100,000 Australians For Same Sex Marriage!

You have obviously got the abuse down pat, and you really excell at fantasising no end of faults and sins to accuse people of. Now it could be time to work on the common sense side of things? Get in touch with reality?

 

Laws of physics? WTF have the laws of physics got to do with marriage?


FFFS

 

I find it deplorable that those in this thread preaching "tolerance" show absolutely no tolerance for others opinions...
No wonder this debate will always be a deadlock.

 

Yes, if it's not written in the laws of physics then it's just something we made up and thus we can change it.

The only people who don't think gays should be allowed to get married, to each other, are hateful bigots.

 

Thanks for proving my point

 

I have and I stand by my comment. You suggest that the policy would have passed if there was a conscience vote by the Coalition. As pointed out this is incorrect due not of party politics but perception of support by electorates.

 

Read it slowly one more time....common you can do it!

Wasn't there a bit of pressure on liberal MP's by Abbott not to cross the floor ? It probably would have got through had Abbott allowed MP's to have a conscience vote. I suppose it would have depended on the numbers in labors right as to whether the support from the liberal left would have cancelled out their vote so to speak.

 

So....heterosexuality is 'properly equal' to homosexual SIN? Since when?

 

As stated I stand by my comment, regardless of who did what. There is little public support for this policy by either party. A fact that I pointed out is that party politics did not fail this policy, public perception did. If the politicians had decided not to risk future backlash at the election booth then they may well have passed this policy.

Perhaps it would help you to understand, my attack on you was for that very line. You are making statement that Abbott has led the charge of the Coalition to turn this policy down. As stated, this is not a party political, us against them. This was a win from lobby groups to stop such policy (be it good or bad). Fact is, there is far more to this policy than public realise and the fact that many are attempting to run it into the ground stands more to outside influence than party politics.

 

So the liberals are ruled by faceless men, which we all knew anyway, but it is interesting that you admit to it. This is not the argument but had to slip this in. Look, based on Makede's figures there is not an issue with most constituents. If constituents have an issue with it then it would have been aimed at the vote against SSM. So you believe Abbott had nothing to do with denying his party a conscience vote?

 

Fact is, if the Libs were allowed a conscience vote, the bill would likely have passed. Abbott prevented them from a conscience vote because he knew there was a good chance it would pass.

 

It would be good if you KNEW what the hell you were on about Mak..
The red headed troll is against it as are some of the alp...please stop blaming the worlds woes on the libs...it shows that you have not thought thing through.

 

There is no logic or law of nature that stipulates as such. It is a human conception. And conceptions can be changed.

I'm not a homosexual. It's ridiculous to suggest that there is no inequality because you can't marry the same sex either. That's the most pathetic counter-argument I have ever heard on this subject. You know what the double-standard is so don't pretend it doesn't exist. They're being denied the right to marry their chosen partner.

So other than nomenclature, does anybody actually have a proper reason to be against gay-marriage?

 

I don't even know what that means.

 

I didn't abuse you. I said your opinions are nauseating. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. An opinion, however, is not entitled to axiomatic respect or shelter from criticism. Especially when it comes from a person pleading for tolerance of an opinion which is, by definition, intolerant.

 

You are no better....YOUR intolerance does more harm to the cause than his does....YOUR intolerance is the biggest hurdle in the equation.

 

How is my intolerance of homophobic vitriol a hurdle in the equation?

 

Marriage is just outdated in general. De facto couples, including homosexuals, have basically all the same legal rights as a married couple since the reforms a couple of years ago. Marriage should really just be abolished, and they should reform De facto relationships some more.

 

Slamming your OPINION down peoples throats while proclaiming tolerance....yeah thats no hurdle at all?
Extremist views of each side should be disregarded.
TOLERANCE if you are going to preach it LIVE it

 

I didn't slam my opinion down anyone's throat. I find his opinion revolting and said as much. No one is forcing him or anyone else to read or take any notice of it. My idea of tolerance is not tolerating anything and everything. Especially not intolerance. You want me to be tolerant of intolerance? This is not serious.

lol, and how is my view extremist?

 

read your own post to yourself, do it a few times if needed....then take a deep breath and work out where you went wrong

 

oh and for the record, I myself am pro gay marriage

 

I guess you've run out of things to say to defend his bigotry. Ah well.

- - - Updated - - -

Then I have to say I think people like yourself are a hurdle. Being tolerant of bigotry in this day and age, and homophobic slanders like "stay in the closet", is moral cowardice afaic.

 

Not at all, but i find YOUR bigotry just as bad..
What makes his opinion wrong and yours right???? NOTHING
yet here you are preaching tolerance while being intolerant of others...you fail

 

I can handle the abuse. However, your intolerant, superior, abusive attitude does your cause no good. I happen to believe that marriage is between a man and a woman. If you can`t tolerate my belief, don`t expect others to tolerate your intolerance.