[Gay Agenda, 4:14]
It is a sad fact that many religious people were brought up to feel revulsion and guilt when it comes to sex. These people will publicly squeal that “sex is only meant for procreation”, but in reality, they have as much sex as anyone else (http://goo.gl/b7NYS, Nerve, Study: Religious people still have sex, they just feel worse about it). In fact, they just feel guilty about it and want others to feel guilty too. The purpose of marriage for them is procreation for the continuation of an ideology. Nothing about love. Nothing about protecting one’s family. Nothing about the welfare of the children. Children must be made so that their twisted ideologies can be passed on.
What has childbearing got to do with it? There are plenty of examples of heterosexual couples where one or both are infertile and their children are not biologically from both of them. There are also plenty of examples of heterosexual marriages where no children are produced, often by choice.
This man’s logic is stupid and childish. If he wants to ban marriage to people who do not or cannot reproduce without outside help then he would have to rescind a lot of heterosexual marriages!
What a goon!
[Gay Agenda, 4:17]
Denying gay couples the right of civil marriage on the grounds they will not be reproducing is extremely hypocritical. Reproduction is not a legal prerequisite to civil marriage in a secular state. Many heterosexual couples choose not to reproduce and many others are completely unable to. In some heterosexual marriages, the male is unable to produce sperm of high enough quality or in enough quantities and the couple resorts to in-vitro fertilisation, even going as far as getting the sperm from a donor. There is absolutely no excuse to deny this right to a lesbian couple. In fact, lesbian couples in culturally superior countries have been doing it for decades and their children are just as healthy, happy and well-adjusted as any other couple’s children, although at times lesbians turn out to be better parents than heterosexuals [Gay Agenda, 3:4].
In other cases, the female is unable to produce a baby even if the male is fertile. In this case, heterosexual couples can resort to a surrogate mother, using the male’s sperm. The resulting child is then adopted by both the male and the female partner in the marriage and the surrogate mother is not involved in the upbringing of the child. Once again, there is absolutely no excuse to deny this right to gay male couples. Further, heterosexual couples whose children have moved out of the house, are not expected to dissolve their marriage. Conversely, heterosexual couples and single women already can and do make children outside wedlock. Just like heterosexuals that are unable to produce children or choose not to, gay men and women can adopt children as a couple in culturally superior countries that recognise how much gay couples can offer to society, by taking in a child that has been abandoned by his heterosexual parents and giving that child a loving home and a second chance in life.
[Gay Agenda, 4:37]
One class of homophobes claim they “have nothing against gays” as long as they don’t have to know about “what they do in their bedroom”. While this sort of homophobe is right that the intimate activities of a gay couple is non of his business, it is totally unfair to ask a gay person to hide all evidence of his relationship. This is the same as asking one partner in an interracial couple to hide their partner because it offends an insecure racist bigot. In fact, gay people have to put up with heterosexuals talking about their loved ones all the time — “Today my husband is going to…..” or “My wife doesn’t like chocolate.” or “My elder son is going to University next year….”. Gay people in Mauritius, on the other hand, are expected to suppress all evidence that they are humans, with dreams of a family and aspirations to bringing up children [Gay Agenda, 1:3; Gay Agenda, 3:3].
(Sorry this one was meant for another story)
from an aussie paper ..”Tom Kenyon, who is from Labor’s hard Catholic right faction …”….says it all! Why are all Australian Catholics MPs so predicatable, they’re supposed to be working for the people not the Pope in Italy. Are British catholic mps like this as well? totally brainwashed and unable to say/think outside what the Pope has told them to say and think?
He’s absolutely right. Gay and trans couples can’t have biological children with each other.
What on earth has that got to do with marriage?
Though I admit, it would make sense if we still lived in a world in which the whole purpose of marriage was for the man to carry on his seed..
Such a good man! A total credit to Australian free-thinking. And lo! He shall sit on the lap of Yahweh for eternity and be stroked like an obedient pet, along with the other religious wackos. What a stupid argument…
So a gay couple who have a surrogate mother or a straight couple going the same way because the female spouse is infertile, should be banned from marrying. You know, our foes’ lame argument is wearing more than thin. How much longer can they continue spewing this nonsense. It’s not even a red herring any more, just a rant from people who have next to little intellectual curiosity. The sort of thing James Malliff and his ilk would say. Not too bright, any of them.
apologises for telling her his view that she shouldnt have equality. not for thinking it? not changing the view? ok…
hey peggy, didnt you say similar stuff not too long ago?
Just a sec. This is the same Penny Wong who last year announced she was against gay marriage. Why should he apologise to her? Apologise to the rest of us by all means, but there is absolutely no reason at all for him to apologise to her. After all, he’s simply agreeing with a view she has expressed as holding herself.
She has argued in favour of it.
OK – she’s since argued for it, but the damage done by people like her is something we could do without.
You never hear these bigots rallying against infertile people getting married.
Or older couples past childbearing age? It’s interesting to see how many of these people who are most vocal against gay people getting married – because marriage needs to be “protected” are on their second, third or more round of it.
What a sad man, what’s it got to do with him? Procreation is not a pre-condition or marriage.
From what I heard here in Adelaide, Kenyon had to ‘be told’ to vote along Labor Party lines for same-sex couples to be recognised in ‘Domestic Partnerships’ under Family Law in South Australia. But what do you expect from right-wing Catholics who basically despise GLBTI human beings! Sums up the loving Jesus of Christianity doesn’t it!
South Australian Labor is full of Catholic extremists!
Sure. What he said was wrong. Totally.
But don’t foregt that Penny Wong has publicly stated that marriage is between a man and a woman.
He was wrong. But she’d agree.
She actually didn’t. She merely refused to give an opinion on the issue at the time because of Cabinet solidarity and then spoke out in favour of it at a Party Convention (the appropriate place to do so).
Penny? Is that you?
The headline is inaccurate.
This bigot did NOT apologise to Penny Wong. He said “I apologise if those comments offended them in any way,”
That is a non-apology as it places the blame on the victim of his bigotry
So as well as slapping LGBT people in the face, he took the time to grotesquely offend everyone who was adopted as well by claiming that only blood related parents are REAL parents.
And he was probably so wrapped up in his own prejudice he didn’t even see that. I’d like to think he’d reflect and realise his own stupidity, but I’m not that much of an optimist.
Has anyone seen Kenyon? Then you will understand? Short guy syndrome!
so adoptive parents don’t count either?
So the Australian Labour Party has a Catholic faction that is anti-gay. It just goe to show that anybody across the entire political spectrum can hold homophobic views.
An all powerful Catholic faction which controls the Australian Labor Party and many of the largest unions! Why do you think that the Greens got over 1 million votes at the last Federal election ? Mainly due to how conservative the ALP have become.
And yet he remains a step above Julia GIllard, who claimed Wong and her partner as close friends in the same breath as opposing their right to marriage and has yet to apologise.
I know this isn’t a political blog as such, but seriously there’s only the slimmest of differences between the Australian Labor andLiberal parties these days. And both are shockingly right wing on anything that might be considered a “social” issue.
“It’s not, biologically, it’s not, it’s not the biological product of two people.”
Erm… it may not be biologically Ms Wong’s baby but it’s sure as hell the biological product of two people!
On a more serious note… this ‘marriage is for people having kids’ thing is ridiculous. Should we also ban marriage of sterile couples, elderly couples, those who just don’t want to have children…?