Gays and Marriage

Forums › Off topic › Gays and Marriage

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

2260 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#664607 31-Jul-2012 14:14

I'm with the majority above, and support it.

I have moved across the ditch. Now residing in Melbourne as a VOIP/Video Technical Trainer/Engineer.

scuwp

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#664608 31-Jul-2012 14:16

kyhwana2:
scuwp: OK, I will have a crack at a sort of opposing view...

Marriage is a defined term, why are we trying to redefine it?

People who don't like change need to either get over it or go diaf.

That's not very nice! Way to put a constructive intelligent conversation in the gutter.

For the record I don't care whether it gets allowed or not. We are all equal as far as I am concerned, and each to their own. Oh...and I like a polygamy idea! Count me in Lol

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

KevinL

656 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#664609 31-Jul-2012 14:16

MikeSkyrme: I think your point re a civil union not having the same legal rights as a marriage is what really hits the nail on the head. What can a couple in a civil union not do that a married couple can do?

For the record, I personally do not care who marries who, male or female.

There's a government factsheet here: http://www.beehive.govt.nz/node/20064

The key difference is that same sex couples cannot adopt according to the current Adoption Act - one partner can adopt, and the other can apply retrospectively for guardianship but the legal implications are different than if both were allowed to adopt. This was the case for de facto couples until the High Court extended the Adoption Act.

Civil unions are also not recognised abroad in the same way that a marriage is (not that a same-sex marriage would be necessarily recognised in certain other countries, but it's probably more likely than a civil union).

kiwitrc

4123 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#664610 31-Jul-2012 14:17

Anything that pisses of the religious nuts gets my support.

nickb800

2715 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#664620 31-Jul-2012 14:30

KevinL:
scuwp: OK, I will have a crack at a sort of opposing view...

Marriage is a defined term, why are we trying to redefine it? Marriage is between a man and woman, end of story. Gay and lesbian couples claim to only want the same rights as married couples, and guess what...they do under current laws in a variety of ways including civil unions.

"Man" and "Woman" are also defined terms. When woman wanted the same "rights" as men, we didn't go out and change the definition of "women" so they could enjoy an equal status in modern society.

I am all for non-discrimination and equal rights no matter what your gender or sexual orientation, but a car is a car, and a truck is a truck. Both have the same rules and rights on the road, lets not try to fix something that isn't broken. Isn't this just more PC nonsense?

The issue is under current legislation a civil union doesn't have all the same legal rights and benefits that a marriage would. If they redefined civil unions to have exactly the same legal rights and benefits as marriage, then maybe there would be less argument - but if civil unions and marriage are exactly the same, why not call it the same thing?

I don't believe it's PC nonsense, I think it's a clear case of equity - much in the same way as we gave women the right to vote.

This is a pretty key piece of information, and I suspect that many people don't know this and thus assume civil unions are the same as marriage legally.

I wonder how many of the fence-sitters or light opposition understand this point

cisconz

cisconz
1341 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#664639 31-Jul-2012 14:42

Also Civil Unions dont have the 'Cool off' Seperation Period that marriages have.
I.e. marriages have the Seperation prior to divorce process, Civil Unions do not.

Hmmmm

ajobbins

5052 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#664645 31-Jul-2012 14:50

scuwp: OK, I will have a crack at a sort of opposing view...

Let me have a crack at pointing out the fundamental flaws I see in every single statement you made ;)

Marriage is a defined term, why are we trying to redefine it? Marriage is between a man and woman, end of story.

Defined by whom? Religious organisations have a different 'definition' depending on their stance, as do different cultures and countries. Something I read today mentioned the current legislation in New Zealand does not specify marriage must be between a man and a women, however marraige licences have been refused to same sex couples to date.

From the Marriage page on Wikipedia:
Marriage (also called matrimony or wedlock) is a social union or legal contract between people called spouses that creates kinship. The definition of marriage varies according to different cultures, but is usually an institution in which interpersonal relationships, usually intimate and sexual, are acknowledged.

We live in a progressive and evolving world where nothing is static. Just because something is 'defined' doesn't mean it is bound by that definition for all of eternity.

Gay and lesbian couples claim to only want the same rights as married couples, and guess what...they do under current laws in a variety of ways including civil unions.

Simply not true and this fact has been extremely well reported.

"Man" and "Woman" are also defined terms. When woman wanted the same "rights" as men, we didn't go out and change the definition of "women" so they could enjoy an equal status in modern society.

Just like we are not trying to redefine the term "Gay". Equality between a man and women is achieved by changing the law on a number of fronts (voting, pay etc etc). It is those that were 'redefined' in law that brings equality, in the same way refending the legal definition of marriage does.

I am all for non-discrimination and equal rights no matter what your gender or sexual orientation, but a car is a car, and a truck is a truck. Both have the same rules and rights on the road, lets not try to fix something that isn't broken. Isn't this just more PC nonsense?

Firstly a truck and a car do not have the same rules on the road - and I am quite happy to point out the reasons why they don't, and shouldn't. And this IS broken - we are denying people the right to equal legal recognition of their commitment relationship based on a bias against their sexuality - this, by definition, is discrimination.

Twitter: ajobbins

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.

KevinL

656 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#664653 31-Jul-2012 15:05

cisconz: Also Civil Unions dont have the 'Cool off' Seperation Period that marriages have.
I.e. marriages have the Seperation prior to divorce process, Civil Unions do not.

That's not true - Civil Unions are dissolved the same way as marriages and require a 2 year standdown period.

Otherwise I would have converted my marriage into a civil union (as you can legally do) and applied for a divorce already!

cisconz

cisconz
1341 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#664654 31-Jul-2012 15:06

In that case it has changed since inception.

However you can apply for an anulment within a certain time of creating a civil union.

Hmmmm

minimoke

750 posts

Ultimate Geek

#664657 31-Jul-2012 15:10

Oh...and I like a polygamy idea! Count me in Lol

Good on you. One less mother-in-law to be inflicted on some poor undeserving bloke!

mxpress

376 posts

Ultimate Geek

#664664 31-Jul-2012 15:17

kiwitrc: Anything that pisses of the religious nuts gets my support.

Amen to that and as a father of a gay son I have no issues with Gay marriage (and wouldn't have even if my son wasn't gay)

mxpress

nate

6473 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#664668 31-Jul-2012 15:21

scuwp: That's not very nice! Way to put a constructive intelligent conversation in the gutter.

Agreed, hence I've modified the original post to remove the unnecessary part.

Let's all keep this civil please, I (and the other mods) always dread topics like this, not because of the topic, but because the ease that it slips into name calling and other nasties.

Cheers everyone

jaymz

1133 posts

Uber Geek

#664695 31-Jul-2012 15:47

Personally I don't mind it either. - As a straight male who doesn't mind people who are gay but can be a bit uncomfortable around the really flamboyant ones!

I struggle to see the point from those who oppose it, however i havent had a good conversation with someone who opposes it.

I do however disagree with those who take it upon themselves to attack the groups who are for or against it (Case in point, the Anti Gay Marriage website Family First put up that got knocked down by a DOS attack)
But in any situation, there are always groups of people who take it too far.

Interesting to know that there are differences between a Civil Union and Marriage. I didn't know that.

NZtechfreak

4649 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#664706 31-Jul-2012 16:03

+1 in definite favour of same sex marriage here.

Agree with earlier post that they should have just legalised gay marriage when the civil unions bill was up for discussion. I guess politicians like John Key needed a bridging step to gauge public opinion before they would support gay marriage too, so in that sense it has probably served some purpose.

No relevant argument against it in my book, religion and homophobia don't qualify.

Nice that the discussion here has remained civil, opened the thread half expecting to be irate within the first few posts (I guess it helps that we're all on much the same page).

@scwup: I have no problem with someone playing devils advocate, just a suggestion that you should very clearly (beyond-a-shadow-of-a-doubt) signal that intent. FWIW I thought it was fairly clear, but my policy is to never leave any doubt, particularly in discussions that can become rather fraught like this!

Twitter: @nztechfreak
Blogs: HeadphoNZ.org

chiefie

I iz your trusted friend
5877 posts

Uber Geek

Retired Mod

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#664708 31-Jul-2012 16:07

jaymz: ...flamboyant ones!...

I think there are good many few would be uncomfortable with flamboyant ones, not just straight people...

Internet is my backyard...

«Geekzone blog: Tech 'n Chips Takeaway» «Personal blog: And then...»

Please read the Geekzone's FUG

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