In response to my earlier question (“was it malice or carelessness?”) you’ve pretty well ruled out carelessness, and given the above, I’m kinda running out of other conclusions I can draw.

It was a direct response to Runner stating that the lie they are born that way is no more true than paedophiles being born that way. I took responded directly to that comment highlighting the difficulty in changing. You gave a very strong reaction to that even though I was just responding to Runner’s comment. I can imagine that you are running out of conclusions. You have certainly stretched the available ones going way beyond anything reasonably intended.

CJ,

I hope your kids grow up happy, healthy, straight, right handed, and unbigotted. Becoming a Christian would be fantastic but probably unlikely.

“so I do wonder about you”

That’s very obvious: “There is a lot below the surface there.”

If you have an assertion to make, mjpb, make it. If not, keep your dark musings to yourself.

“I have some real negative stereotypes concerning that group. However if the activist part is chopped off I am open to friendship.”

You’ll need to explain to me how this is different to my assertion that in your world view, “the pejorative part of the term “homosexual activist” is “activist,” which I guess means that homosexuals are acceptable if they don’t try to change anything.”

Your formulation reads like a clear confirmation to me.

Which musing do you want me to explain. They relate to different posts and different issues even though you think they need bringing together?

I thought this part of the formulation explained it: "What it means is that homosexuals are decent if they aren’t bullies who make a sport of Christian bashing." Tell me you aren't missing the context to see what you want to see by explaining how that is true in that context.

mjpb, just which posters do you think are "homosexual activists"?

I've had some history with many of the other posters and most are as far as I'm aware heterosexual. Fair go and perhaps one other poster have made posts that appear to indicate that they are homosexual.

My impression is that most of us are not in this debate out of self interest but rather concern over a remnant of intolerance that deserves no place in modern Australia.

Concern about the harm done to the lives of not only homosexuals but the lives of those around them by the continuing villification and attempts to limit their freedom coming from some christains and others living in the grip of ancient hatreds. People who all to often ignore a teaching about specks and planks.

R0bert

J Bennett, where is it written that gay marriage is harmful to children. You do realise dont you that gay marriage by definition excludes children. Yes, no doubt they will be able to use IVF or adopt, but they can now - you dont have to be married to do so. Legitimising gay marriage is not going to make an ounce of difference to the effect on children.

Added to that you seem to come to the conclusion that gay partners engage in sexual acts in the lounge room, where all the kids can sit around and watch. Get a grip - I have no doubt that if kids were introduced into the equation, then the mere pressures of time and managing a family will have most gays acting as conservatively as any other parents.

I know of only one gay relationship that includes kids. Neither woman would be picked as a lesbian if you didnt know better. The kids belong to one from her former marriage. They are balanced normal kids, who participate in a wide range of school activities, have lots of friends etc. It has not been a negative impact on them (although I am sure they had to shoulder a bit of school bullying for a while, until the bullies found something more interesting).

You didn't answer specifically whether you believe homosexuality is a choice, saying neither, but that at least indicates that you accept there is some difficulty in 'choosing' to be heterosexual.

In which case, you're in favour of denying these people a civil union. You haven't answered me as to how either treating these people as second class citizens or demanding they remain alone and celibate for life will improve their psychological well being.

You're the one who brought up suicide and depression - tell me how denying these people civil unions helps.

As for the children side of things, other posters have outlined studies refuting that point. Given how many crappy heterosexual parents there are out there, perhaps the people opposing same-sex unions should direct their efforts to combating bad parents full stop.

As for paedophiles - irrelevant. Nobody's arguing that, nor will anyone. It's about informed consent.