The NZ Herald Gay Marriage Poll discussion

To post in this sub-forum you must have made 100 posts or have Trust status or have completed our ID Verification

Forums › Politics › The NZ Herald Gay Marriage Poll discussion

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | ... | 41

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#787201 26-Mar-2013 13:17

I'm not anti gay nor am I religious however I am against this bill going through but it will nonetheless.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

ajobbins

5052 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#787203 26-Mar-2013 13:24

jeffnz: I'm not anti gay nor am I religious however I am against this bill going through but it will nonetheless.

Against on what grounds?

Twitter: ajobbins

sleemanj

1490 posts

Uber Geek

#787212 26-Mar-2013 13:28

Marriage should quite simply be abolished in the eyes of the state. The word is too closely entwined with religions for a secular state to have anything to do with it.

NOBODY should be allowed (for want of a better word, I'm meaning, there should be simply no such thing to "get") to get "married", and ALL existing "marriages" between living people should be reassigned to be civil unions, the legal state of which should be a SUPERSET of all that is covered by the present laws surrounding marriage, a superset in order to ensure that nobody is excluded the opportunity to willingly and freely enter (and exit) a civil union without exceptional reason [fraud, consent...]

If somebody wants to have some supposedly pious religious state anointed on them by a fellow in a silly suit (or hat), and that is called marriage to them, well that's fine, but it should have ZERO effect on any status legally. If you want legal recognition, you should fill out Civil Union paperwork.

The words marriage, marry, husband, and wife should be expunged from all our legislation excepting in the specific case of recognising such unions which were made overseas to treat them as NZ Civil Unions for the purpose of all laws in NZ.

---
James Sleeman
I sell lots of stuff for electronic enthusiasts...

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#787213 26-Mar-2013 13:29

I don't believe it is needed.

I'm not going to get into an argument about it was just voicing an opinion, mine. Suffice we are all entitled to one and I don't think i need to justify it or leave myself open to someone thrusting theirs down my throat because it doesn't agree with theirs.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

ajobbins

5052 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#787214 26-Mar-2013 13:32

^ I tend to agree with you James. I think some of the complexity around this (And also one of the things that currently makes a Civil Union inferior) is that a Civil Union in New Zealand does not necessarily have any legal recognition outside of New Zealand. As long as they can solve that, I think it would work.

I don't have a problem with calling it a Marriage, or a Civil Union - as long as everyone has equal access to it.

Twitter: ajobbins

ajobbins

5052 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#787216 26-Mar-2013 13:36

jeffnz: I don't believe it is needed.

I'm not going to get into an argument about it was just voicing an opinion, mine. Suffice we are all entitled to one and I don't think i need to justify it or leave myself open to someone thrusting theirs down my throat because it doesn't agree with theirs.

I prefer to label it 'educating you on why you are wrong' ;)

You're certainly entitled to you opionion - my concern is that your stance is based on mis-information or mis-understanding of the current law and what the new law would achieve.

The argument that a Civil Union provides all the same rights to same sex couples as Marriage does is simply untrue. If they were in fact totally equal - one of them would be redundant, but we all know that is not the case.

Twitter: ajobbins

mattwnz

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#787217 26-Mar-2013 13:37

MikeSkyrme:

You hope politicians will not be influenced by the majority? That would be anti democratic.....

WHen has that stopped them? The only true poll is to do a referendum, but they never seem to get those right with the question wording. Nor do they seem to do decent referendums during the elections, which is the best and cheapest time tro do them.
Internet polls are a waste of time really, as they don't reach all demographics. I don't bother with them.

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

sittingduckz

680 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

#787218 26-Mar-2013 13:39

jeffnz: I don't believe it is needed.

I'm not going to get into an argument about it was just voicing an opinion, mine. Suffice we are all entitled to one and I don't think i need to justify it or leave myself open to someone thrusting theirs down my throat because it doesn't agree with theirs.

Haven't us hetrosexuals been thrusting our views down their throats for centuries?
I know several gay couples who are wonderful people in very stable relationships, they just want to be recognised, so why can't they?

I'm not a complete idiot, I still have some parts missing.

ajobbins

5052 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#787220 26-Mar-2013 13:44

mattwnz: When has that stopped them? The only true poll is to do a referendum, but they never seem to get those right with the question wording. Nor do they seem to do decent referendums during the elections, which is the best and cheapest time tro do them.
Internet polls are a waste of time really, as they don't reach all demographics. I don't bother with them.

We can't have a referendum every time we want to change the law. That is why we have multiple readings and a select committee process where anyone is freely allowed to make a submission.

This consultation process on this bill has been thorough and there has been plenty of time and opportunity for any New Zealander to make a submission for or against the bill. Thousands of us did, with the majority in support.

If you have an opinion on the matter but chose not to submit to the select committee, then you have (IMO) waived your right and opportunity to have your opinion heard.

Twitter: ajobbins

ajobbins

5052 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#787222 26-Mar-2013 13:47

sittingduckz: Haven't us hetrosexuals been thrusting our views down their throats for centuries?
I know several gay couples who are wonderful people in very stable relationships, they just want to be recognised, so why can't they?

Absolutely. As a heterosexual person in a heterosexual relationship that will likely some day become a heterosexual marriage I fully recognise the fact that allowing same sex marriage has absolutely no effect on my own relationship, and I recognise the inequality that my gay friends, colleges and fellow citizens currently face. It's time to do what is right and fair.

Twitter: ajobbins

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#787225 26-Mar-2013 13:54

ajobbins:
jeffnz: I don't believe it is needed.

I'm not going to get into an argument about it was just voicing an opinion, mine. Suffice we are all entitled to one and I don't think i need to justify it or leave myself open to someone thrusting theirs down my throat because it doesn't agree with theirs.

I prefer to label it 'educating you on why you are wrong' ;)

You're certainly entitled to you opionion - my concern is that your stance is based on mis-information or mis-understanding of the current law and what the new law would achieve.

The argument that a Civil Union provides all the same rights to same sex couples as Marriage does is simply untrue. If they were in fact totally equal - one of them would be redundant, but we all know that is not the case.

Thanks for your concern, rest assured I'm not misinformed.

As I said I'm not going to be dragged into an argument over this.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

mattwnz

20141 posts

Uber Geek

#787227 26-Mar-2013 13:55

ajobbins:
We can't have a referendum every time we want to change the law. That is why we have multiple readings and a select committee process where anyone is freely allowed to make a submission.

I can't see why not, as they can be done at the same time as an election, which means the cost is minimal. These decisions also take years, so it is not a new question. I would say the majority of people wouldn't have a clue about select committees etc, and it is not as though it gets all that much publicity. People just ignore day to day politics, and if you have been to a house sitting, and some of the rubbish that goes on it it, I can understand why. They should have proper hard benches like they have in the english Parliament to keep them alert, our house is pure luxury.

John2010

532 posts

Ultimate Geek

#787228 26-Mar-2013 13:57

Well, according to the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary (which is an authority on the English language) marriage is the "Legally recognised personal union entered into by a man and a woman usually with the intention of living together and having sexual relations, and entailing property and inheritance rights". And traditionally, in most societies that is what it has been.

Now, I have no real reason to object to homosexuals having similar rights but it is not "marriage". What they are doing is hijacking English words and usage to their own selfish objectives.

For example, we (including even the prime minister) are not allowed to refer to brightly coloured clothing as being "gay" anymore else homosexuals invoke their "jump off bridges clause". Now before any of them get angry over my saying that, they should look up gay in a dictionary, in which they will find there are multiple meanings for "gay", of which homosexuality is just but one. Having a gay time, being gaily dressed, dancing the Gay Gordons, having a first name Gay (but maybe Gaye would be acceptable), are all up for demise.

If we carry on this way letting them run rampant converting the English language into "homosexual speak" only we will soon be threatened with the "jumping off bridge clause" whenever we say things like "I am going camping next week", the Queen will have to think up something else to call herself, female dogs won't be able to be called bitches anymore, etc, etc.

jeffnz

2870 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#787229 26-Mar-2013 13:57

sittingduckz:
jeffnz: I don't believe it is needed.

I'm not going to get into an argument about it was just voicing an opinion, mine. Suffice we are all entitled to one and I don't think i need to justify it or leave myself open to someone thrusting theirs down my throat because it doesn't agree with theirs.

Haven't us hetrosexuals been thrusting our views down their throats for centuries?
I know several gay couples who are wonderful people in very stable relationships, they just want to be recognised, so why can't they?

I'm hetero and I haven't.

I know a gay couple that couldn't give a dam about being recognised.

Galaxy S10

Garmin Fenix 5

sleemanj

1490 posts

Uber Geek

#787232 26-Mar-2013 14:00

ajobbins: is that a Civil Union in New Zealand does not necessarily have any legal recognition outside of New Zealand.

Possibly, but I imagine that the problem of international recognition would be there if it's a same-sex civil union or a same-sex marriage.

The international recognition of current marriage is largely non-existent by default, it's pretty much up to each country what they accept as a marriage, from which countries.

Of course, this is a moot point. Our country might be finally willing to accept and even encourage same-sex marriage now, but I think that the unwashed masses would object too strenuously to be palatable for the law makers if their marriage were to be redefined as a civil union :-/ Maybe in 20 years.

---
James Sleeman
I sell lots of stuff for electronic enthusiasts...

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | ... | 41