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 | ... | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41

4338 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 166

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#864304 23-Jul-2013 14:46

kyhwana2:
Klipspringer:

This is true. And while I would like to keep religion out of this thread, it is well known in the Christian faith that in the end times Christians will be persecuted like never before.

Oh, here we go again, the poor old tired story of "wah wah, we're being persecuted because people we don't like now have the same rights we do/can do things we don't want them to".

How about you get over it already and realise not everyone follows your crazy-ass religion.

kyhwana2:
Klipspringer:

Laws like this cannot be reversed. That takes a revolution. And I believe that's where NZ is heading.

And if you want to bring a revolution over stuff like this, you'll be first against the wall, buddy.

You are your sides version of the "crazy-ass" religious bigot. It is hard to have an intelligent discussion on any issue when people like this exist on both sides.

1080p

1332 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 152
Inactive user

#864310 23-Jul-2013 14:51

Klipspringer: But I don't hate. I dont know why people always assume hate?

The only people that seem to "hate" are the ones who live these lifestyles. Ie, in this case the gays. Everytime these type of threads come up the hate is always directed one way.

The comment was a simple poor choice of words, I think it is obvious that no one is hating. At least knowing that would require something that is not transmitted over the internet well.

Klipspringer: So the yard stick is only the “national average” Why not make the yard stick the optimum best situation, ie healthy loving home with heterosexual parents?

I think the point was an attempt to determine whether or not such a yard stick even made sense. The national average is a good place to begin from and the results make it apparent that the argument regarding kids makes no sense after all. The largest study conducted to date proves that the gender of the parents is irrelevant as anyone with a rational mind already knew.

Klipspringer: Well said. But hetrosexual families can supply love too. A point Urzila seems to be missing.

She didn't say that heterosexual families cannot supply love. You're putting words in her mouth.

rossmnz: However I still maintain that a child from a strong, mature, financially-sound heterosexual family unit is inherantly healthier and better off than one from a strong, mature, financially-sound homosexual family unit.

It appears that your contention is incorrect given the evidence. Do you have any evidence to counter?

rossmnz: I contend that the study is not "comparing apples with apples". It should also be noted that the person doing the research is homosexual himself with two adopted kids - Im not saying that this makes the research invalid - just that it needs to be considered.

I'm not sure why the sexual orientation of the researcher would matter.

Klipspringer: Some things are better left for the woman of the house. And some things a man can simply do better.

What are those things, precisely?

bradstewart

4338 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 166

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#864311 23-Jul-2013 14:51

Klipspringer:
alasta: I describe it as disturbing because I am beginning to believe that there is an extreme degree of contempt bubbling away between forward thinking urban liberals versus those with more traditional views. The same sex marriage debate is just one outlet of that hatred, and in the future we are probably going to see a lot more of this.

This is true. And while I would like to keep religion out of this thread, it is well known in the Christian faith that in the end times Christians will be persecuted like never before.

I'm yet to see any evidence of this happening.

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user

#864320 23-Jul-2013 15:06

1080p:
Klipspringer: Well said. But hetrosexual families can supply love too.A point Urzila seems to be missing.

She didn't say that heterosexual families cannot supply love. You're putting
words in her mouth.

No I'm not

"I" said hetrosexual families can supply love too. I did not say she thinks hetrosexual couples can't supply love. I said she misses that point. How is that putting words in her mouth?

1080p:

rossmnz: However I still maintain that a child from a strong, mature, financially-sound heterosexual family unit is inherantly healthier and better off than one from a strong, mature, financially-sound homosexual family unit.

It appears that your contention is incorrect given the evidence. Do you have any evidence to counter?

Yes given that already

Klipspringer:

rossmnz: I contend that the study is not "comparing apples with apples". It should also be noted that the person doing the research is homosexual himself with two adopted kids - Im not saying that this makes the research invalid - just that it needs to be considered.

LOL. Its just biased. Here is a study about all of these studies ...

New Study On Homosexual Parents Tops All Previous Research

1080p:
Klipspringer: Some things are better left for the woman of the house. And some things a man can simply do better.

What are those things, precisely?

WOW. Really. You want me to list the things.

You obviously not a parent yet.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80662 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41090

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#864322 23-Jul-2013 15:11

Klipspringer: LOL. Its just biased. Here is a study about all of these studies ...

New Study On Homosexual Parents Tops All Previous Research

And surely a study made by the Family Research Council, a right-wing Texas-based institution that describes itself as "Christian organization promoting the traditional family unit and the Judeo-Christian value system upon which it is built." is not biased at all.

One thing is "science" and another thing is "pseudo-science".

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user

#864324 23-Jul-2013 15:14

freitasm:
Klipspringer: LOL. Its just biased. Here is a study about all of these studies ...

New Study On Homosexual Parents Tops All Previous Research

And surely a study made by the Family Research Council, a right-wing Texas-based institution that describes itself as "Christian organization promoting the traditional family unit and the Judeo-Christian value system upon which it is built." is not biased at all.

One thing is "science" and another thing is "pseudo-science".

Just as biased as a gay man with kids trying to convince the world that gay parenting is better

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

tardtasticx

3084 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 483

#864327 23-Jul-2013 15:18

alasta:
Klipspringer: Now why on earth would ZM go and stir the pot like this? All its doing is creating hatred and widening the gap between groups of people.

I agree. Why would someone want to be married in a church that is philosophically opposed to the nature of that marriage? The only motivation I can think of is an antagonistic one.

Thats just silly and you know it. Everyone wants to do their wedding in their own way, some in a church and some not.

Are you going to say that my parents have antagonistic motifs for wanting to marry into a church? My mum was married once before and divorced, she conceived me before she was married to my father (though was not born), yet they still wanted to marry in a church. The church said no because of these reasons.

Now because my parents and many other couples who were in a similar situation are straight, you don't think that its antagonistic for them to do this? But the moment a gay couple wants to get married in a church, and have a beautiful wedding with all their friends and family, just like everyone else can, you think they're trying to get one over on religion and bring down the church. Sounds pretty logical to me.

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user

#864332 23-Jul-2013 15:20

tardtasticx:
alasta:
Klipspringer: Now why on earth would ZM go and stir the pot like this? All its doing is creating hatred and widening the gap between groups of people.

I agree. Why would someone want to be married in a church that is philosophically opposed to the nature of that marriage? The only motivation I can think of is an antagonistic one.

Thats just silly and you know it. Everyone wants to do their wedding in their own way, some in a church and some not.

Are you going to say that my parents have antagonistic motifs for wanting to marry into a church? My mum was married once before and divorced, she conceived me before she was married to my father (though was not born), yet they still wanted to marry in a church. The church said no because of these reasons.

Now because my parents and many other couples who were in a similar situation are straight, you don't think that its antagonistic for them to do this? But the moment a gay couple wants to get married in a church, and have a beautiful wedding with all their friends and family, just like everyone else can, you think they're trying to get one over on religion and bring down the church. Sounds pretty logical to me.

I cant get married in a Catholic church because I am not catholic.

Are u saying that gay couples should be able to marry in Catholic churches despite their religion?

To add to this: I would not want to get married in a Catholic church simply because the church does not share the same faith as me. Is that discrimination? Not at all.

But obviously the "gay agenda" would think otherwise.

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
80662 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 41090

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#864336 23-Jul-2013 15:24

Klipspringer:
freitasm:
Klipspringer: LOL. Its just biased. Here is a study about all of these studies ...

New Study On Homosexual Parents Tops All Previous Research

And surely a study made by the Family Research Council, a right-wing Texas-based institution that describes itself as "Christian organization promoting the traditional family unit and the Judeo-Christian value system upon which it is built." is not biased at all.

One thing is "science" and another thing is "pseudo-science".

Just as biased as a gay man with kids trying to convince the world that gay parenting is better

I disagree. Dr Simon Crouch bio reads:

"Dr Simon Robert Crouch is a public health doctor and researcher at the McCaughey VicHealth Centre, Melbourne School of Population Health, the University of Melbourne. Having previously worked on both health policies and health programs as a medical officer at the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing Simon’s PhD studies are now focusing on the health and wellbeing of children with same-sex attracted parents. As lead investigator of the Australian Study of Child Health in Same-Sex Families (ACHESS) Simon is working with Professor Elizabeth Waters of the Jack Brockhoff Child Health and Wellbeing Program and Associate Professor Ruth McNair from the Department of General Practice."

I think it's a bit higher in terms of "science" than a non-profit organisation that openly promotes traditional values. His work is peer reviewed by other academics and follow science standards.

Referral links: Quic Broadband (free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE) | Samsung | AliExpress | Wise | Sharesies

Support Geekzone by subscribing (browse ads-free), or making a one-off or recurring donation through PressPatron.

alasta

6891 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3365

Trusted

Subscriber

#864349 23-Jul-2013 15:35

tardtasticx: Are you going to say that my parents have antagonistic motifs for wanting to marry into a church? My mum was married once before and divorced, she conceived me before she was married to my father (though was not born), yet they still wanted to marry in a church. The church said no because of these reasons.

So did they move on and do it elsewhere, or did they whine and moan about the church making a decision that it was well within its rights to make? If the latter then yes, that would be antagonistic.

Churches, like very other property owner, shouldn't have to justify what they do or don't allow under their watch even if their rules are irrational or ill conceived.

alasta

6891 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3365

Trusted

Subscriber

#864350 23-Jul-2013 15:38

freitasm: I think Adam's point is that anyone's "disagreement" is not relevant to the swing participants. What they're doing is done in their private life and has no effect in anyone's lives, therefore, someone "disagreeing" with it as a moot point.

I personally believe that most people would benefit from having less salt in their diet. That doesn't mean that I go around critisising people who eat too much salt, but it's an entirely valid opinion to hold.

Geekzone

Want to support Geekzone and browse the site without the ads? Subscribe to Geekzone now (monthly, annual and lifetime options).

ajobbins

5053 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1279

Trusted

#864368 23-Jul-2013 15:51

Klipspringer:
ajobbins:
surfisup1000: People are not allowed to disagree about topics that don't affect them? Using your logic for example, people should not be allowed to disagree with a distant war or another persons infidelity or the anti-smacking law if you don't have kids.

Both the examples you have provided relate to the welfare or safety of others. Wars kill people and smacking can hurt (and sometimes kill) children. Unfair comparisons to something that is really about what people want to safely do in their lives.

Oh here we go, setting up a strawman again

Do you actually know what a strawman argument is? It is in fact your argument that is the 'strawman'.

Comparing something that consenting adults choose to do behind closed doors that generally does not put them in harms way to things that cause harm and death to others often without their willing participation you're not comparing apples with apples. You're trying to misrepresent my argument to make yours sound more reasonable.

Is it OK to have a opinion about someone's private/sex life? No, as long as no one is at risk from harm. If you want to have such an opinion, keep it to yourself. Using it as a reason to try and justify withholding a right to a person is wrong.

Is it OK to have an opinion on on war, smacking etc? Yes, because where peoples rights are being violated, as a good human being you should try and stand up for them.

Twitter: ajobbins

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user

#864378 23-Jul-2013 15:59

ajobbins:

Is it OK to have a opinion about someone's private/sex life? No, as long as no one is at risk from harm. If you want to have such an opinion, keep it to yourself. Using it as a reason to try and justify withholding a right to a person is wrong.

Is it OK to have an opinion on on war, smacking etc? Yes, because where peoples rights are being violated, as a good human being you should try and stand up for them.

Why are you bringing sex into this discussion?

bradstewart

4338 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 166

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#864383 23-Jul-2013 16:07

Klipspringer:
ajobbins:

Is it OK to have a opinion about someone's private/sex life? No, as long as no one is at risk from harm. If you want to have such an opinion, keep it to yourself. Using it as a reason to try and justify withholding a right to a person is wrong.

Is it OK to have an opinion on on war, smacking etc? Yes, because where peoples rights are being violated, as a good human being you should try and stand up for them.

Why are you bringing sex into this discussion?

Because that's what this entire argument is about at its root. Also you brought it up 2 pages ago.

Klipspringer

2385 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 286
Inactive user

#864389 23-Jul-2013 16:08

bradstewart:
Klipspringer:
ajobbins:

Is it OK to have a opinion about someone's private/sex life? No, as long as no one is at risk from harm. If you want to have such an opinion, keep it to yourself. Using it as a reason to try and justify withholding a right to a person is wrong.

Is it OK to have an opinion on on war, smacking etc? Yes, because where peoples rights are being violated, as a good human being you should try and stand up for them.

Why are you bringing sex into this discussion?

Because that's what this entire argument is about at its root. Also you brought it up 2 pages ago.

No I never. Quote me

The root of this argument is "gay parenting", thats got nothing to do with sex.

Its similar to you implying that sex between me and my wife is the root of how I bring up my kids.

1 | ... | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41