O Sung Wu and Runner are worried about the 'unnatural' act of sodomy, and kids being without a mother if gay marriage was allowed. What about the other half of the gay population- lesbians? This obviously won't be the case with their marriages?

At the end of the day, all these gay sex and children issues will still have been happening out in the community amongst gay couples, married or not.
So allowing gay marriage won't change a damn thing really.

So let's all move on like other countries have done....or are we really still that backward old colony everyone thinks we are?

Hi (again) SUSEONLINE...

Actually I think you're right. Gay's will be allowed to have the traditional marriage they now so resolutely seek. If not soon, it will be later, if not later - it'll be just a matter of time. They will be able to marry each other without too much doubt.

I recall years ago an old boss of mine, seeing how angry I was over an issue of bail, he reminded me quite timely I might add, '...don't fight the white there young fella...', in other words, the law's the law and there's not a damn you can do about it, other than move on ?

Hi there YUYUTSU...

I understand where it is you're coming from, but not being a religious person, I tend to take a purely pragmatic, and moral approach to the whole issue. Furthermore, as SUSEONLINE has quite rightly opined, it's just a matter of time before the homosexual community will win their way with the marriage issue ? And why not, I don't think I could mount a sufficiently strong enough argument to maintain the status quo anyway.

I could be wrong YUYUTSU, but from what I've heard there are quite a large number of Gay's who are practicing Christians. Obviously some Christian Churches, wouldn't necessarily oppose Gay marriage ? So why fight the inevitable ? From a purely moral objection, that particular argument seems to have slipped through to the keeper, so I really don't know ?

Apparently homosexuality has been around as long as heterosexual procreation, and far greater minds then anyone I could muster, have argued and embraced the issue for years ? I'll just have to content myself with the knowledge that I tried to argue my position herein, and failed atrociously by all accounts ? Thanks for your link to YUYUTSU, most interesting I must confess.

Time to go, my eyes are very tired.

Dear O Sung Wu,

I hope you had a good night.

You wrote: "it's just a matter of time before the homosexual community will win their way with the marriage issue"

What has the homosexual community to do with it?
Most homosexuals are not gay - and most gays are not homosexual.
The ones behind the push for gay-marriage (who indeed seem to be winning this battle), are not homosexual, but anti-religious activists. They probably even need to pay unemployed homosexuals to attend their rallies.
I already mentioned that I have a relative who is homosexual: he has a highly-respected job teaching law in university: he never even contemplated taking part in any gay activities and he has no interest in formally marrying his partner even after living happily and raising two children together for many years, who live with their two fathers and often also see their (same) two lesbian mothers. His male-partner attends family-functions and is completely accepted within my extended family.

Why fight the inevitable? because the organisers will not stop there and rest on their laurels. You mentioned Christian churches that already marry homosexuals: while I am happy about it, that must be quite disappointing for the organisers, for their aim is to break the spirit of the churches rather than see them adapt, so now they would be looking for new pretexts to attack.

Religion has no problem with homosexuality as such - the problem is rather the over-emphasis on sexuality, any sexuality, as our motivating force in life, substituting physical attraction for love and fragments of temporary physical beauty for the divine source of all beauty.

I'm sorry, but ibe had enough of those defending gays and suggesting thier relationships are normal.

While ive tried to remain reasonable, two men engaging in the act of sticking their bits up the other guys back side is way out of the ordinary and if you feel there is nothing abnormal about that and you think thier marriage is equal to that of a man and woman, then you are simply on a different planet to what im on and I sincerely hope you are excluded from any public vote on the matter as your perception of what's normal is far from what I would consider as normal.

I'm sorry but I've had enough if this garbage taking up so much of our time and can't for the life of me underatnd why such a small minority, someone suggested 1% can demand such attention from our law makers.

Even if we do take the matter to a vote e gays won't accept a no vote so It's time our law makers grew some balls and put a stop to this rubbish.

rehctub,

"I'm sorry but I've had enough if this garbage taking up so much of our time..."

Lol!...then why did you go to the trouble of starting a thread on the issue?

Also noting that your last post differs greatly in toleration than your opening spiel:

"By making this simple amendment, those who believe marriage is between a man and a woman can continue with their long held tradition, while gays, or anyone who openly supports gay marriage can choose 'between two people."

You appear to be uncommonly vexed on this issue - the reason it's so topical is that support for marriage equality has ceased to be a minority issue because it has the apparent support of the majority.

"Even if we do take the matter to a vote e gays won't accept a no vote so It's time our law makers grew some balls and put a stop to this rubbish."

That's coming from a poster with the OLO handle "rehctub".

Dear Poirot,

<<support for marriage equality has ceased to be a minority issue because it has the apparent support of the majority.>>

I presume you count me in that majority because I support marriage equality - to be achieved by making the state withdraw from having anything to do with marriage altogether.

The majority of those who want the state to bless same-sex relationships, do so not out of love for homosexuals, but out of their hate of what they perceive to be religion and their desire to hurt them who follow it.