ALTRAV,

I have already explained to you why s 116 is not relevant. Your only response was to assert that same-sex marriage prohibits the free excercise of religion. When I said that it didn't, you simply dug your heels in without explaining how same-sex marriage prohibits the free excercise of religion.

If you could explain how same-sex marriage prohibits the free excercise of religion, then I'd be happy to respond. Religious people don't have to get married to a person of the same sex if they don't want to. So, what's the problem?

Foxy, ..'19% of women have had anal sex'

Have been exposed to anal sex, you mean. Are you still pretending that is good news for anal sex advocates? That it somehow 'proves' that many heterosexual women are requesting and enjoying anal interference form MSMs (males who have sex with other males) and thrill-seeking idiots encouraged by the pornography industry, with the entertainment industry not far behind?

Where many girls are being preyed upon and from UK figures 29% are exposed to sexual experience before age 16 (many are pre-adolescents), does it surprise anyone that the same grubs who take advantage of vulnerable school kids wouldn't also be having a go at their anuses?

How many of the reports of some exposure to anal sex,because they are just raw numbers, right?, are the sad ticks of the survey box by women who were taken advantage of when they were vulnerable and couldn't do much about it, or the violation, 'slips' was planned by some sly grub?

You might reflect on previous advice to you which of course you also ignored, that many women who have had an anal sex are drug addicts. What about kids or women for that matter whose partners demand penetrative sex and use their butt for contraception and hey, no need a condom :( because condoms are for contraception.

You just don't get it do you? But why not? And why is it so necessary for MSMs who are seeking to legitimise and normalise anal sex, to be able to claim, to spread the big lie, that heterosexual women are requesting and enjoying anal penetration?

And, Foxy, what could be the explanation for far more women reporting some f exposure to 'anal sex' (whatever that means), than the number who tick the survey box for the anal violation ever happening again?

Pushed/tricked into it once against their better judgement and inclination but never again? A lot are probably kids and drug affected who were taken advantage of. But some too are affected by that Fifties stereotyping that denies women their sexuality - the need to please men.

More inconvenient facts that you side step.

Speaking of inconvenient facts, here's one of Foxy's posts.

"Here are the facts from the Australian Bureau of
Statistics:

61.6% of the Australian population votes YES. [1 wrong]

38.4% of the Australian population voted NO. [2 wrong]

Of all eligible [note the word 'eligible'] Australians who expressed a view on -
"Should the law be changed to allow same-sex couples
to marry?" The MAJORITY indicated that the law should
be changed with 61.6% (7,817,247) responding YES.
And, 38.4% (4,873,987) responding NO.

Nearly 8 out of 10 eligible Australians (79.5%) expressed
their view." [not 10 out of 10 of 100% as Foxy would have it].

Note how [1] & [2] are contradicted by the rest of her post?

Is this a case of repeating a falsehood enough times?

leoj,

You've made so many claims on this forum.
Saving women seems to be your latest aim.
Good for you. I wish you every success.

Is Mise,

The information was given by the Australian Bureau
of Statistics. Take your complaints up with them.