The Forum > Article Comments > Will the 'pink vote' finally count? > Comments
Will the 'pink vote' finally count? : Comments
By Andrew Murray, published 9/11/2007Will anyone lose or gain a seat on their anti-gay or pro-gay stance?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Page 5
- 6
-
- All
Posted by Celivia, Tuesday, 13 November 2007 2:22:33 PM
| |
One reason why the 'pink vote' won't have a great impact on the election is because the homosexual lobby totally inflate the number of people choosing this lifestyle. At one stage they were trying to claim that 10% plus of the population was born this way. The dishonesty in defending this unhealthy lifestyle flows over into a dishonest over represented gay media. Your ABC have certainly has had their fair share of people into this lifestyle. No need for affirmative action there.
Posted by runner, Tuesday, 13 November 2007 3:11:45 PM
| |
Well... I don't 'choose' this life style myself- I'm married with children.
But I'd like to live in a world where same sex couples have equal rights. I don't have to be homosexual to empathise with the discrimination they have to deal with. I don't have to be a sheep to be able to disapprove of live exports. I don't have to be be faced with an unwanted pregnancy to be able to support abortion rights. What I value is a society where people respect each other's freedom and choices but where people and organisations are expected not to unnecessarily interfere with the freedom of others. Posted by Celivia, Tuesday, 13 November 2007 6:51:36 PM
| |
Celivia
Well said. I'm with you on respect and freedom. Given the flagrant discrimination and hardship that gay people experience - not to mention violence and bullying, in many instances - it's hard to give credibility to those who talk about homosexuality being a freely-made lifestyle choice. Certainly not a matter of choosing an 'evil' lifestyle as some ignorant people imply. Posted by FrankGol, Tuesday, 13 November 2007 10:47:17 PM
| |
Reading the line “There are just a lot of people in emotional pain,” it’s hard to rid myself of the impression that phanto is referring to him/herself rather than me (I think Kipp has read this the same way). I’ve responded to phanto once before about my attitude to my own homosexuality http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=5658#78567 and there’s no need to expand on that here.
However, even worse that the claims about pain, phanto has introduced an entirely new form of denialism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denialism Denialism is the rationale that has allowed tobacco companies to escape responsibility for deaths and misery caused by their products. It was the justification for allowing HIV/AIDS to spread through many parts of Africa, and denialists have led the resistance to measures against global warming. So far the worst homophobes have stopped short of claiming that homosexuality doesn’t exist http://scienceblogs.com/denialism/2007/05/who_are_the_denialists_part_ii.php but not phanto. The denial of historical and scientific truths is a cause of great misery, and the addition of homosexuality to the list of denied facts is one of the saddest things I have read on OLO. Posted by jpw2040, Tuesday, 13 November 2007 11:52:59 PM
| |
The irony is that there are no "supporters of homesexuality"; there are only people who object to baseless discrimination.
I'm sick to death of gays being in the limelight, and tired of homosexuality being portrayed as a human quality of special value. But as long as gays are hysterically denounced, they will be the subject of debate and attention. If christian conservatives really want homosexuality out of the picture, they should just shut up about it! Posted by Sancho, Wednesday, 14 November 2007 9:09:53 AM
|
Mwwwaaaahahaha.