Gay marriage in Australia: Yes or No?

[The_Doc_Man]

@StanHansen - there are kids out there who would LOVE to have a permanent, stable family regardless of its structure. And don't forget that in many cases, one parent has been "living a lie" for years and finally cannot stay silent, so "comes out." The marriage breaks up. And if for some reason the straight parent is unfit due to drugs, alcohol, or other personal demons, that leaves the other parent - the gay one - to take care of the kid or kids. If you have a ban on gay adoption, that means that the new parent cannot adopt the kids even if that is what was desired.

If the floodgates are open, it is time to let them flood and see what washes out with the tides. Once we have some data on the subject, we should be able to decide which is worse - two gay parents or no parents at all.

 

[Galaxiom]

Once we have some data on the subject, we should be able to decide which is worse - two gay parents or no parents at all.

I don't know if you meant it to come out quite like that but what you have said is quite offensive. The presumption that having same sex parents is a bad thing has no basis whatsoever. Many people have grown up in families with same sex parents and are perfectly well adjusted, despite the negative reactions of some in the general public.

Some of them, such as Jodie Foster who was raised by her mother and lesbian partner, are very well known.

MLB player Joe Valentine was raised by his mom, Deb Valentine, and her partner, Doreen Price. He never knew his father growing up. Valentine says, "It's no different than having a mother and father. These are the two women who raised me, and they are wonderful people. It's just not a big deal to me. Why should it be?"

 

[Galaxiom]

And just in case you think it is all about having two mothers:

Gays with Kids | Blog

The Gays with Kids blog provides regular news and updates for gay men or queer men looking to become dads. Featuring news on gay surrogacy and much more!

www.gayswithkids.com

 

[The_Doc_Man]

G, my statement was made dispassionately in the same sense that any scientist would prefer - to make no statement that presumes something about the question being considered. And it is a question that is worth answering definitively.

I sense that you are offended with me more easily now after my comment about cleft palates in a complex context, and as I recall I apologized unconditionally for that one. But I am not going to walk around looking over my shoulder to see whom I might accidentally offend next. To me, "political correctness" and the culture of calling down EVERY POSSIBLE OFFENSE is merely trying to cancel ME because I don't think like YOU do. And for that, I am deeply offended because YOU are implicitly being dismissive of my own worth.

If I added my passion in the context of the statement to which you objected, I would state clearly and without hesitation that having LOVING parents, whatever else they might be, is the most important thing in a child's life. I put no other qualifiers on the parents than that they must be loving and caring with regard to their child's well-being.

I have a gay step-daughter who is an absolutely WONDERFUL person; hard-working, honest, responsible, gainfully employed, married, intelligent, ... I could go on but I hope you get the point. I am NOT anti-gay at all. Many of my best friends in college WERE gay. Once we established everyone's preferences, we had no issues. In fact, my best friend during my bachelor's degree years was also my bridge partner, who was Lesbian. We both lusted after Amy Irving at the time.

My occasional dispassionate stance is because I try not to muddy my own question by injecting a presupposition of the answer. And the question of whether having two gay parents or no parents at all is better DESERVES to be settled. Because if my presupposition IS correct, a lot of religious folks who are anti-gay need to have their noses rubbed into something. But it will take a dispassionate study to be able to dig up the manure that SHOULD be rubbed in their faces for having an anti-gay stance.

Does that help you understand that I just don't think quite the way you do? And if my left-handed way of thinking seems odd, maybe you just don't recognize that sometimes I am looking at the forest; sometimes I am contemplating the trees. There is a LOT of sub-text in what I do and how I think. Forgive me if I choose not to ALWAYS share my stream of chaos that some people call consciousness. (I actually make no claims either way.)

 

[Galaxiom]

G, my statement was made dispassionately in the same sense that any scientist would prefer - to make no statement that presumes something about the question being considered. And it is a question that is worth answering definitively.

Doc. I didn't take your original statement in an offensive way because, as I indicated, I didn't believe you meant it in that way. I know that you are not prejudiced against gay people.

That you of all people would use a comparison about which was "worse" is more an indication of unconscious prejudices pervasive in our cultures. ACLUDAS made the same gaff in post #24.

What I was trying to say was that we need to recognise these embedded prejudices make the lives of some people more difficult and need to be purged.

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

But I am not going to walk around looking over my shoulder to see whom I might accidentally offend next. To me, "political correctness" and the culture of calling down EVERY POSSIBLE OFFENSE is merely trying to cancel ME because I don't think like YOU do. And for that, I am deeply offended because YOU are implicitly being dismissive of my own worth.

Brilliant Richard.

The culture of political correctness is difficult to come to terms with.

It is very easy to just keep your head down, but that's not the way to tackle it. It needs people to be willing to speak up.

What's the saying I'm looking for? It just takes a good man to remain quiet for evil to flourish.... something like that....

Of course, it should now be "person"

 

[NauticalGent]

The recent posts on the thread are stellar...

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

I just saw this and thought it's relevant to my previous post:-

Proposed free speech law will make English universities liable for breaches

No-platformed speakers could get compensation under plans unveiled by Gavin Williamson

www.theguardian.com

 

[The_Doc_Man]

That you of all people would use a comparison about which was "worse" is more an indication of unconscious prejudices pervasive in our cultures.

OK, G, I will accept that there is a problem in any anti-gay culture. But the only way to fight off that kind of prejudice is to find some very cold, very hard, extremely dispassionate facts through solid research so that you can then rub that research in someone else's face.

For that explicit reason, the question of "two gay parents vs. no parents at all" (and I will add "vs. single-parent") NEEDS to be definitely analyzed so that some religious types will eventually be forced to eat their words. Is that a better statement of the sense of my statement? The only way to push back against idiots is with hard facts that force them to slink back into the darkness of their narrow little minds.

For all of the religious people here, as long as you don't harbor serious anti-gay sentiments, I consider you as non-targets for that "rubbing in the face" tactic. If you see the importance of loving others as you love yourself, and don't buy into the anti-gay rhetoric, I mostly don't otherwise care about the details of what you believe.

It's a touchy subject for me precisely because so many of my friends from 35+ years ago were harmed by stupid anti-gay prejudices. One of my gamer buddies lost his job where I was working due to a false accusation about "making a pass" at a guy who was exceptionally straight to the point of being virulently macho. It STILL hurts me that I couldn't help my friend at the time, but I wasn't there and couldn't be a witness.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

What's the saying I'm looking for? It just takes a good man to remain quiet for evil to flourish.... something like that....

Often attributed to Edmund Burke, but it actually is thought to have originated from John Stuart Mill:

“Bad men need nothing more to compass their ends, than that good men should look on and do nothing.”

 

[Uncle Gizmo]

Another quote (I shall probably miss-quote) I just heard the other day which I also think is apt,

You can never be wrong doing the right thing.... Something like that!

 

[harpygaggle]

This is a really serious question to ask. I believe in gender equality and I don't want to hurt people just because of their appearance. I can't really decide which I will side because each side has its own point.

 

[Dandy55]

I don't see anything wrong with same-sex marriage, I think it can help many children from the shelter to find a new family, albeit an unusual one.

Do you support gay marriage? I'm also interested in it.

 

[harpygaggle]

Its ironic that same sex marriage can be explained by science, but being questioned by Religious groups.
If norms can be changed over time, why religion teachings can not? Any ideas?

 

[Galaxiom]

Its ironic that same sex marriage can be explained by science, but being questioned by Religious groups.
If norms can be changed over time, why religion teachings can not? Any ideas?

Religion depends on unity through shared belief and the notion of infallibility. There cannot be scope for variation so it is outlawed.

 

[NauticalGent]

Religion depends on unity through shared belief and the notion of infallibility. There cannot be scope for variation so it is outlawed.

Interesting comment. I married into a devout Pentecostal family and I often find myself feeling like a square peg surrounded by round holes. But I still accompany of darling spouse to church every Sunday just to spend time with her. She doesn't press me to change (get "saved") and I hold my tongue when I hear something stupid and contradictory.

The church we attend is VERY popular - they have to do three services each Sunday and they are full. But there is a rift developing. The old timers want a black and white message with the "wages of sin" up front and center - but they only make up about a quarter of the congregation. The young bucks like the new message because there is leeway given and an absence of judgment and forgiveness is there for the asking.

I do enjoy listening to the moaning and groaning - a wee bit too much!

 

[harpygaggle]

Religion depends on unity through shared belief and the notion of infallibility. There cannot be scope for variation so it is outlawed.

Religion depends on unity through shared belief and the notion of infallibility. There cannot be scope for variation so it is outlawed.

Awesome, well explained. Thank you.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

The whole problem with religion is that, unlike technology, we have never had a "download" of a new version to correct the numerous errors in version 1.0 of the given religion. So when folks attempt on their own to correct the errors, we get a "schism' in the "mother church" and we get a new splinter group.

 

[AccessBlaster]

The whole problem with religion is that, unlike technology, we have never had a "download" of a new version to correct the numerous errors in version 1.0 of the given religion.

Old Testament > New Testament that was a biggie.

 

[Isaac]

Well this is an interesting thread to read over, that's for sure! I won't go into what I really think, as it would do no good at all and change no minds. But I will make a slightly less germaine comment (vs. the most recent posts), which actually is germaine if you go back to the title of the post. I'm not an Australian, so they can do whatever they want, all I'll say is this. Back in the 90's and early 2000's, people who worried about gay marriage with their "slippery slope" arguments were mocked as being overly paranoid. "That will never happen", they said, "Why do you care if two men get married, how is that hurting you?", they said. Except then it did happen. Fast forward 30 years, and of course the movement now wants a lot more than just to 'get married'. Now they come after any organization, group, teaching, church or university basketball game (think ORU and the recent chaos surrounding their unlikely sudden success), or pretty much anyone who chooses to hold a more traditional view (let's say for religious reasons) on the subject.

The point that I'm making right now isn't as much about the MERITS of these arguments. It's merely to point out the acceleration and evolution of the demands of the movement, so to speak, and the absolute falsehood of anyone telling you "All it is is two people getting married, how will that hurt you". Uhhh....No. That's not at all where it ends.

You may agree or disagree with where it's going, that's fine, I respect you. I don't respect the false notion that simply wanting to marry is the end of the story - and that falsehood should be thoroughly repudiated wherever it is found, based on what we now know in countries that have gone through it.