The Forum > Article Comments > It's hard to argue against equality > Comments
It's hard to argue against equality : Comments
By Graeme Innes, published 1/3/2007For gay and lesbian couples the inequalities embedded in current legislation are obvious and inexcusable.
- Pages:
-
- 1
- Page 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
-
- All
Why should the Government condone practices that end up with many filling our hospitals with infectous diseases. Added to that it should be a basic human right that where possible a child should have a father and a mother. It is totally abnormal to have two women trying fulfil the roles of a father. Being tolerable of the intolerable does not benefit society and should not be encouraged by Governments. Experimenting with the traditional family has already filled our prisons with fatherless children and continuing to promote this lifestyle as the same as the traditional family will prove to be another social diaster.
Posted by runner, Thursday, 1 March 2007 1:32:19 PM
| |
Boaz I have read your posts with horror over the months and I find your current domestic arrangements abhorent and insulting so I don't think a man on his second marriage to a woman he converted in the wilds of Borneo is in any position to judge other people's domestic arrangements.
Posted by billie, Thursday, 1 March 2007 2:17:21 PM
| |
The author is right- it is about time that Australia stopped discriminating against same sex couples and that they are being granted the exact same rights as heterosexual couples including marriage and adoption of children and access to IVF.
In the US, I have heard, homosexual people are not even permitted to become organ donors! I wonder how many dying homophobes would say “Thanks, but no thanks” to an organ coming from a homosexual person if that would mean it would give them access to a healthy future rather than death. As soon as I was reading this OLO article I had a premonition that one of the religious posters would bring up ‘pedophilia’. BD you made it come true! BD can’t you just skip some parts of that Bible, there are probably many parts in the Bible that state things you don’t adhere to because you don’t like them or disagree. Fundamental Christians have something in common with Muslims- they both disapprove of homosexuality because it’s rejected in both the Bible and Koran. BD, would you, as an activist, join with Muslims to protest against gay marriage? Like TRTL and others I can’t see why homosexuality would be abnormal- the fact is that a proportion of the population all over the world (human and animal) is homosexual. It is natural, nothing to stress about. Live and let live. RObert, another opportunity for your wonderful sperm calculations! Don’t worry about hell, lol, I’m sure we can meet there, party with the gays and non-homophobes and listen to all the evil rock bands by the open fire. Runner, the government should cater for everyone. Gays pay tax like everybody else and contribute the same to society. Why should the government condone discrimination? And Runner, many children are already being raised by same sex parents. Research indicates that these children are just as happy and healthy as children raised by heterosexual couples. Posted by Celivia, Thursday, 1 March 2007 2:19:15 PM
| |
"But parental leave is only guaranteed to a male employee who is the spouse of a woman giving birth."
Too bad, tough, so the world is not an absolutely perfect place which bends over backwards for absolute gay equality (even if it is safer than bending over forward). I know what would fix the problem - abandon the facile notion of parental leave so no one is "entitled" to it. That would suit me and give everyone "Equality". The dullards of uniformity and equality had not invented it when I was breeding kids and since my vasectomy I aint likely to qualify in the future. Oh, another "inequality" - gays should not be allowed to adopt children - Why - because being gay, whilst I would support anyones right to choose to be a mattress muncher or pillow biter, is still abnormal. Forming an "abnormal relationship" is incompatible with the best interests of adopted children, who should be placed in homes where the abnormality of homosexuality is less likely to occur. Posted by Col Rouge, Thursday, 1 March 2007 2:34:16 PM
| |
This is just another angle on the gay marriage debate which was put to rest a while ago. I am not a catholic however George Pell's article on OLO gave the other side of the debate:
http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=2207 If gay couples should quality for marriage entitlements what about couples who are friends? Not such a silly idea when one considers that the 'coupling' between friends is often longer term and probably more supportive that that so often seen in homosexual relationships where promiscuity is commonplace. Friends love one another, maybe not necessarily in a lustful way but so what? HEROC has outlived any usefulness it may once have had. Why waste more money on this dinosaur of political correctness when there are so many areas of need that are struggling for resources? Posted by Cornflower, Thursday, 1 March 2007 3:29:38 PM
| |
pw2040, I don’t agree that changing the laws will bring an end to hate and homophobia, but I agree with you and the author that we should change them anyway. In a liberal democracy it is a fundamental principle that government should treat its citizens equally. That such discrimination by the authorities is countenanced in the 21st century demeans us all, not just the people who are hurt and humiliated by being denied rights and recognition the rest of us take for granted.
Posted by Rhian, Thursday, 1 March 2007 4:07:18 PM
|