Funny, I was only cancelling it because I'm sick of paying to watch ads period !

You're getting a liberal (small l) ideological point of view mixed up with your own thought processes.

Gold!

topic (its about the foxtel ad) finished a while ago

Can we continue talking about gay marriage in the australian politics thread?

^^^ 442 delivers again.

Incest being defended as a legitimate relationship.

Gold!

Blokes tying themselves in intellectual knots over this. The answer is they can't because it's socially unacceptable. (But they're not honest enough to say so and instead say things like "well if they're consenting adults that's OK".)

Not true, nor should it be. Siblings shouldn't marry.

Homosexuals marrying each other used to be be socially unacceptable but has become less so. Apparently that's OK.

I made the same argument as 433 about 2 or 3 pages back about polygamous marriages, rather than incest in this case, but no one was game enough to argue against it.

The slippery slope argument is thrown about as a way of shutting down the discussion but no amount of obfuscation hides the fact that if one sort of marriage is OK then all types of marriage are OK.

At least be honest and say you are happy to discriminate against some types of marriage.




Edited by munrubenmuz: 21/8/2015 10:27:54 PM

People justify gay marriage by saying that whatever two consenting adults do is their business. Fine.

Why then can't two consenting siblings choose to get married? What is your thoughts on that?

Re: Scotch

Ever heard of adoption mate?

Incestuous relationships can lead to children with some pretty horrendous genetic defects, which in all honesty, should not be allowed to happen. Now this may come as a shock to you so you might want to sit down before you read the rest of this comment, but same sex couples cannot acctually procreate by themselves and are therefore impacting nobodies lives but their own.



Also a ludicrous statement. There are numerous personal and economical factors involving things like this that cannot simply be brushed away with the stroke of a pen. Housing all the homeless would require huge sums of money and manpower that this country is unwilling to pay. Gay marriage however requires about zero money and nothing more than a pen and some paper and from the moment it is signed life will go on as usual for the entire country.


Edited by scotch&coke: 21/8/2015 04:35:48 PM

Edited by scotch&coke: 21/8/2015 04:36:20 PM

It's stupid to compare gay marriage to incest.

But to answer the separate question about siblings getting married - they are two consenting adults, and there shouldn't be a problem. If your concern is genetic defects for the offspring, then presumably you'd be willing to ban two people carrying genetic diseases (e.g. Fragile X, where there are instances where it is possible to tell with certainty prior conception that a child will suffer) from marrying?

Edited by JP: 21/8/2015 03:29:21 PM

You're embarrassing yourself again mate. You seriously sound like you crawled out of Tony Abbott's basement with some of the shit you come up with :lol: Gay marriage is somehow comparable to essentially incest?

You were on your way to become a non-joke, but... FMD :LOL:

FactCheck Q&A: was Katy Faust correct on same-sex family studies and kids' rights?

https://theconversation.com/factcheck-qanda-was-katy-faust-correct-on-same-sex-family-studies-and-kids-rights-46257

Lol

Generally, anything that is between consenting adults that doesn't harm others should be legal. Whether or not the increased risk of birth defects counts as harming others and I'd have to think about. Under these criteria I'd say polygamy should probably be legal too.

Oh and he absolutely does care.

If you take time out of your day to post on a topic, clearly you must care at least a little bit about it. Its ok to care, even just a little bit.

In the way it's being used as a reason to not allow gay couples to marry but allow heterosexual couples.

I have a friend that married while working overseas to a foreigner, it wasn't that trivial to get a visa for her. Still happens of course.

How so?

inb4 you took the time out of your day to comment

Edited by 433: 13/8/2015 09:10:25 PM

Well it was commonplace years ago for relatives to get married. So yes, they can if they want. They're two consenting adults.

There is of course the problem of increased risk of congenital defects if they were to have children.

And, clearly, you do care.

What I think is irrelevant.

I'm just curious what proponents of gay marriage argue.

Please answer the question.

Edited by 433: 13/8/2015 08:43:35 PM

Do you?

I thought you didn't care.

In what way? Two people of the same sex getting married for financial/Visa purposes could be straight for all its worth. Its got nothing to do with actual gay people getting married and everything to do with those in society, straight, gay, bi, whatever, who look to take advantage of a situation.

Do supporters of same sex marriage also support the rights of siblings getting married?

Just a question.

At best I'd put that in the "against marriage in general" category but it has a fair whiff of "gays can't be trusted with marriage" as well.

Essentially this one. Marriages of convenience, helping people get residency Australia etc. Think about it, we all know of someone who has married somebody for visa reasons. Marriage equality could potentially increase such marriages. Many, if not most of these people may not even be homosexual or lesbian.

Again, i'm not saying I think this is a valid reason not to have marriage equality but its a legitimate concern.

Interesting, I'm open to arguments and I understand that people have prejudiced views. I just want those that do, recognise that they are in fact bigoted/prejudiced/homophobic.

What do they mean by misuse? Sham marriages to take advantage of benefits? They'll be more promiscuous and not take the sanctity of marriage seriously? Why would homosexuals be more likely to misuse marriage over heterosexuals?

I don't have a problem with criticism of many of the anti-gay marriage arguments, in fact I, like many, will argue in favour of marriage equality with an individual who argues against it. What I do have a problem with is people like yourself forcing potential social exclusion upon those with dissenting views by instantly labeling them as homophobic or bigoted. I've often argued about this subject with my parents and other older family members who believe that changes in marriage laws could lead to their misuse. I don't agree with them and argue that this already occurs in heterosexual relationships, but I do see some logic in the argument and can also see that there is nothing necessarily homophobic in this view.

Yep it's impossible for people to actually think this is right and people are just too afraid of being "browbeaten" to speak up :lol:

So smug :lol:

That isn't equality, you are discriminating against Muslims, Mormons and anyone else who believes in polygamy. Bigot.

You are wasting your time attempting to use logic and the sanctimonious, he is protected by an impenetrable armour of smug.

I care when society is browbeat into submission and no longer has the will or the voice to self determination.

^ This!

Theres homeless people, people living in tents at Belmore Park in front of Central Station in a "rich" country like Australia, and people want gay marriage, seems like we have our priorities straight! :-({|=