It is a big year for marriage, with three bills to amend the Marriage Act currently before Parliament and two inquiries underway.
Please take action straight away by writing a submission to the Senate Inquiry into the Greens Marriage Equality Amendment Bill 2010. These are due by April 2. A submission can be as short or as long as you like. Email your submission to legcon.sen@aph.gov.au as an attached PDF or MS document (as the Senate prefers submissions submitted this way).
Here are some points you might like to include:
- Marriage is a unique relationship between one man and one woman.
- Marriage is the foundation of family, which in turn is the foundation of society.
- If marriage can be redefined to include two people of the same gender, why not three or more people?
- Marriage is deeply held by a large proportion of the population for cultural and religious reasons and this should be respected.
- Redefining marriage has potential serious consequences for religious freedom and freedom of conscience.
- Same-sex marriage sets up a new family model that trashes the truth that gender is vital to a child in family formation.
- Research shows that a child with married, biological mother and father do best.
- Children should be given the chance to start life with both their biological parents.
Also consider including a personal touch, telling why marriage is important to you, and why it is important to hold on to this time-honoured institution.
For those who want to dig a bit deeper, here are a selection of articles which might be helpful.
This is an important step in the defence of marriage. Please take the time to speak up and have your say by participating in both of these important inquiries.
Leave a comment below if you wish, but remember it’s NOT A SUBMISSION unless you email legcon.sen@aph.gov.au with your submission as an attached PDF or Word document.
Dear Sir or Madam, We are very disturbed about the vote for same sex marriage.. Marriage is defined in our culture and also the Bible as one man and one woman.this is the natural way that we are genetically made. Children are best if they are brought up in a family with one mother and one father. That is the family dinamics that chilren thrive in, and learn from both Mum and Dad, about life that is best for them to grow up and become mature and productive adults in
The hand of the Lord have created Man and Woman, Adam and Eve (not Adam and Steve), to multiply and fill the earth. Even animals were created in the same way, male and female with no gays or lesbians.
The questions are:
How will gays or lesbians multiply?
How can they continue without multiplication?
The answers are:
They can not
I totally agree with what Dr Elia Botros says in regards to Man and Woman being created by god for a purpose which is for companionship, love and support for one another as well as multiplying to fill the earth. I am against same sex marriages for it is not what our lord created us to be in this type of relationship.
God Bless
Gillian Rutherford
I agree with Gillian Rutherford’s comments. God has a plan for each of our lives, and we need to trust him, read his Word and stay in prayerful contact with him as we worship him.
I agree with Dr Elia Botros.
I agree to do.
My wife and I strongly believe that marriage as it is between a man and a woman for life, is ideal for a number of reasons. They include:
The father should be a role-model to the son.
The mother should be a role-model to the daughter.
Combined the should be a role-model of a home that their children aspire to.
It is ordained of God that marriage is between a man and a woman. God made Adam and Eve. Two of the same would not have commenced the human race.
Yes, I agree too.
I strongly agree with this comment and am discusted that same sex marriage is even being considered.
Why should advocacy of marriage as currently understood be regarded as only a cultural or religious matter, as if it does not concern the rest of the community. Conception itself demands the presence of male and female. In communitees without the social services of our own, the female is vulnerabl when there is no committed partner who is big enough and ugly en ough to look afteer both of them. In turn the child needs the talents and protection of both natural parents at least for the first decade or so.
A volte for same-sex marriage is a threat to the whole structure of society.
You are absolutely correct – It’s a no-brainer! All society and earth life as designed would totally fail.
All society will fail and so will life on earth if same sex marriage is allowed??
Unfortunately that’s the type of argument that leaves the unchurched and non-Christians laughing at Christians for their “stupid belief system”.
I am a Christian. The Bible says that homosexuality is against God’s order and is sin. I choose to accept and believe the Bible therefore I must accept God’s verdict on this. I don’t want to see same sex marriage legalised – I believe it is wrong – because God says so.
If EVERYONE was in a same sex relationship then obviously we’d all die out in a generation or two. But allowing same sex marriage cannot destroy society let alone life on earth. Please think through WHY you believe things before you state them publicly because otherwise we Christians undermine our witness and make ourselves and God seem stupid.
I am NOT saying that Arthur and Marion Bray are stupid – I am sure they are good, loving, intelligent, God-fearing Christians and I bless them for their passion.
I absoluetly agree with this!!!!
John, when do you predict Canadian society to fall apart? I’m just wondering if you have some kind of evidence to support your assertion. Thanks.
John, consider how allowing access to IVF has changed society as a case in point for how hard it is to reign in the proverbial horse once it has bolted? Is that evidence enough?
IVF was initially created solely for the purpose of assisting married couples having trouble conceiving. It is now open to the highest bidder, whether single or married, same-sex or not. The there are the mega-multiple births, selective reduction, embryonic research, designer babies and cloning to consider. The authorities started out thinking they could regulate it…but then minorities wanted their legal right to access it. No-one anticipated all the implications. Why didn’t they just cut through the red tape surrounding overseas adoption? Isn’t hindsight a wonderful thing? And what about the long term side effects of IVF? The mega doses of hormones for the mums (who have higher rates of hormonal cancers) or the IVF kids themselves, who are now only in their 30′s?
Ok, so what if they allow same sex marriage in Australia…what if I love my sister so much I want to marry her? Or my pony? Or my car? What if I can’t decide whether to marry a man or woman, so want the right to marry both? Polygamy, anyone?
What will the government do if the IVF offspring of same sex marriages want to sue for them allowing them to start life without any possiblity of a mum and dad? A new version of a stolen generation? Who will fund the counselling they will require?
What about the right of heterosexual married couples to protect their right for the term marriage to only apply to the deep, sacred God-created commitment they have made? Don’t cheapen it by allowing anyone to use it!
You can call a same-sex union whatever word you like – call it “fred” if you want – but marriage belongs to us, not the minority who screams longest and loudest, and the politicians who ride into power on these bills hoping to forward their own political agenda.
“Ok, so what if they allow same sex marriage in Australia…what if I love my sister so much I want to marry her?” No, no you couldn’t. Because that’d be incest, and that’s illegal in Australia. Or another way of looking at it: opposite sex marriage is currently legal in Australia. I’m a guy, my sister is (obviously) a female. Going by your logic I should be able to marry her under current law ?
“What will the government do if the IVF offspring of same sex marriages want to sue for them allowing them to start life without any possiblity of a mum and dad?” Can’t see why this would be an issue when under current law, single and gay people can already access IVF in several Australian states.
I don’t really understand why kids come into it anyway. Gay couples can adopt and access surrogacy and IVF without being married. Straight couples can have children naturally, through IVF, adoption or surrogacy without being married. Married couples can remain married despite never having children. Children do not equal marriage, and marriage does not equal children.
“You can call a same-sex union whatever word you like – call it “fred” if you want – but marriage belongs to us.” We tried that in Queensland by introducing civil partnerships, but still the ACL and many churches opposed it. Now they are letterboxing (in my electorate at least) telling us who to vote for to get the laws repealed. Apparently they are too similar to marriage – hello, a civil union is the legal joining of two people together. A marriage is the legal joining of two people together. Of course they’re similar.
You know, I was perfectly happy, as a gay man, with civil unions. When they were introduced to Queensland last year I was happy with that – I didn’t need marriage. I thought, ‘finally I can stand up with my partner and tell my family and friends “this is the one – this is the person I’m spending the rest of my life with. This is the pinnacle of our relationship, no more dates, no more being single, this is my partner for the rest of my life”. I don’t want to offend anyone, I just want to be legally joined with my partner, and if a civil union can do that without treading on someone’s religious beliefs, that’s fine by me.’ That’s what I thought.
But that wasn’t enough. The ACL still had problems with civil unions. They want ‘relationship registers.’ Registration ? I’m sorry, we’re talking about the love of my life – he’s not a Ford Festiva I picked up in the Trading Post and need to pop down to the local Department of Transport so I can whack a sticker on him.
Despite the ACL’s claims that there is no discrimination against gay couples anymore, there is, mainly in areas of immigration and inheritance. For example, a straight person can meet a foreign partner, marry them the next day and immediately apply to bring them to Australia as a spouse. If a gay person meets a foreign partner, they need to find a way to live somewhere in the world together for at least 12 months before applying to bring them to Australia, as they are only able to do so under de facto laws, which requires 12 continuous months of co-habitation before the visa application.
So that’s when I just thought, stuff it. I’ve tried to play nice, I’ve tried to compromise to keep the anti-gay marriage minority happy. But stuff it. I’m not a criminal. My relationship is not illegal. We are both consenting adults. I pay more than my fair share of taxes. I am an Australian citizen and I now demand the same rights as other Australians. I want to marry my partner.
NB: this reply will likely not be published, as the ACL doesn’t seem to publish much of what I write. I would like it to be published so somebody can write a reply to what I’ve written, addressing some of the points I’ve raised (eg. how can the ACL claim there is no discrimination against gay couples when, as I’ve pointed out, discrimination exists in immigration law). Please note I have not used names or bad language, I’ve not called anyone a bigot or a homophobe. I know those terms are thrown about when they do not apply – just because someone doesn’t agree gay people should get married, does not automatically mean they hate gay people. But I do have questions I want someone from the anti-gay marriage lobby to answer. I just don’t understand the opposition. The ‘use any word but marriage line’ – like I’ve said, that’s been tried. ‘But marriage is about children’ – how is marriage about children when, as I’ve written, couples of all types can have children with or without marriage. ‘It will lead to people marrying their dog or a toaster’ – how can you equate two consenting adults in a legal relationship with a relationship with an animal or inanimate object that cannot give consent ?
“how can you equate two consenting adults in a legal relationship with a relationship with an animal or inanimate object that cannot give consent ?”
Because some people do see themselves as the next big thing:
http://www.browardpalmbeach.com/2009-08-20/news/those-who-practice-bestiality-say-they-re-part-of-the-next-gay-rights-movement/
Once you dilute marriage from its genuine meaning of a union between a man and a woman, anything goes.
There is nothing ‘minor’ about those opposing gay marriage. We are NOT a minority. If everyone was compelled to put forward their view on the subject, those for gay marriage would be an extreme minority. But… a lot that are opposed, unfortunately, do not want to express their opinions. They don’t want to offend anyone and so they don’t get counted. Put their backs to the wall and the truth will out. So don’t think that the bulk of society is for gay marriage. That would be a delusion. The sad thing is that gay marriage could well get through simply because good men and women do nothing. We all have free will, and we can choose to do some things that bring dire consequences. To keep society safe, some free will choices need to be curtailed. Like the free will to murder or to rape or to steal. So not everyone’s ‘rights’ should be granted. Gay marriage is one of these. If you choose to go ‘outside’ of the accepted ‘norms’ of society, then you have to bear the consequences of that choice. No-one should have to make your choice ‘comfortable’.
If people aren’t willing to stand up and state their beliefs in order to protect those beliefs in a society that might laugh or scorn but doesn’t arrest, torture or kill people for their beliefs…maybe they don’t *really* believe it. Convenient beliefs are not the same as convictions.
Those opposed to same-sex marriage may well be the majority…but they don’t appear to be the majority of those who voice their convictions. So it’s a bit like government elections – if you do a “donkey” vote (waste your vote) surely you lose the right to complain about the outcome.
marriage is and always been primarily a religious institution . I find it absurd that the minority gay subset in society who are in the main anti religion are pining after the blessing of a religiuos institution?
marriage is these days not primarily a religious institution. The percentage of marriages performed in churches by religious celebrants, is far smaller than the number of marriages by civil celebrants
AMEN
How would YOU have existed without an EGG and a SPERM? Just be thankfull for your creation, for your life and let it be called the fruit of Marriage (ie a child). Its who you are, how you came to be, it is so simple, so logic, so natural. Egg + Egg = No You.
Sperm + Sperm = No You.
If a female becomes pregnant that man has legal rights and responsibilities for the upbringing of that child, that is a basic human right of the child.
The Law regarding Sperm donation must be changed so that the donators of sperm has the same legal implications as any man fathering a child regardless of the way it is done. It is a basic human right for a child to know who his mother and father are. They (parents) have the responsibility to care for that child, this fact cannot be sighed away in a contract as it violates basic human rights.
Same sex marriages should they be introduced are incapable of [without scientific manipulation] producing children. All people receive life by the sexual union of hetereosexuals and marriage is a God ordained institution to give sanctity and uniqueness to that union.The current marriage act as it stands reflects that. Any society that is concerned for the future social wellbeing of itself would and should reject any perversion to an institution that recognises the sole natural way the future generation arrive .
You say we’re all products of heterosexual unions: I was conceived on a chilly night on a school camp to a thoroughly unmarried couple of teenagers who having been brought up in repressed “just say no” rural Queensland didn’t have ready access to condoms and possibly not even the knowledge that could have prevented the pregancy. (Trivial fact: the most religious US states have the highest rates of teen pregnancy – just say no is a failed approach!!) So exhibit 1 we see that marriage is not a prerequisite for procreation. Due to the social mores of the day I was put up for adoption. As fate would have it a good Christian couple in Sydney became my parents. Exhibit 2: Does the fact that they were infertile invalidate their marriage?
Gda y Stephen. Yes I do say we are here due to the sexual union of heterosexuals you included [ according to your testimony] . I f just say no is a failed approach for teenagers i can only conclude that you think just say yes is a better formula. I dont know how many kids you have Stephen ,I have three teenagers and saying no is working really well in there lives. With regard to exhibit 2 there is nothing in the marriage act as it stands that states that infertile spouses must terminate there marriages. Cheers Gerard
My understanding from the Bible is that when when a man and a woman sleep together, in God’s eyes, they are married, regardless of whether they’ve have a marriage ceremony (eg. when Jesus points out to the Samaritan woman that she has many husbands because she’s been sleeping around). The act of having sex with someone is a spiritual event that unites two people.
God also wanted us to save sex until marriage (as I’ve pointed out, sex = marriage) and we can see the repercussions of that in our society too, with unplanned pregnancies, abortion, and children living in broken homes.
It’s not just gay and lesbians that don’t understand what marriage is meant to be – it’s most of society. People “try before they buy” (which in God’s eyes means your marrying the first time you have sex and then your committing aldultery over and over), marry for a couple of years and find out that they’re not getting what they want from the marriage and divorce. Promises mean nothing.
Canadian courts and commissions already prosecute people for speaking the truth about falsity so one can say regarding Canadian society falling apart with certainty that it is already has started for any society that legislates a legal fiction so as to refuse to discriminate between what is tue and what is false has harmed the Good of Truth.
Wow John,
I so agree! It seems that to be committed to truth is becoming a very confused issue – I can only imagine that this is because the people who thought that some truths were self evident haven’t yet had the courage to stand up and state their position publicly.
Here’s the rub though, ultimately, what is true (that is, born of the spirit and grace of God) does finally make itself clear and all of the contrivances and exceptions and yeah-but’s of people who thought they knew better become silenced as the awful fruit of the over-turning of simple blessings that keep peace is clear to everyone – and strangely – nobody votes for it on that day.
Dear Sirs,
I am greatly disturbed by the pressure being applied to our Legislators to redefine ‘Marriage’ in response to the whims and/or deeply felt preference of individual and organised groups of Homosexuals and Lesbians.
Marriage always has been and always should be the lifelong commitment of a man and a woman to each other, “As long as they both shall live”.
Children are entitled by law and by nature to the love, care, nurture and security of both a Father and a Mother.
Anything else is contrary to nature and should be avoided.
Dear Sir or Madam,
I am writing to express my concerns as to where the Marriage Equality Amendment Bill 2010 will lead our country and our culture.
I would like to note that discrimination – meaning the unfair treatment of one person or group, usually because of prejudice about race, ethnicity, age, religion, or gender – should not be used in the instance due to the circumstances.
Marriage is, and has always been the unique relationship shared between one man and one woman. This has been the foundation to which families are built upon, and in turn the society has been built upon. This solid foundation has been the culture for more than 4000 years, and has been directly influenced from the Bible.
If marriage can be redefined to include two people of the same gender, why not 3 or 4? Why not lower the legal age for marriage? Or alcohol? Or driving? Where does the line of “discrimination” end?
Redefining marriage has a massive potential to cause serious consequences for religious freedom, and freedom of conscious.
Children are born of a man and a woman, and research has shown that a child brought up in the home of a married man and woman will do best. Why take that benefit away from a child who hasn’t had a chance to make the decision themselves? Every child deserves the chance to start life with both their biological parents involved in their lives.
To redefine the marriage act, the foundation of marriage, would be like removing the stumps from a house. How long will the house stand before more structural parts start to be removed? How long will the house stand?
Our culture in Australia has stood firm on this before, and it is my strong belief that we should stand firm once again, and keep marriage between one man and one woman, how our God and creator intended it to be.
Thank you for your time in reading; I hope this finds you well.
I am very concerned that ministers who object to same-sex marriage will be forced by extreme social, political and legal pressure to perform same-sex marriages anyway. Gay activists promise this would not be the case; however people who oppose same-sex marriage in the public arena such as Margaret Court are already persecuted (not always in a legal sense) as homophobic and discriminatory. Christian facilities (such as the Phillip Island Adventure Resort at Phillip Island which I have been to on several occassions) that refuse to host gay events have been successfully sued for discrimination in Victoria.
Judging by past events, if same-sex marriage is legalised, social, legal and maybe even ultimately political pressure will consider any refusal to perform gay marriage as unacceptable. After all, the social and legal pressures are what creates political pressure in our democracy.
I understand that in a strict legal sense, authorised celebrants are not currently obliged to perform any marriage, but in a social and political sense, this would be seen as homophobic and discriminatory. It is from this social and political demand that religious ministers do what gay activists want that the social and legal pressure will come.
As I said in answer to the third survey question, to force a minister to perform a gay marriage against his beliefs is not free at all; it is anti-free. Freedom of religion needs to mean free to not perform gay marriages.
No minister, will be legally obliged to perform a same-sex service. That is NOT part of the legislations. Let’s all calm down and actually for once LOOK at what changes are being debated rather than getting caught up in the hype and Scaremongering.
NOONE will be forced to marry anyone of the same sex, no minister will be forced to perform a same-sex service, NO more children will be raised by same-sex parents than currently happens.
MARRIAGE WILL have a renual, Statistically, Marriage will last longer, and the sanctity of marriage will only be strengthened as Same-Sex couples will be finally allowed to aim and aspire to the great pinical of marriage. Just as everyone has been brought up to aspire to it.
We believe that marriage between a man and a woman with complete fidelity is essential for the family.Marriage between two of the same gender cannot provide the foundation necessary for children to be reared in.Already gay activists are pushing for same gender marriages which are in effect seen as a legal union which provides a firm foundation for their relationship.Gay men and women have the liberty to choose thir partners as do heterosexuals yet it doesn’t seem to be enough.De facto relationships are common so gay relationships are more widely accepted and understood.Why the need to change the law to accommodate the gay population?Just leave well alone and sanction marriage between Man and woman as it has been for 100′s of years. It doesn’t take a genius to see that marriage between men and women is more acceptable than gay marriages.
Could people give me their opinion of this quote by Immanuel Kant (German philosopher writing at the end of the 18th century):
“Natural sexual union takes place either in accordance with mere animal nature or in accordance with law. Sexual union in accordance with law is marriage (matrimonium), that is, the union of two persons of different sexes for lifelong possession of each other’s sexual attributes. The end of begetting and bringing up children may be an end of nature, for which it implanted the inclination of sexes for each other; but it is not a requisite for human beings who marry to make this their end in order for their union to be compatible with rights, for otherwise marriage would be dissolved when procreation ceases.”
From Immanuel Kant’s ‘Metaphysics of Morals’.
___
Could people also tell me if I am interpreting Kant in the above passage correctly:
- Marriage is between one man and one woman.
- Procreation is nature’s way of telling what genders are to be deemed suitable for marriage. Therefore the right to marry should be the right to marry someone of the opposite sex, not a right whoever you happen to be favourably disposed towards.
- You don’t need to have children in order to be married, otherwise old people and sterile people would be excluded, and clearly we should allow them. Rather, the *in principle* ability (determined via gender possibility, not individual personal genetics) to have children through natural means should point us to what is marriage.
I support the view that God intends marriage to be between and man and a woman. It also follows that this is the “natural” way of things because both genders are necessary for reproduction.
What I am trying to understand, is who’s point of view should the government be listening to in order to fairly govern in our democratic system? Even though this country was founded on Christian values, we now live in a secular society. Marriage is no longer purely a religious thing, as with civil marriages couples can hold legal marriage ceremonies without any mention of God, only a commitment to each other.
If you follow national polling on this issue, support for same-sex marriage continues to grow, and I believe there is a point when the government is required to listen to what a large proportion (and eventually a majority) of the population are asking for: allowing same-sex marriage.
When this happens, I hope that the Christian community will get together and declare Christian marriages as separate to civil marriages. This distinction will make Christian marriages more special and unique then they currently are, since now we share “marriage” will those civil marriages that do not recognise God at all.
I am a Christian but I fully support gay marriage and I think that many Christians do. I think the church and the ACL in particular should try and put their resources into something more important. Why not push for policies to help human rights, basic human needs, education, refugees and freedom of religion.
I think Christians should be ashamed of how gay and lesbians are treated. Jesus didn’t ask us to try and change our government he asked us to love people, heal the sick etc. Why isn’t the ACL trying to help those who can’t help themselves? Why instead make people feel like their life is a sin. I love all my gay and lesbian friends and would sooner march in the Mardi Gras apoligising for past treatment by the church than stand with the ACL on this issue. I am not the only one too.
Whether it is right or wrong to be gay is not my business, it is God’s business. I truely can’t tell you but I know I am suppose to love others. Supporting gay marriage is not about supporting ‘sin’ it is about allowing people equal rights.
An example of person who I agree with is the Honourable Michael Kirby who was both Christian and a homosexual. His views and work changed Australia for the better. He was a person who stood out from the crowd due to his morality and integrity.
My point is not all Christians are with you on this one.
Elizabeth, You are too shallow to see the implication of legalised gay marriage. To make something legal, it means it is proper and correct. It is proper and correct to tell lies? Gay people deceive themselves to think a male is not a male, a female is not female. They want everyone else to accept such lies and confusion. Think of the psychological harm in children who will be told a father is not a male or you were born of some unknown person etc..Gay people are psychological impaired to see the basic difference between male and female. You want to promote and support this? Don’t call yourself a Christian when you don’t seem to know your Bible at all or you simply choose to ignore the basic teaching therein by sounding oh so understanding and loving.
Hi Lizbeth,
Unfortunately your comment doesn’t make much sense. Perhaps you should read some different legal theories and as you will discover the law is not what is ‘proper and correct’ it is about a functioning society, projecting citizens and in some cases a majority view. Just to make my point, lying is not illegal. Telling lies in a public arena or publishing it is illegal because it damages a person’s reputation. Lying whilst it may not be ‘proper’ is not illegal.
Your comments about gay people thinking males are not males is completely incorrect and I think you should talk to some gay people and you may realise they are just attracted to and love the same sex. They understand gender identities. You may be confused with transgender people who I again think should have the same rights as everyone else.
In terms of being born to ‘unknown people’. This is the same as adoption and is something the church and society has always accepted. Many heterosexual couples have children who are not planned and this increases the risk of child abuse. I don’t imagine you are going to tell them not to have the unplanned child. Adopting children is a very big process and the people who do it are throughly screened and very dedicated parents.
I don’t think you understand homosexuality so please don’t call me shallow. Further, I have read the Bible cover to cover and had a lot of teaching on it. Of course there are different interpretations but my interpretation is that Jesus’s teachings were on loving, forgiveness, accepting the gospel, accepting Jesus into your heart and being an example of God’s love. I don’t think that trying to control the laws of the country to reduce minorities rights really fall into his main teachings. If you disagree with homosexuality then that is fine but why should your opinion stop people from living their lives. It isn’t hurting other people and the argument that it is hurting society and children is a very weak argument.
Hello Lizbeth,
My apologies Lizbeth, the reply I wrote you, was meant for Elizabeth, got mixed up with the comment and the reply.
Elizabeth’s arguments are with God, not with us.
Col.
The gospel is for Jew and Gentile. And it is for believer and unbeliever. The unbelievers will reject it as foolishness, but the believers will come to it as the power of God.
The gospel is the gospel of the BRIDEGROOM coming for his BRIDE, to redeem her, and bring her to himself. The gospel is the repitition of the Old Testament’s statements that say that God made humankind MALE and FEMALE, for marriage.
The gospel is the gospel that says divorce is not how marriage is meant to be conducted (hence divorce is a sin). Divorce should be illegal. The gospel is the gospel that says sex should be reserved for the marriage bed, any sex outside of marriage (fornication, adultery, homosexual sex) is not how sex is meant to be. It is wrong that sex outside of marriage is legal, and for that same reason it is wrong that prostitution is legal.
The life of a practicing homosexual is one lived in unrepentant sin. Christ calls all homosexuals, and all sinners for that matter, to drop everything at the foot of the cross where there is redemption. That means you are no longer identify as homosexual once you are truly in Christ, you identify as Christian.
Call this hate? I call this Christ’s example of speaking the truth in love. I love you LGBT’s. Let us remember Christ’s own love toward woman caught in adultery whom the Jewish authorities wanted stoned:
“Go now and leave your life of sin.”
When you leave your life of sin, it doesn’t mean you will not sin, it means your life is no longer defined by your sin, but by Christ. Drop your identification as homosexual, and pick up Christ as your life.
Hi Colin,
As I have said previously, I really believe Jesus’s message was to love others, forgive people, love God, accept Jesus and help others. I find your comments about divorce and sex very disturbing and seem to be in line with the kinds of laws that are in Saudi Arabia. Being a Christian is about choosing to live a life that is righteous and honourable it is not about being forced to do it by the laws of a country. Yes divorce is high in Australia and it is sad that many families are broken up by divorce but it certainly shouldn’t be illegal. God gave us freewill and so should the people of Australia. Further to this, many people get into abusive relationships and divorce really is the only option in these cases. If you think that abusive people are going to change and that they should just stay in the relationship, this is only going to hurt women and children (just what ACL claims to be trying to stop). Do some research on it if you don’t believe me.
I can see your point about prostitution but probably due to a different reason than you. Laws really need to protect people especially the weaker people in society. Preventing gay marriage is not protecting anyone. It will not stop people being gay and it does not protect children.
As long as christians can freely be christians and there are not laws which force them to do things which they are morally opposed then the countries laws are fine. Allowing gay marriage does not force any christian to be gay, it does not reduce your rights to believe that homosexuality is a sin. You can believe that if you want. I don’t have a problem with that.
Also can you please tell me where christ specifically talked about homosexuals?
You have evidently been deceived with this:
“Also can you please tell me where Christ specifically talked about homosexuals?”
Christian teaching is that Paul’s own words are equally authoritative as Jesus’ words. Also, the Old Testament is equally authoritative as New Testament teaching in cases where Jesus or Paul (or any other New Testament author) reaffirmed an Old Testament teaching in the New Testament. But where the New Testament has not reaffirmed, such as in the case of dietary laws, only those Old Testament teachings are not continued in practice this day. However dietary laws and other law not practiced today stil teach us important lessons in theory, eg. ‘what is holiness?’. And so:
“ALL Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness,” 1 Timothy 3:16
____
Now that we have recognised the authoritative nature of all scripture, did Paul talk about homosexuals? YES. Did the Old Testament teach about homosexuality, or is this a new teaching by Paul? YES, the Old Testament did teach about homosexuality, it is not something new.
Before leaping into the scriptures it would be wise to point out the flaw in some of the arguments supporting gay marriage. One of them is in the statement that ‘marriage predates Christianity’, which while true, those using this phrase are implying there that pre-Christian civilisations had gay marriage, but this is not the case.
For example the Greek word ‘hupandros’ refers to a man and a woman. In Greek religion when we look at the phrase ‘hieros gamos’ (or hierogamy in English) we see that Zeus and Hera (Greek god and goddess) got married. Significantly, Hera was the Greek goddess of marriage. All sacred marriages in all times past have always been associated with fertility, and fertility associated with conceiving children. Hera is associated with childbirth.
The problem is not with recognising same-sex love, indeed the church already recognises the existence of same-sex love (as illegitimate when fused with sex), but legitimacy is not the question here, recognition of existence is. Same-sex couples are just ranting because nature hasn’t allowed them to have children with each other and the church is criticised for pointing out the obvious.
Turning to the scriptures now:
“For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.” Romans 1:26-27
“We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine”
(The above passages reaffirms old testament teaching below.)
“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” Leviticus 18:22
____
So God made human beings with sex drives, but homosexuality was not how it was meant to be, same with adultery, divorce, and prostitution. Many people do not regard divorce as a sin, I happen to. I am not being unbiblical:
“For whatever does not proceed from faith is sin.” Romans 14:23
Given that, where did divorce proceed from according to Christ?
“Because of your hardness of heart Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so.” Matthew 19:8
As we can see, divorce first proceeded out of men’s hardness of heart, not an obedient faith in God.
Elizabeth,Christians love the gays but hate the sin.as does God.We are not gay bashing.Really Elizabeth the Bible is clear.It tells us in Laviticus,in Romans and Revelation.
When we all stand before our Maker one day, you will not be able to present a good argument before God.Get to know your instruction manuel a bit better.
I liked your non agressive message and your non condemning approach but unfortunately the gay and lesbian lifestyle simply just does not does not work and can not work.
If you are a follower of Jesus if you read
the apostles Pauls guidelines to homosexuality and healthy living and see how depraved the nations got who turned to these lifestyles and were punished by God in the Old Testament, not out of a revenge scheme but so his people would not turn to those ways of living. Constantly the nation of Israel wanted to turn to the lifestyles of those nations around them that was a constant corruption of what He (God) had intended for them.
Jesus told us to be in the world but not of the world , not letting this world dictate its ways to us. Yes still love them but not the worlds ways.
Yes I am a typical Aussie male who if I was embracing my culture I would be sleeping around with pretty women everywhere but I know tha is not what God wants for me and how damaging that would be to not only to my beautiful wife but also our lovely children.
I must strongly disagree with the result of where your thoughts will take us.
I think as a Christian you shouldnt speak for all of us, and read your Bible more carefully when Gods people allowed wickedness into their land judgement came. Jesus loves the people who choose this life style but He is the judge and we are his hands and feet if we do not oppose what God does where is His standard. And if that is true about not all Christians are standing on the side of rightouseness then it is no wonder that the world is heading down a very distructive path indeed. Gods word is truth and unshakeable get into it and study it with the Holy Spirit
You need to read your Bible.
It is very clear you can not be a christian and support Gay marriage, the bible say’s that it is to be between man and woman. Even in the old testament when men had more than one wife it was always females. If you don’t believe the old testament, then try the new testament ‘a man should be the husband of one wife’. No I will not give you scripture and verse because you clearly need to read the whole book. Don’t go around calling yourself a Christian if you don’t even know the essentials of the christian faith. Through the Bible it talks a great deal about sexual sins, and it always includes all sex between non-married people, i.e. one man and one woman.
As far as God is concerned the Government can change the law, but any two men who are ‘married’ or two women who are ‘married’ are not really married. God does not approve. He forgives and then says ‘go and sin no more’.
The church does push for these policies you write of. I love people but in this case i do not love thier actions, behaviour and what they stand for and that is not saying i don’t love them, as you say your a christian and these things that the gay people stand for is not of God and if it is not of God we know where it is from. Jesus does ask us to take a stand and to be good stewards as well as to uphold his values…what you write clearly shows you have a foot in both worlds and the luke warm will be spat out…so march in the mardi gra and show your true colors to your creator.
Bernies comments are directed at Elizabeths writting, and I pray that that the eyes of your understanding Elizabeth are truly opened and the deception is eradicated from your life allowing you to put both feet squarely on the rock of salvation.
Elizabeth
You have missed a very important point. As Christians our bodies are to be the “temple of the Holy Spirit”. As such we are not to defile ourselves. God has ordained marriage and sex to between a man and a woman in the bounds of marriage. Anything else is a defilement of God’s law and a defilement of our bodies. Please look more closely at God’s word aand you will hopefully see where you are in error.
Regards
These Bills have nothing to do with Rights – gay couples are already seen as being in a De Facto relationship in the legal sense of the term. There is nothing stopping them from being a ‘couple’.
These Bills are a Direct Threat by a minority group (under 5% of the population against the Christian population. The Marriage Ceremony appears in historical records dating back to 30 AD and is used in context of being a Christian event. This is mere robbery from 1 cultural/spiritual group for the political granduer to appease a minority group who have no claim to this ceremony or its history.
Further to this, in Scandinavian countries where same-sex marriage is legal, very few of the gay population are taking it up. Of those that do, the divorce rate is skyrocketing in comparison to heterosexual couples (1 country stats female same-sex marriages have a 170% higher divorce rate).
The costs of these legislative changes, and the cost of the related divorces and the destabilisation of the family unit is enough to question the forwarding of these Bills.
Political Granduer to appease less than 5% of the population – tail wagging the dog
If these bills have nothing to do with rights what exactly do you suggest they are about?
Thousands upon thousands of people of no christian faith are married every year, why aren’t you up in arms about those people as they would certainly have no claim to christian ceremony or history.
Is divorce exclusively lmiited to same sex marriages? No and to suggest it is just absurd. How exactly would a dissolution of a same sex marriage effect marriage differently than the thousands upon thousands of marriages between men and women (christians and non-christians) which end in divorce now? Is it divorce per se that disturbs you or only divorce between certain people?
Polls suggest that the majority of Australian citizens are in favour of same sex marriage. Your talk of a minority group amounting to a tail wagging the dog is just plain wrong.
John van den Akker says: “Polls suggest that the majority of Australian citizens are in favour of same sex marriage.”
What polls? This is bandied about but never sourced and is an urban myth created to sell the idea. What has been pointed out is that there was such a poll commissioned by a gay lobby group where the question was along the lines of “Do you expect that Australia will have gay marriage?” and a majority said yes. If true then it indicates a loaded question designed to elicit a large percentage saying yes and the response is the twisted and misrepresented as a response to a question connected to but fundamentally different from that in the survey. Again this is testament to the fact that gay marriage is a campaign based Goebbel’s theory that a big lie told often enough will become accepted as truth.
What poll? You say the claim is never sourced but the problem must lie with you, because you can find direct citations in 2 seconds of Googling.
For example, Galaxy poll Feb 2012: 62% support
Herald/Nielsen November 2011: 62% support
Roy Morgan July 2011: 68% support
and so forth.
But you indicated that you have decided a priori that any poll showing large support is faulty, so I’m not sure why you need to pretend that they don’t exist in the first place.
But Louise, you did not provide the URLs which you claim support those percentages. I googled some of them and received results on unemployment rates. Not percentages supporting the non-existant gay marriage. Why are you so coy? I did spot a couple of online references to newspaper accounts but neither said anything about the question asked or the methodolgy. I referred to the question being hidden and as to the methodolgy it has been remarked that face to face interviews in surveys commissioned by the likes of GetUp do tend to elicit higher percentages because of the implied response people have been conditioned to expect from saying they do not support gay marriage, i.e. that to say so one must be a homophobic bigot.
I wrote
3. The essential public purpose of marriage is to attach mothers and fathers to their children and to one another. That is the only reason the government has any valid interest in marriage – it is a societal good within terms of natural law. Same-sex attracted people do not engage in procreative sexual activity and their relationships do not form part of the essential public purpose of marriage. Artificially having children made for these relationships denies the child their right to both their biological mother and father with the full intention. ART is ethically dubious, and using it to create a “right” not naturally occurring is unethical.
4. By separating biology as the basis of parenthood we are placing in the hands of judges the “right” to decide who is a parent of a child and who is not, ignoring biology. This is not only unjust, but unethical and immoral. These are unjust laws and have no place in the Australian constitution. Creating “rights” do not make them an inherent right of a human being under natural law, simply Caeser decrees it so. Fascism by stealth.
May I suggest you research with The Ruth Institute. They are active in this area in America and their arguments are solid and all secular (they are Christians). Here’s the link to the site http://www.ruthinstitute.org/
An article on a speech Dr J gave http://www.franciscan.edu/News/2011/Pro-Family_Speaker_Challenges_Students/
I’ve got her pamphlets and cd set. Good preparation for this debate. Unfortunately I’m on work assignment interstate so can’t quote more from her presentations.
Elizabeth. There is no discrimination in the current legal definition of marriage: No man is allowed to marry another man. No woman is allowed to marry another woman. Individuals are subject to the law not couples. Likewise in terms of marriage as it exists in reality, the purpose of which is the ensure that society has a future as a *functional* society, not a dysfunctional one. The benefits of marriage flow to all members of society, regardless of sexual orientation. Minority groups, including homosexuals, are, relatively speaking better off with marriage than without as witnessed by dysfunctional societies where marriage rates are low.
For centuries people who practicised homosexual activity felt they had to pretend that aspect of their personality did not exist, i.e. that they were just like everyone else. For a couple of decades they were honest. Now they want to revert to the pretense that they are just like everyone else but this time they want society to do the pretending. What the so called ‘gay marriage’ movement is about is divorcing the legal definition of marriage from the reality and create a legal fiction surrounding the bedrock of functional human society. A society which makes it a law to tell a lie is already dysfunctional and has no future.
At its most basic government exists to preserve and defend the common good but gay marriage proponents would have government attack the Good of Truth. That is an attack against the Divine.
Why do “gay” lobbyists believe they have the right to change the historical meaning of marriage? (i.e. the commitment of one man and one woman to each other for life, to the exclusion of all others, with the generally anticipated begetting of children to complete the family unit.)
It is impossible for “gay” couples to procreate, so cannot fulfil a major purpose for which our Creator ordained marriage. By trying to “correct” their childlessness through adoption, IVF, surrogacy or whatever, they treat the child so engendered as a commodity to fulfil their own self-interest. This is a grave injustice to defenceless human beings and will cause much anguish when they realise they have no knowledge of their roots.
“It is impossible for “gay” couples to procreate, so cannot fulfil a major purpose for which our Creator ordained marriage. By trying to “correct” their childlessness through adoption, IVF, surrogacy or whatever, they treat the child so engendered as a commodity to fulfil their own self-interest.”
So are you saying that heterosexuals who know that they are infertile should not marry and try to “correct” their childlessness through adoption, IVF, surrogacy or whatever?
I don’t see the difference.
From a religious perspective I do not support religious group losing their rights and being forced to perform same sex religious marriage ceremonies against their will. It’s the right of the religious body to deploy religious marriage how it wants, and for some christians it’s obviously not in line with their faith.
However, in the secular context I support same sex marriage because of legal rights conferred on married couples.
So. I support christian’s right to deny religious same sex marriage if the church says no, and support same sex marriage from a legal perspective. I think they can work together.
Dear Brian J,
I am curious to know whether you believe that any Christian person involved in the wedding industry ie photographer, florists, cake makers, printers, reception venue owners, should also have the right to refuse to participate in weddings that violate their personal beliefs?
How about religious schools who believe homosexuality is sexual immorality, should they have to accommodate gay couples at their school formals, or include homosexuality in their sex education, or have Gay straight alliances forced upon their schools?
Did you know that every single Catholic adoption agency in Massachusetts that refused to adopt children to gay couples has been forced to close?
These things are all very real results of legislating in favour of SSM. Look at Canada, Massachusetts, New York, Spain, the Netherlands etc,
Please consider this case of a Christian pastor who has been charged by an American court of crimes against humanity because two years ago he stood before a Ugandan tribunal arguing that while he did not agree with homosexuality , homosexuals should be given treatment and counseling not persecution.
Now he is being held responsible for all the violent acts that have happened towards homosexuals in Uganda….utterly ridiculous!
Is this what should happen to Christian ministers who speak out against homosexuality in Australia?
http://www.lifesitenews.com/blog/christian-minister-accused-of-crime-against-humanity-for-homosexuality-stan
Sorry but one concession for churches to not be forced to marry homosexuals is just not good enough.
Please think about what is really at stake before you decide to support SSM.
By the way- I noticed many of the earlier respondents have written what seems to be their submission as a response here- do they know this is not where they put in a true submission?
There appears to be some confusion.
To all homosexuals,
Believe this my friends and never ever doubt it, Our almighty Father in heaven Loves you with all his heart and longs for the day when you will come back to Him in a loving relationship through our Lord Jesus Christ. Don’t let the god of this world(satan) deceive you. God made the Law, Man and Woman only in marriage. To disobey is between you and Him. Remember friends, GOD SAYS NO!
Spot on T.C
“For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.” Romans 1:26-27
“We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine”
(The above passages reaffirms old testament teaching below.)
“You shall not lie with a male as with a woman; it is an abomination.” Leviticus 18:22
Enough said! (except that same-sex couples look ridiculous)
Hazel you are so right. What is it that we don’t understand about those scriptures.It seems so clear to me.Only a non believer will try to justify their position.In a secular society you have no God.You make your own laws according to your own mind.
Marriage is for man and woman designed by God. It’s NOT to be any other way. Plus think of all the children that will grow up in confusion if it was allowed.
The concept of marriage has existed for thousands of years and has always been understood to be between a man and a woman. Homosexuality is not only tolerated but celebrated in Australia; there is no need for any amendments to the existing laws regarding marriage. This will not significantly improve the lives of Homosexuals in any way, it will only lead to more division in Australian society.
Authorised celebrants, including ministers of religion, being forced to perform same sex marriages is a horrifying concept and it disturbs me that this could even be considered. Nobody should be forced to provide such a service against their conscience (whether it involves homosexuals OR heterosexuals), let alone a minister of a religion which forbids such an act.
Who says ministers should be forced to do so? I believe gay marriage should be allowed but if a minister doesn’t feel comfortable doing so for whatever reason he should not be forced.
You are imposing on others by disagreeing with gay marriage, it being allowed will not affect you in anyway.
Sorry Alex – It is worth reading Paul Kelly’s article in The Australian
Passion for same-sex marriage a problem for Labor
“In political terms, legalisation of same-sex marriage brings state and church into direct conflict. To try to solve this problem, Labor activists specify that changes to the Marriage Act will not impose an obligation on a minister of religion to solemnise any marriage. This is the escape clause and it is pivotal. It is designed to permit religious freedom to continue to exist in Australia. Only a fool would accept this at face value.”
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/passion-for-same-sex-marriage-a-problem-for-labor/story-e6frg74x-1226209574310
Dear Sir/ Madam
Our world that we are living now is getting crazy, a lot of destruction , going on we are all still called blessed in this nation of Australia. Don’t let destruction come into this country by legalizing gay marriage , don’t let our future children suffered for it
and pay the crime they never committed… Please think …….Fear GOD…..
You know it is not right….
michelle,
God made male and female the bible tells us Genesis1:27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him: male and female created he them.28 And God blessed them and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply how can this happen in same sex marriages IT CAN’T there should not be other doners involved either for this is not of God and His is our Creator. Sodomites are an abomination to God look what happened to Sodom and Gomorah in the bible Genesis19:24 Then the LORD rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorah brimstone and fire from the LORD out of heaven25 And he overthrew those cities, and all the plain, and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the ground. This is a GROSS SIN and God will not turn his judgement away from this. Don’t allow this to bring down our country and our future.
Up until recent times, even though same sex relations took place it was kept more private for the couple concerned. This kept minors from becoming curious & starting out in a life that most would agree would be a confusing approach to life. Please remember most of us (until recent times did come from a mother and father). I also agree that in certain circumstances both men and women do have quite different genital dysfunctions. This does not mean that we should take the minority and justify the majority just for the sake of a sexual excuse. If we are honest and looked at the majority of same sex couples, one dominates as the male and the other as a female. That’s in both Homosexual and Lesbians alike. This alone should show us that there is something amiss. The one thing I have noticed and don’t agree on is that women are more general in their search for intimacy and love. On the other hand most Men, (though not all), seem to strike at the younger of the same sex then after they have had their fun they move on destroying the other persons identity leaving them empty, feeling used abused & confused. This is why I personally take the stand on a heterosexual vote as when a child gets bullied at school calling out to Mummy, Mummy or Daddy, Daddy this simply does not gel with me.
Yes! I am a Christian and believe in a creator God. I’m also not trying to prove his existence to you or otherwise but I’m sure deep down inside most people agree with me on that even though they would not admit it. As the saying goes, There are no atheists in foxholes. Let’,s face the truth if you can? There is absolutely nothing attractive in another person of the same sex and if a person does think there is then it would only be a very few trying to pervert the course of righteous living..
We are all concerned about the fact that in some countries, strict Muslim leadership is leading to the persecution of Christians – based only on the fact that they do not follow the countries ‘main’ religion. For a long time in Australia we have prided ourselves on our religious tolerance. We have accepted the fact that non-Christian religions, and non-religions all exist, and we have allowed these people to be married by the state, or by churches who support their religious position. Australian law is undoubtedly based on Christian values, but the greatest of these is under-pinnings is ‘do no harm’ (aka love one another). Why then, are we now trying to force Christian views on Christians and non-Christians alike? Surely it is between the people involved and God. This is only a slim step away from forcing the Christian religion onto everyone in the country, and using force to back it up. That would be a sad day.
Here are my reasons not to support same sex mariage.
If we all followed in same sex relationships the world would be without humans in less than one hundred and twenty years.
Marriage is a unique relationship between one man and one woman.
Marriage is the foundation of family, which in turn is the foundation of society.
If marriage can be redefined to include two people of the same gender, why not three or more people?
Marriage is deeply held by a large proportion of the population for cultural and religious reasons and this should be respected.
Redefining marriage has potential serious consequences for religious freedom and freedom of conscience.
Same-sex marriage sets up a new family model that trashes the truth that gender is vital to a child in family formation.
Research shows that a child with married, biological mother and father do best.
Children should be given the chance to start life with both their biological parents.
Okay, some of these points are pretty ridiculous:
“If we all followed in same sex relationships the world would be without humans in less than one hundred and twenty years.”
This makes no sense. Source? Otherwise it sounds like you made it up.
“Marriage is a unique relationship between one man and one woman”
This is a position on Marriage. Not a reason
“Marriage is the foundation of family, which in turn is the foundation of society.”
There are plenty of families whose parents aren’t married. And in turn there are plenty of married couples who don’t have kids. The idea of family is much more dynamic than just the nuclear family.
“If marriage can be redefined to include two people of the same gender, why not three or more people?”
SSM doesn’t equal polygamy. Separate issues both ethically and legislatively.
“Marriage is deeply held by a large proportion of the population for cultural and religious reasons and this should be respected.”
And people’s sexual orientation should also be respected and included too. Respect is a two way street.
“Redefining marriage has potential serious consequences for religious freedom and freedom of conscience”
I don’t understand the fear behind this. The bills that are being presented are specific that religious institutions will not have to perform ssm if they don’t want to.
“Same-sex marriage sets up a new family model that trashes the truth that gender is vital to a child in family formation”
What has gender got to do with sexual orientation?
“Research shows that a child with married, biological mother and father do best.”
This is debatable as there is research that supports both sides and overall is inconclusive
“Children should be given the chance to start life with both their biological parents.”
Sometimes that chance isn’t there. I am sure a child would rather two loving parents than none at all.
“There are plenty of families whose parents aren’t married.”
And they don’t do as well as married ones: http://www.clasp.org/admin/site/publications_states/files/0086.pdf
“The idea of family is much more dynamic than just the nuclear family.”
Maybe so, does that mean we should also recognize families that result from polyamory/polygamy, bridal kidnappings, child marriages and so on?
“SSM doesn’t equal polygamy. Separate issues both ethically and legislatively.”
Because some people do see themselves as the next step: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/three-in-marriage-bed-more-of-a-good-thing/story-e6frg6z6-1226218569577
Once you allow homosexual relationships and ‘marriages’, anything goes.
“Redefining marriage has potential serious consequences for religious freedom and freedom of conscience.”
“I don’t understand the fear behind this. The bills that are being presented are specific that religious institutions will not have to perform ssm if they don’t want to.”
First, can you guarantee such ‘protection’ for religious institutions will go on? But there is something else you may be missing. There is more to religion (and also a marriage) than just a wedding ceremony. Religion is meant to be whole of life, informing and instructing people how to live. With that in mind, will you allow for say a wedding-cake shop operator to refuse to cater for a homosexual ‘wedding’ precisely because it clashes with their conscience and/or religious beliefs? How about a bed-and-breakfast operator that refuse to allow a homosexuals to come in because it clashes with their religious beliefs/conscience. Will you allow that? If you don’t that means you threaten religious freedom.
“Sometimes that chance isn’t there. I am sure a child would rather two loving parents than none at all.”
And parents mean father and mother.
Hi all, I think you all need to read the recorded comments by Mr David Coburn, published by the Christian Post on March 13, 2012.
“Gay UK Politician Defends Faith Community in Stance Against Same-Sex Marriage”
David Coburn, the openly gay spokesman of Great Britain’s U.K. Independence Party, claims that Prime Minister David Cameron is “picking a fight” with the religious community over same-sex marriage, insisting that pushing such legislation “shows a lack of toleration towards others who look on marriage as a holy sacrament between man and woman.”
Coburn and UKIP made their opposition to the same-sex marriage legislation known last week, arguing that civil unions are a superior alternative that would not hinder religious freedom.
According to Coburn, the government’s preference for same-sex marriages over unions implies that “marriage is something else… if so, it is clearly the domain of the church and of other faiths – and it is none of the government’s business to meddle with it.”
UKIP also claims, “If the government does legislate in this way, we believe that any criticism of same-sex marriage which may be expressed by someone on the basis of their faith could be classified as a ‘hate crime.’ That would be a grotesque assault on people’s freedom of conscience.”
A week after explaining UKIP’s stance on the same-sex marriage issue, Coburn contributed an editorial to the same-sex marriage supporting website PinkNews.co.uk.
In the article, Coburn defended his position as an openly gay man opposed to same-sex marriage legislation by arguing that it was a question of liberty.
Coburn begins his article by saying, “The same-sex marriage debate is not an old-fashioned left-right political issue. It’s about freedom.”
“I have always fought for equal treatment and I believe civil partnerships have achieved that,” he continues. “However I think it does the gay community no good whatever to cross the street and pick a fight with people of faith.
“We have for so long been persecuted ourselves that it seems like performing an unnecessary victory roll over a defeated enemy to demand that our perfectly satisfactory arrangements should be called ‘marriage.’ This shows a lack of toleration towards others who look on marriage as a holy sacrament between man and woman.”
Although UKIP is a relatively small party in British politics, it has benefitted from some recent defections from other groups over same-sex marriage.
Two weeks ago, former Conservative Roger Helmer changed his affiliation to UKIP after praising the comments of Scottish Catholic leader Cardinal O’Brien, who claims that gay marriage is a “grotesque subversion of a universally accepted human right.”
I don’t think I need to say any more!!!!!!!
If God has put us on this earth to be married to the same sex, both genders would be able to father or give birth to a child, obviously when God created us he had decided that there was male and female, one was the father and the other was the mother the same as in the animal kingdom, you don’t see animals mating with the same sex. God gave us dominion over the animals and I sometimes think that we have proven it was a bad choice, animals often have far more sense. We have made such a mess of this earth of ours in so many ways and this is just another situation which should never have been permitted to get as far as it has, it is not how we were made and it is not the right way to do things.
Dawn: There are over 1500 species of animals that display homosexual behaviour. You need to educate yourself before making statements. And you are correct animals do have more sense than humans. They don’t interfere in the private and personal business of another animal. You obviously believe in God and I don’t have an issue with that but have you ever thought that God also created same sex attracted people to give a balance to the human race? Could you imagine if the entire world was entirely heterosexual couples and gave birth to a child? Look at Africa and those places now. It would be far worse. Again, a marriage ceremony is no longer just a religious ceremony. There are thousands and thousands of heterosexual couples marry outside of the church now. If you choose to have faith, well and good, but don’t assume that same sex attracted people weren’t created in gods eyes just like you were.
Jan there may be animal species which display homosexual behaviour but it has been commented that they do so opportunistically, i.e. no female is available, e.g. having been reserved by the alpha male, so engage in it as a proxy as in prisons, rather than in preference to heterosexual behaviour. You also say “They don’t interfere in the private and personal business of another animal” but that is exactly what proponents of gay ‘marriage’ (so called) want government to do contrary to the cry when they wanted sodomy decriminalised, i.e. to bring private behaviour between two homoesexuals into the public arena. Society interefere’s in the private behaviour of heterosexuals because such behaviour has public consequences whereas behaviour between two homosexuals has none. Government therefore has no business getting involved.
Jan:
About 90% of the earth’s people live on 10% of the land. Additionally, about 90% of the people live north of the equator.
Population density of the continents:
•North America – 32 people per square mile
•South America – 73 people per square mile
•Europe – 134 people per square mile
•Asia – 203 people per square mile
•Africa – 65 people per square mile
•Australia – 6.4 people per square mile
Perhaps the problem with places like Africa is plain old poverty and ungodly global selfishness.
The relationship between one man and one woman is the foundation of a family with a potential Dad and Mum. Children deserve the promise of this age old and honoured relationship. I see the risk of a child being raised with the impression that same sex relationships are a normal and universally accepted state of family life.
I have read the various opinions in this thread, and welcomed the lively discussion though, some of the reasonings seem to be based on misinterpretations of Bible passages. I’ve used the suggested instructions above to have my say re the Marriage Amendment Bill 2010, using the suggested points in my submission.
There’s something really beautiful and sweet when the man and his wife stand together. It’s really cute!
And I guess just looking at the structure of the human body, obviously man and woman have very different and defined qualities from each other. And somehow have been designed to fit perfectly into each other. Any other way is abnormal. Marriage should be kept between man and woman, they specialise in different fields but bring balance in a relationship. The woman made more tender, and in general a carer while the man is physically and on the whole mentally and emotionally stronger.
Thinking about the objection to same sex marriage using the kids’ rights argument. Same sex couples will be having kids – that’s not going to stop, through surrogacy or otherwise. I think you would agree that the ideal structure for raising children would be a legally married couple. So, for the sake of these children, wouldn’t it then point to allowing the parents to get married? Should these kids be denied the right to live in a sold, married family structure?
Saying that they will be having kids through surrogacy or otherwise only makes nonsense of homosexuality. You can’t have kids with homosexuality. And marriage is between a man and a woman.
Marriage is between a man & a woman; that’s how God said it to be & also nature declares it. As that is how the future generations are made with male & female & not male & male or female & female. The population of either people or animals would stop if the same sex came together. Children need the nuturing & love; of both a mother & a father. Not 2 mothers or 2 fathers. D. Adams
I strongly oppose the amendment to the marriage act. I believe that marriage is between one man and one woman. I believe that same sex relationships are not blessed by God, in fact, I believe that same sex relationships will help bring down the judgments of God as happened long ago in Sodom and Gomorrah. These cities were destroyed. See Genesis 19.
I believe that children should ideally be raised by their biological parents, their father and their mother.
Bill Muehlenberg’s blog is good read here:
Why the Demand For Homosexual Marriage?
As I have carefully documented in my new book, Strained Relations, not only do most people not give a rip about homosexual marriage, but nor do most homosexuals. It was never even on the radar until just recently, but now it seems to be the most pressing item there is, at least according to the mainstream media.
http://www.billmuehlenberg.com/2012/03/24/why-the-demand-for-homosexual-marriage/
MJ
It is great that you have written this and ACL have published it. Good on you for having the guts to post on what is seen as a conservative site. I am not particularly conservative nor am comfortable with many aspects of the liberal party, especially on economic issues.
As a homosexual you enjoy the same rights as the rest of us in relation to couple relationships with many legal rights, including the right to access the courts.
I am also glad that you love your partner and that is great. I also love my partner in a natural male and female relationship. If your relationship is sexual, it goes against the natural order. Male and Female is the natural order, just look at the animal kingdom.
But like you I also love other things. I love my father, brother and grandfather, but it does not mean that I will have a sexual relationship with them. What would make your relationship right, in the natural order of things, if your relationship with your lover non sexual.
What homosexuals want is to be accepted. You have rights now. But the reality is most people just think homosexuality is a perversion. If homosexuals want to be accepted by the community, they have to not try and shove the culture of homosexuality down our throats and not present it as some beautiful choice.
As any health professional, the actual physical act of homosexuality causes all sorts of health problems.
The QLD election is a good example of the unacceptability of the homosexual agenda.
The ALP have had incomprehensible losses in NSW, VIC and now QLD. They losing because they are out of touch with the electorate. They will find out at the next election nationally.
The really sad part is the ALP have been far more visionary on the economy for the last forty years and are better economic managers than what the liberals have ever been.
The ALP are out of touch and the homosexual agenda is the flag ship of just how out of touch they are.
There are over 23 million people in Australia and parties need to decide on issues that unite all of us and not spend their political capital issues on divisive issues like homosexuality.
David
Thanks for the reply DavidD. I don’t think it necessarily takes ‘guts’ to write on a conservative website – after all, this is an issue that affects me. I must admit I don’t actually understand how it has any effect on heterosexual Christian conservatives, but there you go.
Just a couple of points though on what you’ve said (and I hope the ACL publishes it). Firstly, your point that “Male and Female is the natural order, just look at the animal kingdom.” Probably not the best point to make. Homosexuality has been observed in over 1 500 species within the animal kingdom (B. Bagemihl, ‘Biological Exuberance: Animal Homosexuality and Natural Diversity’, 1999). It seems that homosexuality occurs across a broad spectrum of species in nature. A quick google will also provide much information on how it has been observed in all human societies across several thousand years. So I find it hard to believe that homosexuality is not a natural occurence.
“As a homosexual you enjoy the same rights as the rest of us in relation to couple relationships with many legal rights, including the right to access the courts.” Actually, same sex couples don’t enjoy the same legal rights as straight couples. As I stated in my earlier post, there are issues with immigration. There are also discrepancies with inheritance law. Even taking your partners surname, which for a straight couple is as simple as presenting your marriage certificate, is an entirely different process for gay couples. This is not ‘enjoying the same rights.’
I can’t accept that the ALP lost the Queensland election because it introduced same sex civil unions. This is a government that sold my state’s assets, changed our car registration costs from the cheapest in the country to the dearest, has almost doubled the cost of public transport tickets within a single term. These are the things that I’ve heard people talking about as election issues, and they are the things that I’ve read in the newspaper and seen on television as being listed in polls of random voters as their main concerns. I’ve not seen or heard of the ‘homosexual agenda’ being raised once, with the exception of the ACL’s Wendy Francis in her interviews on ABC radio.
And finally to Sam (26/03/1984). “God provided us with an instruction manual. In Romans Chapter One, God’s position on homosexuality is clearly laid out.” Please don’t ask for the laws of our country to be based on religion. The ACL is currently (rightly) campaigning against the persecution of Christians in Egypt – a country where laws are based on religion (in that case, Islam). So you can see how that turns out. It may be your instruction manual, because it is the book you believe in. It has no place in public policy – it is your personal belief.
Anyway, again if this gets published, cheers to DavidD for being quite respectful in your replies. Well, apart from telling me that my relationship with my partner is akin to my sleeping with my grandfather, and that I’m unnatural. But it’s cool, I went to a Christian high school, so I’ve developed a pretty high tolerance for insults and put downs (which, I can tell you, does wonders for your self esteem when you’re 15 years old. I mean, if I hadn’t gone to my school pastor for advice when I realised I was gay, I might have missed out on the fun experiences of attempting suicide twice !).
Actually, come to think of it, for a ‘religion of love’, some Christians know how to hurt people pretty well.
“The ACL is currently (rightly) campaigning against the persecution of Christians in Egypt – a country where laws are based on religion (in that case, Islam).”
“It may be your instruction manual, because it is the book you believe in. It has no place in public policy – it is your personal belief.”
Actually, you and those Egyptian Muslims have one thing in common: to dismiss/discount/eliminate Christians from the public, maybe even totally (by that I mean physical extermination).
The idea of marriage is based on the bible. It is a ritual between a man and a woman and the almighty, once the two have agreed that they are willing to forsake all others and give themselves away to one another, they then go before God as he makes them one. Marriage and it’s meaning is bible based, the bible speaks of the idea of a creator, who created man and woman for a purpose.
If two men or two woman decide that they want to join together in a marriage type covnant, then there should be another one for them. They can call there bond something else, something different because marriage is already taken.
The foundations of marriage already has it’s meaning, and is defined by the bible who states that man and woman were created for the purpose to live with one another.
God created a male & female to be inrelationship. We can’t go againt that, if we do, there will be consequences in the land. Those are in Authority should take a stand to save our Nation.
Homosexuality is found in over 400 different spices world wide. Clearly God wants them this way – he doesn’t make mistakes! He is perfect and makes us perfectly how he wants us. Stop questioning his work. God loves all his children equally so who are you to judge what’s right and what’s wrong? God is the only one who can do that and i’m sure that if he was against homosexuality he wouldn’t have created so many of them in so many different species!
One of the biggest concerns of those with religious objections to marriage equality is that the government will be inhibiting religious freedom by allowing same-sex marriage. On the contrary, the legalisation of same-sex marriage will increase religious freedom because it will remove the government restrictions placed upon those religious institution that DO wish to perform same-sex marriage ceremonies. Jesus had two dads and he turned out ok.
Sally you are confusing what is your desires and those of the Holy Spirit.
Galations 5:19-26
19 When you follow the desires of your sinful nature, the results are very clear: sexual immorality, impurity, lustful pleasures, 20 idolatry, sorcery, hostility, quarreling, jealousy, outbursts of anger, selfish ambition, dissension, division, 21 envy, drunkenness, wild parties, and other sins like these. Let me tell you again, as I have before, that anyone living that sort of life will not inherit the Kingdom of God.
22 But the Holy Spirit produces this kind of fruit in our lives: love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23 gentleness, and self-control. There is no law against these things!
24 Those who belong to Christ Jesus have nailed the passions and desires of their sinful nature to his cross and crucified them there. 25 Since we are living by the Spirit, let us follow the Spirit’s leading in every part of our lives. 26 Let us not become conceited, or provoke one another, or be jealous of one another.
Sally
Sally, It might also be said there are 400 different . . . . (Fill that in gap with anything you like.)
That does mean those . . . . are endorsed by God or that those . . . . are therefore ‘perfect’. (your word)
God provided us with an instruction manual. In Romans Chapter One, God’s position on homosexuality is clearly laid out.
Marriage. All must agree that marriage is based on a religious foundation for the purpose of man and woman coming together. Regardless of children it is between a male and female.
In saying this no person whom has the slightest respect for religion would even consider same sex marriage as acceptable, and for those with no religion…..well they are already condemned so not much hope there.
No matter what religion you are or even if you are like our lost sheep PM , we will all be judged on our actions once we leave this world. We are only here for a short time and this time is but a test to see how we have elected to use our free will…………the greatest gift of all.
No one is saying that a homosexual cant be with another homosexual or a lesbian be with another lesbian, that is the beauty of free will. If however you choose to change our definition of marriage then you are playing with fire and ridiculing the fundamental belief that the vast vast majority of our society respect to keep us as a humane community.
If man was meant to be with man and woman with woman, how would life continue?
It often amazes me how the most intelligent creature on earth, us human’s , can accept that the joining of same sex couple be acceptable when no other creature on earth acts in this same way. Doesn’t that seam odd?
Life is a test…………..choose wisely and respect each other……………..your time to leave this wonderful world come before you realize it.
I think God knew what he was doing when he creating mankind because he create Adam and Eve and not Adam and Steve, in today’s world nothing is bad in the eyes of people, as long as they get what they want. we are full of greed and there is no fear of God because we reject him, The bible says, if God didn’t spare his son but send him to die he will not spare you. For a few days that we live here on earth we do everything possible to please ourselves and forget about eternity. We cant love God and live like the devil. Please think it twice and marry the right person for the kids sake. God bless you.
Marriage is a sacred union between a man and a woman this is how god designed us to be joined together. This is also how children are to be brought up with a father and mother sharing the parenting roles. Two same sex couples cannot naturally conceive and bear children this is a physical impossibility therefore our marriage laws should not be altered whatsoever.
I am tolerant of same sex relationships although I don’t necessarily agree with them.
Why can’t they be satisfied with having a Registered Union? Marriage was created to be between male and female. Male and female procreate and this brings into the world more people. God got it right in the first place, why try to change what He did?
Marriage was intended to be the union of Man ADAM and Woman Eve. God
Spoke it and intended it to be!! Male and Female. Believe in God of the Holy
Bible, our creator He can not make a mistake He is GOD and He is Perfect,
Good and Right ……now and forever!
If same sex marriage becomes legalized in Australia then we should hit back by creating a union with a different name (traditional union for example) for heterosexual marriage and force society to accept this as a legal option just as they have done for de-facto. That might mean denying that you are “married” and insisting that our name for the union be recognized in all legal matters including forms at hospitals etc.
There are two possibilities to explain our existance: Creation or Evolution. By the Creation God made male and female with complimentary sex organs to reproduce and also to fuse those different sexorgans to become one flesh.
By the Evolution there are two different sexes able to reproduce when they join. Same sex couples die out.
In both cases same sex couples are wrong from the origional design.
And there is no ‘homosexual gene’ somebody is born with, because homosexuals don’t have offspring. Nobody is born as a murder or politician, they become. But it is fashionable to be weird and do the wrong thing for: LOOK AT ME !!!!
I for one do not condone gay Marriage! and that is from a person who for several years was involved in the so called lifestyle! I only find that this is just another way that the Gay movement can get back on the attack against Quote! (the Breeders) as I have heard them say,in the past. I am so happy that I had a Married Mum and Dad,Not of perfection but a Married Mum and Dad none the less. I know that a lot of the people that Demand!the right to marry are only to young and I would say that commitment would not be in their Dictionary,and I have seen that in the lifestyle Myself.Yet it would be said that Heterosexuals,Do the same Yet I would say Most are committed to their marriage,especially when God is in the Middle of the Union. Yet I would go on to say that any Child brought up by the Gay Persons,should have the Right to Sue the parents for any obvious lack of (Male and Female role Model Parent) as I only know too well that Either sex have different qualities and that the other cannot give! (naturally) that is.
please note! No one can say that I am a biggot or sexist because once again, I have been were they are.And another thing the Love they feel for one another I see as a Codependent relationship.
I feel so much that the Gay and lesbian people feel they have to have the Same as anyone else,is just like the Broken Child they are within their Spirit and Soul.
Marriage does not need redefining like some word meaning in the dictionary. Marriage is a union between a man and a woman. End of story. Redefining marriage would have a long string of potential serious consequences for religious freedom and freedom of conscience. Can you imagine in our lovely country of Australia to have religious pastors and people hauled over the courts for discrimination in obeying the laws of God over any other adverse law. NO WAY. I agree with Robyn, God put the right laws in motion the first time, why try to change what God did perfectly.
Hello dear/sir leaders,
We need you to make sure that you stand on the side of truth and the feelings of our society that marriage is in between a man and a woman. No more no less.
Thank for listening to your people
Marriage is what our society is built on. We should not undermine it
Marriage is what our society is built and marrage should be protected for the wellbeing of our society
I respect that others have a different view and I trust they will extend the same courtesy to me. I consider divorce the biggest threat to marriage, not increased membership. Maybe that makes me a ‘bad’ Christian but I was instructed to love others as I would love myself, not to judge or I will be judged, and to love my enemy. It’s not my place to judge others but to be an example. God gave us free will to follow Christ’s instruction. If others exert that free will and live in ‘sin’ then that is their fate. Christ alone will intercede on my Judgement Day, no one else. I am not accountable to ACL or anyone else who shares their views on this matter.
Kwan Ming Leung & Sau Chun Lai
My wife and I strongly believe that marriage as it is between a man and a woman for life, is ideal for a number of reasons. They include:
The father should be a role-model to the son.
The mother should be a role-model to the daughter.
Combined the should be a role-model of a home that their children aspire to.
It is ordained of God that marriage is between a man and a woman. God made Adam and Eve. Two of the same would not have commenced the human race.
As an Australian I recognise the rights of all people to a life of freedom and choice. With these universal rights in mind, I must question the move to allow marriage among the gay community of Australia. I believe it ignores the rights of those Australians whose values determine marriage to be exclusively between a man and a woman. I also must question the motivation of the gay community in using a Christian institution as a confirmation of their relationship when Christian values do not recognise homosexuality as a natural relationship and the Christian community is largely unfairly accused of homophobia because these views are contradictory to the gay community. This does not mean that the gay community do not have rights. It is merely that the Christian community should not have to give up their rights to the gay community who are unfairly taking what is not theirs to have. Further, the reasons for marriage cannot be met within a gay union. 1) marriage is between a man and a woman full stop. 2) Marriage is for the birth of children that can only happen between a man and a woman and 3) that only in a marriage between a man and a woman can the raising of children be fully supported and children given every chance of a normal, balanced upbringing.
If marriage between couples other than a man and a woman were to be recognised within Australia, it would severely undermine the values on which marriage has to this day been built and nurtured upon. Additionally, relationships would become inconsequential and the importance of marriage would be trivialised by the introduction of laws that would allow anyone to be married. As society develops, we become more concerned with what we can’t do than why these moral principles and laws are instilled into society in the first place. We continue to open the gates to freedom to do what we like without consequence. As a result, society loses its way, loses its morality and finds itself rationalising its actions into shades of grey rather than the black and white morality that has protected us from the minefield that legalises every new phase of destructive rule breaking that eventually becomes ‘the norm’.
Gay marriage is yet another rationalisation of freedom to do what you want and the agenda of a few that fails to include an holistic societal approach. By refusing the legalisation of gay marriage, the family unit remains strong and is given every chance to become even stronger. At the same time communities built on the family unit benefit from the solidarity of families including schools, sporting clubs, neighbourhoods, charities, social work, welfare and many other fields involving family and children. I suggest that it is the government’s responsibility to protect the family unit, to protect the wider Australian community from what is in everyway fundamentalist gay rights and activist intervention and to continue to strengthen the family unit as the very basis of the wider Australian community that inturn improves the welfare of Australians, its economic and international footing, health and available resources. Please do the right thing by Australia and refuse to be held to ransom by a community with their own agenda.
– Marriage is deeply held by a large proportion of the population for cultural and religious reasons and this should be respected.
>>This does have the implication of a majority which works for it. To speak plainly though, I do foresee secular worldviews struggling to see some of the points made.
– Redefining marriage has potential serious consequences for religious freedom and freedom of conscience.
>>Religious freedom is perhaps only directly affected if religions are required by law to preside over such unions. As I recall, the government isn’t going there (yet, if ever). Indirect/social vectors do affect religious organisations though. I suspect this argument relies on something buried within the Constitution. Were gay marriage to be unconstitutional, that would be the issue resolved right there, or at least until the Constitution is changed.
– Same-sex marriage sets up a new family model that trashes the truth that gender is vital to a child in family formation.
– Research shows that a child with married, biological mother and father do best.
>>Two words: Political Correctness. Also, claims of research come with expectation of citation. The lack of citation here is not helpful. In contrast to this claim, children from a variety of upbringings can indeed be raised with negligible issues. These include orphans, by relatives, by single parents, foster parents, adoptive parents, and of course, by gay parents.
————————————-
The media is decidedly in favour of gay marriage. Coverage of opponents to gay marriage has become synonymous with “crackpot Christians” and the use of deceptive tactics (while seemingly blind to similar tactics by proponents). The ACL’s association with the issue does not help endear the anti-SSM stance to the media. Same sex marriage is not at its heart a clash between religion and secularism. It is more aptly described as an issue left to sociology and anthropology.
I am against “same sex marriage” because the institution of marriage from the beginning of time and in every culture has always been between a man and a woman, for the purpose of having offspring and perpetuating life in the future. In the animal world you never see two male or twe or females of any species trying to be a “pair”
I have espect for other people’s convictions and feel if a same sex couple wishes to commit to each other, that is their business, but the conception of “same sex marriage” is an anomoly.
Marriage is a unique relationship between one man and one woman because its the way its been since the beginning when God made adam and eve the start of the human race.Two people of the same sex would not have have been right in Gods eyes.
Dear Committee Secretary,
As an Australian who believes same-sex couples should be able to marry, I strongly support the Marriage Equality Amendment Bill 2010.
As a Secular State, we should not allow religious arguments from certain religious groups in our society (read; not all religious groups) to dictate how our laws should be legislated.
As a law abiding Australian, citizen, a tax payer, and contributor to our society, I demand full equality before the law in all its facets. Simply, it is discriminatory for a secular society, which I believe Australia to be, to restrict marriage between two consenting adults of the same sex.
When conducting its enquiry, I ask the Senate Committee, to closely observe the separation of “church and state”, which is the essence of secularism, and which is also reaffirmed in Section 116 of our Constitution. “The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance …”
The large community of Australian’s from all walks of life that are in support of Equal Marriage, are not asking for religious institutions to be forced to marry same-sex couples, this is totally up to them, in the spirit of their beliefs. However, we ask that the Marriage Act which governs the secular interpretation of marriage, and which prescribes its legal standing be amended to include same-sex couples, who ask that their love and commitment be recognised and given equal standing within our society. It is my belief, that this is a human right any individual in the free world should be afforded.
“As a Secular State, we should not allow religious arguments from certain religious groups in our society (read; not all religious groups) to dictate how our laws should be legislated.”
Classic bigotry and discrimination towards the religious. And why should we let only ‘secular-minded’ people have the only say?
“As a law abiding Australian, citizen, a tax payer, and contributor to our society..”
There are people who are also law abiding Australian citizens, tax-payers and contributors to society who disagree with SSM, why should their views not count?
“Simply, it is discriminatory for a secular society, which I believe Australia to be, to restrict marriage between two consenting adults of the same sex. ”
What next, beastiality and polyamory? After all, some people do see themselves as the next big cause:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/three-in-marriage-bed-more-of-a-good-thing/story-e6frg6z6-1226218569577
http://www.browardpalmbeach.com/2009-08-20/news/those-who-practice-bestiality-say-they-re-part-of-the-next-gay-rights-movement/
Once you destroy the meaning of marriage of its true definition as a union between a man and a woman, anything goes.
“When conducting its enquiry, I ask the Senate Committee, to closely observe the separation of “church and state”..
The words “separation of church and state” do not exist in Section 116. And you’ve conveniently left out the part that said “The Commonwealth shall not…prohibiting the free exercise of any religion”. But you’ve given the game away: at heart, the SSM movement really seems to be a direct assault against religion.
“…not asking for religious institutions to be forced to marry same-sex couples, this is totally up to them, in the spirit of their beliefs.”
Who can guarantee such exemption? After all, we’ve already seen former tennis great Margaret Court get persecuted simply for speaking her mind. Furthermore, there is more to a marriage than just a wedding. Will you allow for say a wedding cake baker to not cater for a homosexual ‘wedding’ because it clashes with their conscience/religious beliefs? If you do not, then you are anti-religion. Which, judging from most of your writing, is exactly your goal.
I am totally against Homosexual Marriage and the teaching to our children that ‘Bob” and “John” are married and have sex together.
Why can we not comprehend this simple truth?
Romans 1: 24-27, 1 Cor 6:9
Are we trying to build a dysfunctional and distorted society by supporting homosexuals, gays, their distorted views? God forbid. Children don’t need two of a kind parents like this in their lives. Last time I checked the Biblical view it clearly stated God, our creator, made one man and one woman, to habitate together and to create children. It has worked well for centuries and we don’t need to change it. Children of these unions have one female mother and one male father. Not two of the one and same gender. It is not in the best interest of children to grow up in these distorted and dysfunctional homosexual relationships where a child would be robbed of a parent of a certain gender, because one parent of the wrong kind was replacing the missing gender of that union. The child needs in order not to grow up discriminating, or be biased, or otherwise, two parents of opposite gender, male and female. I am glad I am not raised by homosexuals or gays.
If the laws support this gay marriage rot, of two of the same gender marrying then IVF will get out of hand, as would adultery, as they all start to get broody for children because they can’t have children of their own without the help of an opposite sex partner, and then that would be adultery committed outside their marriage union as they will need outside help to have children irrespective. And demands for adoption will also rise. And my understanding there are not enough children to adopt in Australia compared to overseas children which has its own set of cultural, and other issues, and problems. And things will just continue to spiral and get out of hand, and out of control, as homosexual/gays demand more and more in their efforts to have the same as those in a heterosexual relationship.
None of us would exist if it were not for the union of one man and one woman. And that is what a marriage needs.
‘Marriage’ according to my dictionary is an act between a man and a woman. Not two of the same kind.
as i see we dont need gay marriages.as the fact its not right.i no gay people i have few cousins who are gay thats ok for them but as i see it when u look at straight people in the papers having babies there never marride.cant they just live like they where its crazy.the greens have done enough in tassy we have have lost jobs and people moving away.and people killing themselves as they have no jobs and lost there families because of money.cant we vote them out now.
i havent said what i realyy wanted ran out of time.
Christians don’t ‘hate’ homosexuals, i sappose they just hate what their are doing with themselves not them. God loves everyone hetrosexuals, homosexuals, bisexuals, this however does not mean he loves what they are doing – In the Bible (God’s guide to this world we live in – ruled by the hater, Satan) is is very clearly stated that God made Adam – man, and gave him a partner – made from him rib, Eve – women to be his conpanion. Adam and Eve made children, that is how the world re populates. God clearly says homosexuality is not pure, it is not meant to be. for those who understand the ‘spiritual relm’ in the world and that this life is a spiritual battle between God (good) and Satan (evil). All Satan wants is to make your believe everything he makes you believe. i.e. Satan was the Arch Angel in Heaven, he was the Angel of Music – Satan being selfish wanted to be bigher in power than GoD. God banished him from heaven and all is wants is you to think he can give you the world, but really he doesn’t care one bit for any of us! After he took 1/3 of the Angels and they became Demons, and if you look how the media in this world has become about lust, homosexuality, witch craft, drugs, alcohol, treating women as objects, ‘expressing yourself’ etc.. – these are all ways that make you feel in power (selfishness), in control of your life, because this world creates the image that its ‘your life, live how YOU want’. But no – thats not of pure heart. This life is not about us, its about purpose, we were all made for a purpose, hand crafted in our mothers womb, planned and wanted by God. Alot of people (i have myself witnesses and experienced) get tricked into wicked thinking and being desieved and doing things with ourself which aren’t natural, and are very self-distructive. All the things in this world you are told you want and need to be happy in the end never make you happy – there was a study that most homosexual relations dont last more than 5 years, and your lucky to make it past 10. I wonder why this is so? A women can not give another women what she needs truly from what only a man can provide, as with a man not being able to provide for another man how he should be provided by a women.
I have noticed though reading alot of these comments and there is hate from the ones ‘decieved’ and there is love and concern from the ones who ‘understand this world’. It saddens me also to see those calling themselves ‘Christians’ and still supporting Gay Marriage. A true Christian is someone who has a living relationship with our Heavenly father, God. He talks to you, his presence is awing and his love is extravigant – He is REAL. It really doesn’t matter if you don’t believe us, or you don’t listen, and you feel something stirring up in hatred reading these words because you will one day understand – most of you when you leave the 0 – 100 odd years you’ll live on this world, and find yourself not dead, your body may be still rotting on Earth but your spirit is still well alive! – I don’t want to come across as anything hurtful, i am speaking truthful. But again most of you hating on the people trying to help our future Generations – as they are the ones we give the future to.
I myself as a Christian know well and truly and it says in the Bible, there will come a day when Gay Marriage is passed in Government and will become legal. I understand this, and accept that this world is an evil place, and i can’t wait to go to Heaven and be with the one who will love me unconditionly and live in a beautiful place like he longs to give his Children (everyone ever lived, lives currently, hasn’t be born yet).
With poverty, young death, homeless, etc funny how it’s all Gods fault? WRONG! Its Satans doing, there are some things God allows, and some things he lets happen as ‘tests of judgement’ and also every though some people might help with things that happen wrong in this world with wrong desions that our ancestors may have done which are are paying for now?
Anyways i am off topic but with Gay Marriage, i think its a wrong desison, and i will put my foot down to try and put it off for as long as i can so i can save my son the chance to witness how truly discusting this world is and how man have helped create this world of how it is now. To all of the homosexuals ready this – you are truly loved by your Heavenly Father – i know there is something inside of you stirring up with anger, i suggest you read this article, (this is not the article i am referring too, i can’t seem to find the link atm but take a look at this?http://ipost.christianpost.com/news/saved-from-homosexuality-there-is-no-such-thing-as-a-gay-christian-10039/ ) my fiance’s brother is a homosexual and its heartbreaking. He is decvied and his life can be turned around and he can live the life God planned carefully for him, but for that to happen he needs to stand up for his soul and tell that homosexual demon inside of him to stop decieving him and never let him in again! There is many kinds or demons trying to decieve all they can by attacking where they are weak as thats the easiest way. i.e. girls with father issues, confidence issues, or anything as such and becoming prostitues. Its a sad world we live in, more sad to see so many blinded.
But again i am going off topic. take a look at this for further reasons on Gay marriage as the wrong desision – http://www.tfpstudentaction.org/politically-incorrect/homosexuality/10-reasons-why-homosexual-marriage-is-harmful-and-must-be-opposed.html
Also with the whole ‘equal rights’ topic – by trying to please everyone, you will please no one!
Sorry i wrote this in a rush for i am at work, and i could’ve alteast read this over, but the Jesus in me stirrs up reading some of these comments, and i wanted to do my part – thanks.
Dear Commitee Secretary
Let me begin by saying I have friends who are gay and I am not anti-gay.
I believe that the terminology, if you check the dictionary, is that marriage is recognised as being between a man and a woman.
It has always been this way and should not be changed due to a minority group lobbying hard.
Laws are changed for the Majority NOT the Minority which is the homosexual lobby.
I also agree in the separation between Church and State.
The State must NEVER be allowed to dictate to the Church what should and shouldn’t be the norm.
Gay people can have commitment ceremonies if they wish to commit themselves to eachother but Marriage is sacrosanct and the term should not be hijacked by the gay lobby
Thank you.
Laws are changed to reflect what is “right” – NOT what appeases the majority. If a muslim man wants to open a shop in a Christian country, should the majority Christians create a law to stop him from doing so, even though his shop will not force everyone to eat Halal, or force Wollies to supply only Halal meat? Of course not, the RIGHT thing to do is to realise that his shop will NOT AFFECT you. You let him open his shop and you get on with your day.
Same-sex marriage will also not affect you, it will not force you to marry someone of the same sex, it will not deminish your marriage.
Allowing only commitment ceremonies is the same as you saying that “look, I have gay friends, but I don’t honestly see them or their relationships as equal”. It would be like being told by the state that because you were born with brown hair, you can only wear blue clothes. If you want to go to a church that say’s brown haired people can only wear blue, then that’s totally fine. But to have a nation tell it’s browned haired children they are worth less, that’s a time when laws have to be updated. Even if it is for the minority.
Guess you are right Alec, in fact:
Polygamous marriage will also not affect you, it will not force you . . . .
Bi-sexual marriage will also not affect you, it will not force you . . . .
Lavender marriage will also not affect you, it will not force you . . . .
Consanguineous marriage will also not affect you, it will not force you . . . .
Objectùm-sexuality marriage will also not affect you, it will not force you . . . .
Wow, so many choices out there ! Wow, so much love !
and Alec a stack more possibilities at http://polyoz.net.au/explore/resources/words-we-use
Wow, the sky’s the limit !
There is no such thing as gay Marriage.
Marriage has been defined as a formal union between a man and a woman.
Should the Parliament consider changing the ground of the understanding of a marriage, not only that the definition would be wronged, but the meaning and essence of it are being wronged.
No standard and no ground will lead to nothing but a chaotic society.
Furthermore, it is sinful to disregard and go against God.
We are surely living in the last days, whereby what is wrong is considered right, and what is right is considered wrong. May God have mercy on us for reaching this point of changing the marriage act in our world. Even as some churches are in agreement of such a change. Can I remind those churches of the Word of God and what it says. It is an abomination to God, it is the final rebellion toward God himself.
Those that are behind the changing of the marriage act are just wanting to legalize the act of sodomy. Do they really think that God would accept their marriage commitment? Highly unlikely. But God will accept the sinner that comes with repentance in his heart, and asks for forgiveness.
Lord have mercy on us!
Jude 3-4, warns us about false teacher.
Jude 1:3-4, (NLT),3 Dear friends, I had been eagerly planning to write to you about the salvation we all share. But now I find that I must write about something else, urging you to defend the faith that God has entrusted once for all time to his holy people. 4 I say this because some ungodly people have wormed their way into your churches, saying that God’s marvelous grace allows us to live immoral lives. The condemnation of such people was recorded long ago, for they have denied our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.
Didn’t God give us freedom of choice? Why are “christians” taking away others freedom of choice? Let them love who they want and do what they want. They aren’t hurting anyone, what right do christians have over others to say what they can and can’t do?
No we have the right over what is Godly and sacred to us, marrige is but one.It is for a man and a women only and can’t be down graded to act of lust.
Just lodged my submission on homosexual “marriage” with the Senate Committee tonight. Good on you Jim and the staff at ACL for advocating why marriage should be strictly between a man and a woman.
Also good on those that have spent the few hours writing submissions on this issue as well.
As per email from ACL:-
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) in rejecting the right for homosexuals to adopt in France where it is illegal, made two important comments in the judgment:
* That same-sex marriage is not a “human right” and therefore states can deny it, but
* Where a particular status is conferred on same-sex couples they must be given all the entitlements of others with the same status without discrimination. This means that if same-sex marriage is passed, churches will have to marry same-sex couples regardless of any statutory protections for conscience, as proposers of our bills are trying to comfort us with.
Now this finding is a God-given wakeup call and comes when we urgently need the church to make another effort.
We must ensure that there is a decisive weight of submissions to the Senate Inquiry in our favour when the date for them closes next Monday 2nd April.
At the moment, due to a flood of ‘form submissions’ by the gay activists, we are comprehensively losing this, despite being well ahead on considered submissions against same-sex marriage. But it is this weight of numbers that a complicit press will report, and we must win it and then pray the strength of argument in our considered ones prevails.
This is no longer just about same sex marriage. This ECHR decision both confirms the legitimacy of our case to deny gay marriage, but the staggering consequences for religious freedom if it is passed; consequences that will inevitably over time reach even further into freedom of religious conscience and speech.
We are very disturbed and disgusted re: the same sex marriage issue.
put simply: Man was made for Woman and Woman was made for Man
and together begetting children – start of the human race as ordained by
our Creator God.
Same sex marriage is a threat to the whole structure of society culminating in
the death of humanity
As far as recorded history goes (well at least from what I can see) the first marriage was between Adam and Eve and it was performed by God.
So as far as I can tell, marriage is fundamentally religious and has somehow managed to ween its way into becoming civil. I can only assume that this is because up until the last century or so, the vast majority of people were religious.
I feel that homosexuals wanting marriage goes against the very essence of what marriage is. Likewise with atheists being married.
Over recent years, the gradual corruption and loss of religious values in society has managed to slowly change the value of marriage from being something that is sacred, beautiful and Godly, into something that is convenient for tax purposes, and required by law for certain benefits.
I vote that church and state must be completely separated and that marriage may only be had between religious persons within their own religion. For non-religious and homosexuals there should be civil unions.
In making this change, the value of marriage doesnt change, and people wanting recognition for their sinful relationships can have it. (when I say sinful, obviously sin is something deeply tied to religion as well. If they dont believe in religion then they dont see it as sin, so this is just a matter of point of view)
Problem solved.
Mariage is known by its other title, Holy Matrimony. It is not called ‘holy’ for nothing, as it was ordained by God as a union between a man and woman, according to the bible. The Oxford dictionary definition of ‘gay’, as applied to the common use of the word in todays world, says it all: quote, “dissolute, immoral, living by prostitution” therefore allowing the use of the word marriage to apply to homosexuals would be an oxymoron. By the way, Christians who oppose the actions of homosexuals are simply pointing out that their (homosexual) actions have consequences, believe it or not. This does not mean they are homophobic. Warnings are not necessarily threats. Love the homosexuals but not their behaviour.
03/04/2012 at 7:47 pm
Marriage is known by its other title, Holy Matrimony. It is not called ‘holy’ for nothing, as it was ordained by God as a union between a man and woman, according to the bible. The Oxford dictionary definition of ‘gay’, as applied to the common use of the word in todays world, says it all: quote, “dissolute, immoral, living by prostitution” therefore allowing the use of the word marriage to apply to homosexuals would be an oxymoron. By the way, Christians who oppose the actions of homosexuals are simply pointing out that their (homosexual) actions have consequences, believe it or not. This does not mean they are homophobic. Warnings are not necessarily threats. Love the homosexuals but not their behaviour. PS it may be possible to change the opinion of men but to change the opinion of God may not be so easy.
I agree wholeheartedly. Marriage should be between male and female and nothing else.
I strongly object to marriage between anyone other than male and female. Same sex marriage is wrong and should not be allowed. Marriage between more than one male and one female is bigamy and illegal. Don’t let it happen.
To whom it may concern, ‘Firstly please allow me to Thank the Government for doing a great job in running out courntry. This email has given me the opportunity to say how much i apprieciate the wonderful job your doing ,keep up the good work. May “The God guide you continually” that’s my prayer for you, in all your decision making, as it such an awsome job.
Please be wise in your decisions about the issues on same sex marriage,the reality is God created man and women for a purpose.He said go and be fruitful and multiply.Let’ s stick to the truth, This is written by someone who lost sight of that reality through drugs. let’s not lead others astray also. Regards Zora Elliss.
if you must approve of these unions FOR GOD’S SAKES AND GIVE THEM THE SAME PRIVILEGES……. find some other name for them but do not call them ‘MARRIAGE’
Marriage is between a man and a women only .
Marriage is by its very nature between a man and a woman, it is the union of two people of the opposite sex preluding to parenthood, and in so in nature only a female and a male can procreate. Therefore marriage between the same sex is an affront to nature, the creator of us all and all I believe in. I will strongly dislike any change to the marriage act to allow same sex marriage.