I think the freedom the youth of tomorrow really need Foxy is to be untainted by the misery and disease of the homosexual lifestyle. If we look at history in depth, at a certain stage, ever single homosexual/sexually immoral society fell and vanished. Its the way it is under God.
A gay person sincerely coming to Jesus Christ, looking for help, is how to get genuinely set free of the nightmare.
Being gay is only a spirit power that binds the victim.
No one was EVER born that way.
"Everyone who calls on the Name of The Lord Jesus Christ will be saved"...Romans 10:13.

Why do the godbotherers,live back in the dark ages.

Gibo When I come around and knock on your door, espousing homosexuality, then you can complain. In the meantime tell your mates to cease knocking on our door.

Then again I do love the look on their faces, when I tell them "This is a Gay house"!

Good article.

Gibo provides a fine example of the shaky ground that religious arguments are based upon. Gibo, whether you like it or not, you're doing a fine job arguing for the other side.

By way of rebuttal to some posts... I'll pick the most sensible out of a decidedly illogical collection of comments.

Grn, the reason why they assume it's because of the religious right, is because there is precious little to support the assertions outside of a religious framework.

You say that ideally, a child should have a biological mother and father.

This is understandable - however, unless you have the same problem with single parents, it looks more like a simple dislike of homosexuality. Surely two parents are better than one, even if they are the same gender?

In relation to adoption, I'd have thought that preference should be in this order:

1) loving parents, no criminal record
2) supportive environment, sufficient income to support the child
3) - possibly, your gender issue (i.e. a both genders for an upbringing).

I'd say that the gender of adoptive parents are far less important than the first two priorities. In the event that an ideal couple is available, then yes. But if it was a heterosexual couple than had anything less than a stable environment and solid income, then I see no reason why a homosexual couple should be denied.

Wouldn't it be better than an orphanage? You speak of ideals, as if this is an ideal world. I don't have any issues with homosexual couples raising kids provided they meet all the criteria, but I suggest that third preference in order to placate the admittedly large number of people that still seem to have issues with this.

Isn't that reasonable? If not, what part isn't?

So much ignorance, so little time…..

Leigh, you constantly march out your assertion that gay men and women can privately arrange their financial affairs to take care of each other, and should therefore shut up. That’s simply wrong. Please read the HREOC report on the 50 plus federal laws that discriminate against them, and then apologise at your leisure.

Gibo, your bizarre ranting barely deserves a response. If you still believe homosexuality is immoral, please move to Iran or Saudi Arabia where you will be amongst friends.

grn, I love your argument the most. Every legitimate, peer-reviewed study has demonstrated that children raised by same-sex couples have outcomes AT LEAST as good as the more ‘traditional’ alternatives. Even if you choose to ignore the research and base your sad opinions on thin air, what exactly would you have the government do about it? Take the children away? Yeah, that has worked brilliantly in the past, let’s try that again. The children of same-sex parents WILL continue to exist despite the law’s appalling silence about them, and those children deserve the protection of laws that treats their same-sex parents as a unit who are equally responsible for them.

I hope Rudd has some strength of character and stands up to the ACL and the other regressive elements of Australian society. I live in hope.

Actually, from where I stand Rudd is member of the "religious right", but it's all relative I guess.

I'm not going to respond to the blathering of the homophobes and Christian nutters - we've been there before and they just enjoy a platform for their odious rants.

Oh what an evil man Mr Rudd must be to keep his pre election promise not to allow same sex civil unions to mimic marriage. Amazing how the left is happy for Mr Rudd to break some promises but not others. THankfully he is holding off for the time being as the perverted homosexual lobby and its supporters show how intolerant they are of views other than their own.