Jump to content

Welcome to Emo Forums
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!
Photo

Gay Rights

- - - - -

  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#21
Nereus

Nereus

    The Old Man Of The Sea

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,833 posts
First off, it's sickening to me the Government preferences this when there two more important things to worry about: Queensland's ailing economy and your needed infrastructure.

Aside from that, the reason Campbell can do this is simple: There is a lack of a charter or a Bill of Rights. What this means is that any aggrieved person is left without legal basis to challenge this legislation in a court of law that alters a group of people in such an adverse way.

Also, didn't you have a state speaker who once advocated anti-gay therapy? Yeah, pretty fucked up for a western society, huh?
  • 1

#22
wrist of sorrows

wrist of sorrows

    Delicate Snowflake

  • Full Members
  • Pip
  • 14 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:in a pineapple, marrying spongebob.
  • Country
  • Fav Band black veil brides♥
  • Fav Song you me at six-underdog
this is sad:/ people love who they love, and for him to say they cant be with who they love is jsut sick:/
  • 0

#23
Chica

Chica

    Screeeeeeeeeeeee~!

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 37,306 posts

He argued children were best raised by a
loving mother and father, before quoting
numerous religious figures including Pope
Benedict.



...Don't make me laugh. Ok, if they're going to base it on that why not ask these 'confused' 'deprived' children themselves? No? Because they know perfectly well the children are just as happy and safe as they would be being raised by a mother and a father. In my case happier and safer.

This whole thing is ridiculous. Are we seriously still living in the stone age? Why do these idiots not realize yet that no one can control who they fall in love with, and that there is nothing wrong whatsoever with two consenting men, or women falling in love?
And if religion and child raising and the 'sanctity of marriage' is all they have to base their arguments on, how the hell are they still able to pull stupid stuff like this? If God exists, I am quite certain he/she/it does not go around condemning people for finding love and happiness. I'm pretty sure he/she/it would want a diverse heaven full of happy, open minded people with intelligent things to say. Diverse: All different races, beliefs, lifestyles, sexualities, etc. etc. etc. etc. NOT a heaven full of clones who kiss his/her/its butt every five seconds. Seriously. How boring would their view of the afterlife be?
As for raising children. They can shut the hell up because they have no idea what they're talking about. I grew up with lesbian parents. I'm happy, healthy, have always had everything I have ever needed. And I have always been able to accept people for who they are, as long as their intentions are good, as naturally as learning to speak or walk. If anything, being raised by a same sex couple is a good thing.
Sanctity of marriage? Isn't marriage the joining of two people who are in love? I'm pretty certain the same sex couples wanting to get married are in just as much love as straight couples.

So, their arguments are null and void.
  • 0

#24
Occasional_Desire

Occasional_Desire

    WE WILL RISE!

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,820 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • Country
  • Fav Band Hurt
  • Fav Song Rapture

this is sad:/ people love who they love, and for him to say they cant be with who they love is jsut sick:/

He isn't banning homosexual couples from being together.

Everybody seems to have missed the fact that he is also banning the right of single people to have children through surrogacy, is that not equally as important in this argument?
  • 0

#25
PatchIsaNarwhal

PatchIsaNarwhal

    Spiraling Tempest

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 235 posts
That is the issue of single people.

He is basically making any same sex couple's relationships feel inadequate to make female couples.
This while cause them to move out of Queensland.

If i were in a same sex relationship in a state like this i would personally leave.

I have no respect for out government what so ever.

And Its disgusting that they think that God whatever he/she whatever they may be wouldn't want people to be happy.
  • 0

#26
Occasional_Desire

Occasional_Desire

    WE WILL RISE!

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,820 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • Country
  • Fav Band Hurt
  • Fav Song Rapture

That is the issue of single people.

Then this is just an issue for gay people.

Are you kidding? Are you anymore important than a single person that is being refused? No you aren't.
  • 0

#27
Rellik San

Rellik San

    Adorably Bitter And Angry Cabbit!

  • Sub Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,625 posts
How to derail a Christians "No Homo" stance in a few easy steps;

1. Ask them; "is god perfect?" they will of course answer "yes."
2. Ask them; "is gods creation perfect?" they will of course answer "yes."
3. Ask them; "and all of creation is god's design?" they will of course answer yes.
4. Ask them; "So then with homosexuality being proven to be genetic, isn't hating gays then admitting that god made a mistake?" Watch them squirm for some obscure out of context Old Testament quote.
(now this is where it gets fun)
5a. If arguing with a female point out; "Timothy 2:12, No woman is to teach or have authority over a man in church" (I'm paraphrasing). At which point they will cite the Old Testament as being over written by the new, thusly rendering their argument invalid.
5b. If arguing with a male ask them; "Does the new testament over write the new?" They will respond yes proceed to point out "At no point does Jesus ask you to persecute anyone and instead embrace everyone. Ergo, as Jesus is god, they are going against his direct word and their argument is invalid.

As an aside and I know this is immature... but does anyone else find it funny that of all places QUEENSLAND is trying to stamp out gay rights?
  • 0

#28
Chip

Chip

    Potato Chips Are Friends, Not Food

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,114 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:A Lays Chip Bag
  • Country
  • US State:Virginia
  • Fav Band .
^ you are silly

I've read enough about the homosexuality and agree with most of the points.

The banning of suragates is daft. What it a single women is unable to give birth, but able to produce eggs? What are they going to say to her? 'Whoops! Guess we overlooked you. No kiddies for you. Mother nature really fucked you over. Too bad.'? Ugh. Politics and religion are so linked, it's impossible to have a good leader.
  • 0

#29
Rellik San

Rellik San

    Adorably Bitter And Angry Cabbit!

  • Sub Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,625 posts

The banning of suragates is daft. What it a single women is unable to give birth, but able to produce eggs? What are they going to say to her? 'Whoops! Guess we overlooked you. No kiddies for you. Mother nature really fucked you over. Too bad.'? Ugh.

True fact: Despite being extremely liberal, that is what my sisters and mother feel on the subject, that if you can't physically do something then; "It's natures way of saying don't do it." I personally say fuck that, if I break my leg falling out of a tree, does it mean that nature was telling me not to use my leg? Of course not.
  • 0

#30
Occasional_Desire

Occasional_Desire

    WE WILL RISE!

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,820 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • Country
  • Fav Band Hurt
  • Fav Song Rapture

if I break my leg falling out of a tree, does it mean that nature was telling me not to use my leg? Of course not.

It was probably telling the 25 year old man not to climb trees.
  • 0

#31
Rellik San

Rellik San

    Adorably Bitter And Angry Cabbit!

  • Sub Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,625 posts

It was probably telling the 25 year old man not to climb trees.

Psh, I'll climb all the trees I'm want, being responsible does not mean being mature, what's the point of being an adult with disposable income if you can't indulge all your childhood fantasies?
  • 0

#32
Steve 

Steve 

    King of Modesty

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,680 posts

Everybody seems to have missed the fact that he is also banning the right of single people to have children through surrogacy, is that not equally as important in this argument?

My guess is that banning the right for homosexuals is a lot more controversial than banning the right for single people. It's not exactly less important, it just gets less publicity. I think the basis of whether someone can have a surrogate child should be on the individual's capability to take care of said child, not the sexuality of the potential parents/guardians.
  • 0

#33
Chip

Chip

    Potato Chips Are Friends, Not Food

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,114 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:A Lays Chip Bag
  • Country
  • US State:Virginia
  • Fav Band .
I understand the publicity, but that shouldn't matter. It IS important to those involoved with surrogacy. There are women, I know in America at least, who use surrogacy as a way to pay their way through college or just live, because the economy blows and this is an easy, you know what I mean, way to get money when you can't get a job.
  • 0

#34
Insane Pie

Insane Pie

    Four String Samurai

  • Sub Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,807 posts

I understand the publicity, but that shouldn't matter. It IS important to those involoved with surrogacy. There are women, I know in America at least, who use surrogacy as a way to pay their way through college or just live, because the economy blows and this is an easy, you know what I mean, way to get money when you can't get a job.



That's not something that is right either.
  • 0

#35
Chip

Chip

    Potato Chips Are Friends, Not Food

  • Full Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,114 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:A Lays Chip Bag
  • Country
  • US State:Virginia
  • Fav Band .

That's not something that is right either.

How so? Someone who isn't ready for kids can make someone who can't have kids life better. Thy get help to become what they née in life until they are ready for kids of their own.
  • 0

#36
Insane Pie

Insane Pie

    Four String Samurai

  • Sub Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,807 posts
It's almost like being a hooker. You are paying them for their body.

Instead of sex, it's being used to carry a child.
  • 0

#37
Rellik San

Rellik San

    Adorably Bitter And Angry Cabbit!

  • Sub Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,625 posts

It's almost like being a hooker. You are paying them for their body.

Instead of sex, it's being used to carry a child.

I'm not so sure, as to me, it's the same as donating a kidney.
  • 0

#38
Insane Pie

Insane Pie

    Four String Samurai

  • Sub Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,807 posts

I'm not so sure, as to me, it's the same as donating a kidney.


You wouldn't be donating an kidney though.

You're paying someone to carry a child for you.
  • 0

#39
Rellik San

Rellik San

    Adorably Bitter And Angry Cabbit!

  • Sub Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,625 posts

You wouldn't be donating an kidney though.

You're paying someone to carry a child for you.

I fail to see the difference.

Let me put it this way, donating a kidney, is essentially selling a part of your body to give someone happiness, by your definition, that is also prostitution.
  • 0

#40
Insane Pie

Insane Pie

    Four String Samurai

  • Sub Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,807 posts
Well, you could sell the kidney instead of donating it, but that's a totally different topic.

I was relating surrogacy and prostitutes.

With prostitution, you are paying the woman for sex. You are using her body for your sexual pleasure.

With surrogacy, you are paying the woman to carry a child for you. You are using her body as a vessel.

Both also using cuurency as a form of payment.
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users