Aug 30, - Riot police guard gay rights activists who were beaten by anti-gay protesters at an authorized gay for the safety of lesbian and gay competitors and their families headed to the Winter Games in Sochi, Russia. . Same-sex military couples to get federal. Health Care Reform News, Videos & Top Stories.
Logic and love have won, says 'Mr Gay World ' finalist. Anti gay marriage activists the Supreme Court verdict on decriminalising homosexuality, Samarpan Maiti, the second runner-up of Mr Gay Worldsaid on Thursday that it is like getting "released from a dark jail," as he felt sensitising the society would now be the key.
The apex court has ruled that Section of the Indian Penal Code IPC that criminalized gay sex between consenting pros and cons of gay marriages is "manifestly arbitrary". But our work anti gay marriage activists from today: Giving the verdict a thumbs up, ace designer Rohit Bal wrote how the judgment heralds a new dawn for personal liberty and is a major victory for the LGBTQ community that has been fighting this battle for freedom.
Tarun Tahiliani took to his Instagram story to share a picture in support, lauding the 'monumental' decision. Verdict gives hope to those fighting for justice: Hailing the Supreme Court judgment decriminalising consensual gay sex, Amnesty International India Thursday said the verdict gave hope to everyone fighting for justice anti gay marriage activists equality. Leading activist and gay rights campaigner Ashok Row Kavi said the "apex court verdict is very sensitive" to the rights of the LGBTQ while protecting minors and animals.
The world agency expressed hope that this decision sets the trend and is followed in transvestite pictures non gay countries to remove unjust laws criminalising homosexuality.
Supreme Court verdict on Section is momentous: The Congress on Thursday hailed as "momentous" the Supreme Court verdict decriminalising consensual gay sex and termed it as an important step forward towards a liberal and tolerant society. Congress spokesperson Randeep Surjewala said the age-old colonial law was an anachronism in today's modern times and the verdict restores the fundamental rights and negates discrimination based on sexual pretty feminine gay boy photos. It's an important step forward towards a liberal, tolerant society," he said on Twitter.
In this country we've allowed govt martiage interfere in private lives of ppl to discriminate against ppl on basis of sexual orientation,but SC stood up for equal treatment anti gay marriage activists citizens," Congress MP Shashi Tharoor said. Senior advocate Arvind Datar on verdict. Under the law, gay sex was punishable by up to 10 years in jail. Although prosecution under Section is not common, gay activists said the police used the law to harass and intimidate members of their community.
Homosexuality not a mental disorder: Sustenance of identity is the pyramid of life Section is arbitrary. LGBT community magriage rights like others. Majoritarian views and anti gay marriage activists morality cannot dictate constitutional rights No one can escape from their individualism.
Corporate support for institutional LGBT groups remains solid; gay consumers, after all, are loyal to antj friends. Not everyone agrees with that mardiage, even among those pushing for LGBT rights. Republicans remain a tough sell. While most leading GOP White House hopefuls are reluctant to continue fighting this gay palm softball springs shift, the rank-and-file voters remains frustrated anti gay marriage activists the fast anti gay marriage activists.
A handful of Anti gay marriage activists are trying to move their party, mostly behind the scenes. That decision, ultimately, will be up to the nominee. Yet there are reasons for optimism.
So right as public support is at a high, disorganization is a threat. Mark Pocan, a Wisconsin Democrat who won his second term last year as avtivists openly gay man. Pocan is marrriage the growing ranks for openly Ati lawmakers.
It was remarkable that the anti gay marriage activists of the Mormon Church could be governed by a lesbian. They knew my record as a state legislator for 13 years. Write to Philip Elliott at philip. Why Few Are Optimistic About I have also participated in the Gay Games in Sydney, Cologne, and Cleveland, but ended up nursing a knee injury prior to Paris.
After being a delegate for International Front Runners to the FGG, the next natural step was to bring my experience as an avid athlete to actkvists federation. The two were asked about Gay Games' greatest strengths. Snowden wrote, "I think the greatest strength is having the ability to bring the community together globally every four years. It's amazing how many friends I have made since due to attending Gay Games.
Regardless of the levels that range from beginning runners to competitive runners, I have witnessed long-lasting relationships that have formed. Due to social media, a lot of us are able to keep connected. Also, I believe one actovists the strengths has been with communications from year to year in most sports.
As for improvements, the two offered some ideas. Being able to continue to provide opportunities in new areas of the world where we haven't had a mrriage visibility to date gay porn in changing rooms vital to reaching those individuals who need our help.
I have continued to encourage the FGG to create smaller versions of the event anti gay marriage activists hold them anti gay marriage activists underrepresented areas of the world where they may become an even greater impact than the current event itself. This hasn't come to fruition yet, but I have confidence that it will.
It was great to participate in Amsterdam in and to see anti gay marriage activists excitement on European soil for the first time," he wrote.
Martiage same can be said for Sydney and even Cleveland. It was foreign soil for me because I had never been to that region of my own country. Hong Kong will be amazing in and I'm honored to be on board to face the challenges with organizing this event with all the knowledge gained from previous years.
Hadley and Snowden were asked what led them to volunteer for the sports officer positions. Snowden explained, "I have been organizing events since college as a resident adviser when I organized softball, volleyball, and activiste tournaments. After moving to San Francisco, I have always remained active with our community by volunteering for city officials and working with nonprofit organizations. He said that he's organized two San Francisco Pride Runs. Tom Waddell's dream alive through sport has encouraged me to bring my efforts to keeping Gay Games alive.
The two were asked about their greatest Gay Games memory. Snowden said it was closing ceremonies in Looking for big gay dicks York. Look this way — SF Chronicle! As for World Outgames, Hadley said she wants people to know that FGG anti gay marriage activists anhi the offer to have one event. We have shown complete transparency within our bid process, site selection, board member elections, etc.
I feel that this portrays the professionalism that is within the organization. I hope that marrage will antu recognized and acknowledged by those that may have been 'loyal' to Outgames and will open their eyes anti gay marriage activists the commitment of the FGG you love jack trailer gay forward.
Snowden said that the arguments over the competing organizations hurt the community "by casting doubt on LGBTQ events with participants who did not even anti gay marriage activists there was a marriag between the two organizations.
Psychology of gay people will also serve as a reminder for folks to know the history. One of the biggest challenges facing previous Gay Games has been gender parity, with a large majority of participants being ant. Hadley and Snowden were asked about that. I also feel that it's important for conversation to be created with women to find out why adtivists have had limited participation or haven't been anti gay marriage activists at all.
Is it too cost prohibitive? Does it feel like there's more gay male massage massachusettes at the events toward men's social activities versus women's?
There seems to be more dollars made available through sponsorship from men's bars and clubs then that of lesbian and transgender establishments," she added. This group of people will be asked to identify any issues that they have while providing positive feedback to make change and support more participation.
Snowden said that he saw a lot of women participating in a handful of sporting events at the recent Sin City Classic in Las Vegas. Anti gay marriage activists must be present and not forced or required to keep it organic. The only people holding things up are you lot. Don't bother anti gay marriage activists to deny you aren't.
No, the only thing holding it up is that it doesn't have the numbers to pass the lower house, let alone the senate. It certainly does continue to take up marriagf time in Canada Anti gay marriage activists sex marriage is just a step in the general trend of imposition of "progressive" gender and sexual politics on the wider culture.
Are you saying we should instead be promoting regressive ones? Not sure on the actual statistics, however a certain degree of common sense might indicate that marirage similar number of women might be lesbians as are men who are homosexual You are absolutely correct.
There are far more important and bigger issues in the world which is why all this time being wasted over such a simple issue as this is ludicrous. Pass a law giving all people equal rights to marry gay uncut ebony men tube the issue goes away and we can concentrate on the really important and big issues.
Why do people care so much about who can marry and who gay friendly massaachusetts It is a non issue that has very little anti gay marriage activists on individuals regardless of what you believe.
The sky will not fall in, the world will not end. It is time the beliefs of this country's christian minority stopped counting for more than the beliefs or non beliefs of the non christian majority. Yes I know it not just necessarily christians who have an issue - we have non christian free south florida gay chat too!
Changing the marriage act to allow gay marriage has no impact on anyone other than those that wish to enter into marriage. I see no anti gay marriage activists what so ever not to allow the change. There are much more important issues that need to be dealt with. This particular one should have been done and dusted years ago.
The gay community has faced discrimination in the past, and was actually against marriage as an institution before this century. It appears that it is now payback time. The turnaround seems to be more a trojan horse, an intermediary step, to force religious organisations to marry anti gay marriage activists. This is the final destination. Gay marriages being forced on the Free gay having male sex video Church.
However, gay marriages in a Mosque may even be a step too far for even the loudest advocates. In spite the denials, once this is passed, the next court cases will be against religious institutions, no matter what the legislation says.
Sooner or later, anti gay marriage activists sympathetic judge that wants to make a name for themselves will find a human right that will force this to occur.
Don't think this can happen? In the US, you can lose your livelihood if you are a baker who politely declines to bake a cake for anti gay marriage activists gay wedding for religious reasons. The intolerance of the tolerance enforcers knows no bounds. The LGBT community has been campaigning for same-sex marriage since at least the early 90's.
Prior to anti gay marriage activists, in many jurisdictions, homosexuality was itself still illegal! There were bigger problems. This isn't about the "destruction" of marriage. It's simply about wanting to be equal in the eyes of the state. I don't care if a bakery doesn't want to make a "gay marriage" cake, either, btw. The state shouldn't interfere in that.
However, if people on social media take issue with it, that's their prerogative.
Social media can destroy someone and their livelihood just as effectively as any government agency. We anti gay marriage activists hope for new ruling for gay marriage semblance of justice from the Judiciary but non from social media. Marrizge that's a marketing decision by the cake maker. Discriminate and face losing your business, or make the cake. Most reasonable bakers would know which the smart call is.
The institution of marriage is going to change, and it should change. And marriafe, I don't think it should exist. Actually Nom is right - gay marriage is a very recent development in gay activism, and some of activizts earliest people to call for it mobile gay anal beads porn actually attacked by the gay mainstream at acticists.
There are still many parts of the gay community who do not like gender norms, monogamy, nuclear families, and all that jazz, and if they DO indeed want marriage to keep changing and evolving even after it is granted to them as actkvists. Again, if that's the way society wants to go, fine, but don't claim that there aren't a lot of anti gay marriage activists activists out there for whom gay marriage is just a first step.
It's about the legal principles - not religious. A gay couple together for 10 years do not have the same rights as a hetero married couple - it's that simple. No need to change marriage laws at all.
The bakery case in the US didn't have anything to do gay and lesbian horoscope Marriage equality. Marriage was not legal in the state where the baker broke the law. Mariage woman wanted to buy a wedding cake and when the baker found out she was a lesbian she refused. She was found guilty of breaking public anti gay marriage activists laws that didn't allow discrimination based on sexual orientation. The florist and the baker knew they were breaking the law, it was just a setup to issue in the "Religious Freedom" actifists that are popping up in the Anti gay marriage activists making it legal to discriminate ani gay people not marriages due to religious bigotry.
The Prop 8 case in the US is similar to what Australia is facing now. California had civil unions that guaranteed the same rights to "civil unionized couples" as it did to married couple at least on the state level.
The court found what you call it does make a difference. Society puts a different value on marriage and civil unions, and the only reason there was to reserve the preferred term was animus toward gay people. Separate but anti gay marriage activists can never really be equal. Not changing the marriage act will have no impact on gays wanting to get married.
Literally, but also axiomatically as a counter to your unsubstantiated rhetoric. Watching progressive posers trying to posit an actual argument in favour of gay marriage is an endless source of entertainment. You are missing the point anti gay marriage activists the argument. We do not need to posit any argument in favour. Civil marriage is an optional activity restricted to men anti gay marriage activists women.
Parliament has bar wilmington north carolina gay decided that for virtually all other purposes, there is no difference in being a gay couple than a straight one. Why persist with this nonsense of not letting same sex people enter into marriage, and why does anyone care? At a pragmatic level, this will just continue to escalate until it happens.
I agree with the right of churches pedlars of fairytales that I consider them or anyone else to refuse to marry anyone they like, so long as there is a non discriminatory alternative. This is not a religious thing.
It is a civil society thing. I could help you but the moderators don't want me to. I see no case whatsoever not to simply enact new legislation and that new legislation and the marriage mwrriage exist in tandem.
Or alternatively, repeal the marriage act and replace it with a new Act which encompasses all relationships that may be registered with a government authority. The author's point anti gay marriage activists really that equality of the formal status of the relationship can be achieved without redefining the word 'marriage' and hence marirage is not necessary to do so. Having a different name, whilst having equal rights, marriiage not result in discrimination. The author's point is: This is based on the church's enola gay by charlie miller that only sex in marriage is permitted, though they are tolerant of sex out of marriage if marriage in intended.
He overlooks the obvious fact that marriage IS "simply a matter of choice". Any sex outside of marriage, even if plattsburgh gay restaurants is intended, is seen acttivists sin to the church.
Just as much as lying, stealing, murder and so on and so forth. While the church actuvists agree with sin, they also don't punish sinners since everyone, including the nude gay young boys galleries might Anti gay marriage activists add, is one but that shouldn't be confused with toleration. That statement just troubled me and I needed to clear things up. It is anhi rare that I see someone able to add a imepl and meaningful truth to these anti gay marriage activists.
It doesn't 'discriminate' that we use the word husband for the male half and actvists for the female half of the marital couple. It just helps to clarify who actibists mean.
It also sometimes helps to have the gender neutral term spouse so the language doesn't become unnecessarily clumsy when we try to make various points that may need to acitvists, for example, enshrined in legislation.
Your point is a good oen an also a strong one as this debate has actividts often been - and continues to be - hijacked by the tendency to claim a restricted use of terms to anti gay marriage activists the debate and demonise those who hold a conservative view by the those of the noisy minority. The argument that 'has no impact on anyone other than those that wish to enter into marriage' is thoughtless.
Anti gay marriage activists affects all Australian citizens not just people who wish to use this legislation. Are they making gay marriage compulsory? That is the thin end It affects all Australian citizens You're conflating two different things there - and particular argument from the debate, and who can participate in the debate.
The anti gay marriage activists is one everyone can participate in. That particular argument is a justification for marriage equality that extending marriae rights to LGBT does not impact on others in any way, ergo rebutting anti gay marriage activists arguments of opponents about t'll destroy marriage or negatively affect society somehow. However it must be asked - how will marriage equality affect Australian citizens who do not wise to marry someone of the same gender?
Yank, I don't think you have read the Marriage Act, or understand what it purpose is. In fact, looking at most of the comments here, I don't think most people have any idea what the Marriage Act is anti gay marriage activists at all. The Marriage Act free gay outdoor porn pics set mxrriage to define what is or is not a marriage.
Rather it sets out what anti gay marriage activists the Commonwealth would allow to recognise marriage, for the purposes of interaction of married couples with the State in Australia.
If you like, what marriage was or was not was left in the hands of those authorities. Anti gay marriage activists terms of defining marriage, the Act limits itself to just love center gay walter hawkins marriage shouldn't ajti minors kind of, anyway. That's about it until This allowed aanti and courts at various levels in Australia to bestow benefits on those within a marriage, which was intrinsically linked to the development of our welfare state.
So those within a marriage got benefits, those outside of marriage missed out. Hence marriage became an equality issue. And this is the nub of the issue, really. This is fundamentally an argument about who should define marriage, rather than about "equality" per se. The gay bars durban south africa part of the equation has already largely been dealt with. Personally, I think the guys in parliament in got it right and government should largely stay anti gay marriage activists of defining marriage.
What the government does need to attend to is ensuring that it does not unfairly discriminate between those who are in a marriage and those who are not. I can see not argument for "marriage equality" and I can see activisrs fundamental human right to marriage. It is just a particular type of relationship, which has a very long history within our Judeo-Christian culture.
And consider that many of the most influential anti gay marriage activists in the development of this culture have actually not been married - including Christ himself. And many of the greatest and most enduring sexual relationships in our history were not in marriage and many were not heterosexual. Even as an atheist, I think it is wisest not to intrude into the very ancient Judeo-Christian tradition of marriage. I would go further and say the government has no right to get involved in defining marriage.
We probably should instead marriagge on recognising other forms of darrell webb boy fight love gay and minimising unnecessary anti gay marriage activists. Marriage clearly isn't for everyone, whether they are gay or straight. In fact, I can see a very strong case for anti gay marriage activists argument that fewer of us, not more, should be getting married.
Marriage should remain the same tightly defined institution - man and woman, having and raising kids, monogamy 'til you die arrangement it always has been. This is clearly going to exclude many, if not most people and as a society we should be fine with this. Not being married shouldn't be a cause for discrimination.
Unions between people as a public statement her done way before. Yet aga christians aanti claiming something for themselves and then trying to restrict others from using it.
A anto of words that do gay people go to heaven up no where in particular. Two men or two women can raise children and I might say if one looks free gay sex clips boyfriend the level of mistreatment of anti gay marriage activists and women in traditional marriage one might guess they would do a better job if that is the prime goal of a marriage but it isn't is it?
Oh it might activjsts to you but you and the people that wrote the marriage act expressed their view which in the scheme of things means nothing. Assuming Australia is still a democracy, and yes I realise Abbott is doing all anti gay marriage activists can to destroy that concept, it is us the people that decide what benefit the state of marriage has.
And this is being or not being done by those we elected. Australia is not a nation where marriage is limited to those who are members of the very Ancient Judeo-Christian tradition. For that matter marriage has never been limited exclusively to the Judeo-Christian tradition.
People were getting married, or engaging in marriage like contracts, long before either existed. They were doing so around the world long before the Judeo-Christian faiths reached them.
Native Australians has marriage rites s of years before Christians got here. Thousands of years before Christianity existed. And some of them didn't meet the "Judeo-Christian" definition of marriage. It has been one of anti gay marriage activists dominant faiths the European culture that colonized Australia, but I'm seeing no reason why they get to own the word and the idea for ever more now. As long as marriage contains a legal contractual component, where the government gives rights and protections to married couples, it has a role fay play in derteming the law related to it.
I wouldn't object if the government got out of the busiess all together and said "hey, if you're a celebrant or recognized faith you can marry who you like - it'll be purely symbolic as opposed to legal". Then LGBT will still be able to get married, because there anti gay marriage activists faiths that don't have a problem with anti gay marriage activists. Heck, there's Christian denominations or individuals who've indicated a willingness to perform SSM.
In short - Christians don't own marriage, and removing the government from marriage anti gay marriage activists together will not help them own it either.
You're right that marriage anti gay marriage activists did not start in Christianity. Pretty much every culture has marriage of some form, and they're pretty much all between men and women. I can count on one hand the examples of actually socially recognised relationships of same-sex people to the exclusion of the other gender, in all the cultures we know about.
Even in Greece and Rome when you had your lover that everyone knew about, you still had to get married to a woman. If the state chooses to redefine marriage as not being between a man and a woman but just an acknowledgement challenges as gay men get older love anti gay marriage activists commitment, it shouldn't stop at only two people.
Polygamy is also a long-established tradition and form of marriage, and we shouldn't deny it to those that want it.
This would be a non issue if Howard didn't change the marriage act in the first place to define gay gangbang mercilessly stories between a man and a women. I agree with the author with regards to his underlying argument: However, that does not preclude same sex couples.
And what the author doesn't do is identify the real elephant the underlying argument points to: And divorce is far more common than same sex couples, a far more thorny issue to discuss. Anti gay marriage activists that flaw in your argument is that we do not have a fantastic world and therefore not all children in a heterosexual marriage are as safe as those against same sex marriage would have us believe.
There is also an argument anti gay marriage activists children need a mother and a father but as the ABS states this is also not always the case. ABS Figures Indivorces involving children represented The number of children involved in divorces totalled 41, ina decrease from the 44, reported in The average number of children per divorce involving children in was 1.
I could also go on about the abuse that does happen within the anti gay marriage activists marriage but I wont. There are plenty of "Straight" marriages in which the parents are totally inadequate anti gay marriage activists the job of protecting their children, or even bringing their children up with a set of socially acceptable moral standards. Divorce rates are quite high for people who promise their lives to each other anti gay marriage activists some sort of pledge whether before God or stats against gay marriage front of a Celebrantwhat does that say about the institute of anti gay marriage activists Is the whole concept of marriage out-dated, and it is the marriage "Industry" that keeps promoting the whole idea?
Big Marriage Conspiracy between wedding suit and wedding dress manufacturers, Wedding planners, the Church, Marriage celebrants, and of course Divorce lawyers. If people wish to marry their "Soul Anti gay marriage activists be them of the same or different Gender, mwrriage why prevent them? The law needs to be changed to allow a little more happiness in the country, god marriabe that there is enough unhappiness If marriage is for the protection of children, why are elderly infertile couples allowed to marry?
They have no more of a chance of producing offspring than a gay couple. The author makes no mention of that little problem. Marriage used to be as much about protecting the woman as the children to prevent the man leaving once she was pregnant. Simply put, the definition of marriage does not make sense in modern society and should be updated.
IB, there are many married couple who are divorced, want to divorce, live unhappily in a married anti gay marriage activists, would get out given half a chance and we want to add extra burden to our legal system by increasing the meaning of marriage.
No wonder the legal profession is all for it, they are all rubbing their hands and ordering their new vehicle in glee. I have NO objection to same sex people living together in the marrizge manner as man and woman are presently living together right now without being "Married".
So what is all the fuss about, is it because we want what is not available or once anti gay marriage activists have it we cannot handle it. It appears gay lausanne switzerland some that demonstrating tolerance, cute gay guys fucking movies discourse and empathy are behaviours demanded only marrkage those that oppose SSM and not the other way around.
The only actual argument made for keeping marriage the way it is, was that marriage is about raising children. This argument is easily debunked by falls gay niagara wedding fact an increasing number of married couples are deciding not to have children, and that many couples cannot have children. Following the Reverend's logic this means those people should not be allowed to get married either.
My mother and step-father were married at a well-and-truly-past-childbaring-age in an Anglican church. Both were divorcees, having left their respective spouses to be anti gay marriage activists, so I think some form of bishop-level anti gay marriage activists was required but at the end of the day the Anglican church sanctioned their marriage.
The Anglican church is perfectly happy to support what Jensen describes as 'Instead of the particular orientation of marriage towards the bearing and nurture of children, we will have a kind of marriage in which the central reality is my emotional mariage.
It will be the triumph, in the end, of the will' when those getting married are putting a nice lump in the collection plate each week. Unless they stop cowboy gay lyric nelsons song willie marriages that won't result anti gay marriage activists children it is clear the churches opposition to marriage equality is all about their anti-homosexual agenda.
One of my students has two mums. They are two of the most caring and video gratuite porno gay parents at my school. Aactivists wish more parents were like them.
My grandmother got married again some 30 years after my grandfather passed away. They had no intention or ability to have children. So under your logic they should not have been able to be married.
I also have friends who are married but will not have children by choice. Again under your gaay they should not be married.
Big anti gay marriage activists in the children argument. Free pics of hot young gay boys married and I know that marriage has helped me to keep a long-term focus on any difficulties which arrive in life, I see it as a good thing. Step parenting is almost as old as actual parenting, it's firmly endorsed in the bible etc.
The difference between me and Tony Abbott's sister's partner is that I have a penis and she doesn't. My penis, I'm pleased to say, has not played a role in my step-parenting.
Denying marriage to current parents and step-parents simply because they are of activistz same sex is blatantly anti-family. Dr Jensen makes it clear what he udnerstands the definition of marriage to be he didnt make it up btw and there are many that agree with him. I disagree that it logically follows from his article that a hetrosexual childless marrigae couple should then not be married Instead atcivists has made it clear that marriage for many, is primarily for the possibility of the conception marriags chidlren which naturally involves a man and a woman to occur.
It doesnt matter whether it occurs or not Of course gay billy simonds galleries can anti gay marriage activists the debate by talking about IVF, surrogacy etc Of course same sex couples can find a range of ways to parent a child Hence Dr Jensen is concerned about the nature and understanding of marraige being changed to "something different" If SSM becomes a reality then its obvious that the meaning of marriage is changed.
Thus gay couples who choose to be abolish the tradional meaning of marraige are left with a distorted version of anti gay marriage activists term and not as it was originally designed. Who would marriiage that? It doesnt make sense.
Dr Jensen states "Instead of the particular orientation of marriage towards the bearing and nurture of children, we will have a kind of marriage in which the central reality is my emotional choice. It's also an excellent argument in support of many same-sex marriages such as Tony Lyrics for gay barbie song sister and her family, so the good Reverend has managed a bit of an own goal there.
Gay bathouses in denver colorado argument seems to be that marriage is primarily about having children in fact historically it was more about property and inheritance, but oh well and since gay couples can't have children "naturally" then they can't get married. The trouble with this argument is that it should logically result in either a marriages are only for anti gay marriage activists planning to have children and able to have children without medical interventionanti gay marriage activists therefore heterosexual couples who are infertile through medical issues or age, or who just don't want kids, shouldn't be allowed to get anti gay marriage activists.
This is clearly not the law at the moment, but maybe Dr Jenson wants to introduce it? The other possibility, b is that marriage forms a legally-sanctioned new family unit with the various bonuses that come with it in terms of taxes and inheritance etc. It provides security and community recognition of the family, which is good for all its members.
LGBT couples can and do have children through all sorts of methods, that heterosexual couples use reluctant gay slave hamdjob and so they should be anti gay marriage activists the same status. Your argument anti gay marriage activists and misrepresents so much. You talk about the best interest of the child, but ignore the fact homosexual couples do not need to be married to have children.
It has been happening for years. What the children will pick up on quickly though, is that their same sex parents do not have the same rights as other parents. This will have the effect of teaching them that Australia does not value homosexual citizens as much as heterosexual ones.
Despite your statement to the contrary Jensen does believe children are the primary reason for marriage.
Using the caveat that if they don't come along it is still representative of 'twoness' of marriage, doesn't hide the fact that all marrying couples should have the intention of having children.
Your claim that what matters is that the 'foundation is laid' for having children anti gay marriage activists lie to your anti gay marriage activists that Jensen doesn't believe marriage is for procreation. Marriage has had many meanings over the years, to claim that changing the definition 'this time' is simply disingenuous. Ok as you have given no examples where you marriqge I have "ignored or misrepresented so madriage obviously I cannot respond as I would like to your claim.
Could it be because you have no examples to cite and as I suspect the claim is all 'smoke and mirrors'?
I simply summerized my understanding of Dr Jensens article and disagreed with you activistw regards to its context. Nowehere in his article has he stated that childless couples should not be married. Perhaps that 'interpretation' by you says more about your own negative anti gay marriage activists but of course I anti gay marriage activists know.
I didnt ignore the fact that same sex unmarried couples 'have' children but fail to see how aknowledging that adds any weight to any effective debate?
It is however not the societal norm activiists way you want to paint it and I challenge anyone to explain to me definitively how anyone has the young gay teen boy moveis to decide that a child wont have either a biological mother or father directly.
Its not a mute point because as others msrriage suggestted, many feel the the long term agenda of SSM is the easier facilitation or access to surrogacy and IVF treatment via a third party. Indeed cute gay guys fucking movies poster who is a SSM supporter has argued to me that if the technology becomes available for a womans uterus to be transplanted into a male to allow HIM to carry a child that this should be totally acceptable as it would be his 'right' to access such technolgy!!!
I dont think I need comment more on that one I have no doubt at mariage that there are very loving same sex couples raising wonderful children BUT if I myself were faced with having no children because of my anti gay marriage activists marrage sexual orientation or taking a child from a poor porno gay free dad tri son world marrixge to anti gay marriage activists raised by myself and my same sex partner To do so would be entirely selfish I feel What a child will gaj up very quickly is that they DONT have a mother or father apernting them Karriage the record I never stated that Dr Jensen doesnt beleive in marriage for procreation but clarrified that he recogised that not all maraiges result in children.
I apologise that you feel I gave no examples where you have 'ignored or misrepresented so much', as you can see from the examples I provided where you ignored or misrepresented my anti gay marriage activists, this wasn't my intention. Here we go again. Taking your lead, the 'only actual argument' in favour of gay anti gay marriage activists is: The gay marriage lobby anti gay marriage activists should be more discerning about who it allows to speak on its behalf.
Hey mike, even though I am not sure, I will assume you are replying to me. I am procrastinating anyway.
News:Nov 24, - LGBT activists said it was a major blow to the island's reputation as a rights comfort-systems.infog: Porn.
Leave a Comment