filled with those things. Great Parents come in all shapes and sizes, grandparents, Aunties, Uncles, Same-Gender parents as well as Mother/Father parents, biological or non.

We just hope love shines through in the end, not a book or those who proclaim to be preaching God's word! Only God can truly do that, and he shall only do this when we meet him after our time on earth is through.

What are the gay community asking for?

Acceptance of their life by outsiders? No.
Recognition that they fit what is ’normal’ (whatever that is) in this society? No.
Rights beyond what every other individual who doesn’t fall into this category get? No.

Security and control over their personal lives? Yes.

It’s that simple. You don’t have to like what they are or believe that it’s right or wrong, or Gods will or not.

You just have to offer them the same thing you offer any human being in this country. The right to own property and share in that property with their chosen companion.

Are the anti-gay posters here implying that because someone is gay they do not deserve the right to choose who inherits their life’s work? Are they implying that deciding who gets to make life choices for them under some conditions is not their right?

Or are they simply saying ‘they are different so they don’t have any rights’?

Can people like coach and Boaz David answer this simple question without diverting from the question:

“Would you allow a gay individual to decide for themself who inherits their property and who makes decisions for them in case they are incapacitated?”

It’s that simple. Keep your answer brief please and try not to leave this particular field of play. Discussions on the behaviour being right or wrong can be left to another thread, eh?

Reason, I don’t know exactly what you mean by “a person like coach and Boaz David” - I don’t think I fall into the category - but here’s my two part answer to your interesting question. Yes I would allow a gay individual to decide for him or her self who makes decisions for that individual in the case of incapacitation. No I would not allow a gay individual to decide for him or her self who inherits that individual’s property totally because I believe if a person has u/18 children then there is a responsibility for that person to support their u/18 children. But this has got nothing to do with discriminating against people who are gay because I also would not allow a straight individual to decide for him or her self who inherits that individual’s property totally because I believe if a person has u/18 children then there is a responsibility for that person to support their u/18 children. If a gay (or straight!) person had no u/18 children then yes, they could do whatever they wanted with their property. The answer to all this (tee hee) is to go and see a lawyer (smirk, smirk) and get your advanced heath directive / living will and will and estate planning all worked out…. ;-)

Kipp ummm obviously this same sex couple haven’t been to see a clever enough lawyer generally if you own the house as joint tenants when one person dies the other person owns the whole – if you own as tenants in common then yes part of the house could be taken away.

BOAZ_David so you don’t like anal sex. Or is that only male-to-male anal sex? Do you think male-to-female anal sex is okay? What about oral sex? Or masturbation? If people stopped worrying about consenting adult homosexuals they could focus on opposing the proponents of pedophilia and bestiality (where there is no consent so it is rightfully illegal).

To all the Christians who are condemning what they see as immorality in Civil Unions for homosexuals, I would suggest that you consider: 1 Corinthians 5

9 I wrote you in my letter not to associate with immoral people;

10 I did not at all mean with the immoral people of this world, or with the covetous and swindlers, or with idolaters, for then you would have to go out of the world.

11 But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler--not even to eat with such a one.

12 For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church?

13 But those who are outside, God judges. Remove the wicked man from among yourselves.

The emphasis that is not to judge those outside the Church. If you see immorality amongst your worship group, by all means take action, but certainly not hateful action, but try to lead those to righteousness. At the same time, look inside yourselves and inside the worship groups that you belong to. Should churches provide wedding services to those who have no belief or have shown a distain for Christian beliefs? I am asking a question, not providing an answer.

I have big problems with gays boasting in their homosexuality inside churches that have as a core belief that sexuality should be expressed in a marriage between a woman and a man, as equals. I am also aware of gays who have followed a path of celibacy as Christians. This is their choice. I also know that there are other Christians who are living 'in sin' with heterosexual partners or who use the services of prostitutes, who use drugs or abuse alcohol. I feel that the gays following Christ in celibacy are being better servants of God than the hypocrites.

But as for homosexuality outside the Church, so long as no one tries to make it compulsory it doesn’t worry me.

BD
A few points of sanity
1) Pedophiles are NOT claiming that they were born that way. In fact it has been recognised for decades that pedophiles come from homes where they were sexually abused as kids. Those abused kids then go on to abuse - thus completing the cycle.

2) Civil Rights have to do with being a citizen of a country - Australian homosexuals are citizens of this country & therefore should have the same civil rights as any other citizen of this country. Isn't that only logical?

3) Jesus said Zip, Nadda, Nothing about homosexuality. That's your hang up, NOT his. Ask yourself - if homosexuality is such a big deal why didn't Jesus say something about it? Shouldn't that question be important to you?

Once again, there is no connection at all between something's being natural (or unnatural) and what is right or wrong, or good or bad. Why do some of you (on both sides) keep repeating the nonsense? Many unnatural actions are morally obligatory. Many natural ones are morally wrong. It does not matter whether same sex activity is natural or unnatural. It tells us absolutely nothing about its morality. And, may I remind you, writing posts is not a natural activity.