Title: National Marriage Day Rally
Location: Parliament House, Canberra
Link out: Click here
Description: In a repeat of the successful 2004 rally, the Great Hall of Parliament House Canberra has been booked on Tuesday 16th August 2011, 10am to 12pm to show support for marriage being defined as between a man and a woman.
This event is being organised by the Australian Family Association, with support from The Dads 4 Kids Father Foundation, the Australian Christian Lobby and the National Marriage Coalition.
You are needed in Canberra to show support for natural marriage and warn all politicians.
For more information and to register, click here.
Start Time: 10:00
Date: 2011-08-16
End Time: 12:00
Oh what a shame. I have to be in another state that day, or else I would be there!
Please note that the first day of sitting for the new Senate where the Greens assumed the balance of power was actually 4 July 2011.
Thanks Josh, you’re right. ACL Team.
I emailed my local Labour MP pointing out my opposition to same sex marriage and referred to two bases. Firstly I pointed out that when homosexual activity was decriminalised it was after the gay lobby had argued that the government had no business legislating in regard to what two individuals did in private but the lobby was no arguing that the government should be concerned. I pointed out that the reason why society took a view on marriage was because it private sexual relations between man and woman had repercussions on society which do not arise from homosexual activity. In short sexual activity outside of marriage leads to the disintegration of society when the children that result have to be supported by society and that the males who refuse to become men antisocial in a number of respects. On the other hand society to continue into the future needs children but children who have grown up within a committed and enduring relationship. Hence society has a stake in discouraging the former and encouraging the latter but has no stake in homosexual relationships. Hence from the gay lobby’s own arguments of 20 years ago the government should stay out of the matter of homosexual ‘marriage’.
His response was to ignore that basis and instead reefer to having worked for well known homosexual judge and had been aware of the discrimination he and his partner faced. He did not specify what this was or argue that it was because they were not ‘married’. Instead he said, without foundation, that he was aware that ‘many’ people in the electorate felt that gay mariage should be enacted but that a number were not and that until that consensus was arranged he did not feel it appropriate at this stage to push ahead with gay marriage.
However he added that he and the many others saw it differently and that his job as my representative was not to take my views into account in what he would represent but rather to bring my views into line with his.
That’s scary.