Margaret Court.. were the project hosts disgraceful?

[Bad Billy]

Everybody's entitled to an opinion. Like it or not.
They shouldn't have put her on tv if they didn't want to hear from her.
Very disrespectful.

 

[GoTheDoggies]

Project is a shambles. Get Wally, Carrie and co to watch a speech by Ahmadinejad and put it on goggle box. Watch the left wing lunatics squirm. Gay marriage is not for Australia end of.

Sick of the gay agenda it's such a non issue. Bigger problems going on such as ridiculous wars in the middle east and terrorism.

 

[Realist90]

1. John Howard changed the law so SSM couldn't happen

2. The bible also says women shouldn't be heard, why is Margaret Court picking and choosing which verses of the bible she believes in? She shouldn't be heard according to the nonsense she believes in

3. Does this mean we should also sit down and have a discussion with "flat earthers" and hear their view points? Or how about people who believe in leprechauns? Or how about those that believe in fairies?

4. You have NO EVIDENCE to say that gay people do not have a life long union, that's just baseless homophobic garbage

5. There are many people, approximately 40% of the Australian population according to the last statistics bureau performed in 2009, that don't believe in the fairy tales she believes in. If she takes a book, which 40% of the population don't believe in, as her "evidence" then by all means she deserves to be mocked, she entertains no actual REAL EVIDENCE OR FACTS

For your second point you're incorrect. You're correct that it says the woman's voice shouldn't be heard but that's strictly in the context of in a church and beingnpriests etc. hence the Catholic Church having only male priests, arch bishops and popes.

 

[Realist90]

The first wedding rings came from ancient Egypt BEFORE Christianity.

So our religious brethren can forget about their ownership of marriage

You really have it in for Christianity, why don't you go to a country where Christianity is not taught at all and undermined like Sweden or Denmark places like that? Like all you do is chuck tantrums against Christianity as if it's personally effected you and has forced you to bow down to Christian beliefs.

 

[Realist90]

You have no idea about the Bible mate. So unless you actually sit down hours per week studying it then you have every right to comment. Don't just pick out and throw bible verses. WOMEN can speak and be heard and if you know how to read in the very same chapter Paul talks about women prophesying in the Church and that their heads should be covered when doing so.

Read the Bible in context, place and time. Don't just take a verse out and throw it out like its the truth. Ignorant fool.

That's just the liberal in him bro. Liberals bash Christianity at every turn because to them Christians have it easy and have done all the evil in the world.

 

[Raysie]

Marriage is a joke anyway. Most people take their vows and still lie, cheat and divorce.

There are 50,000 divorces generally per year and then these very people talk about Marriage as if it's some sacred shit.

If Homo-sexuals want to also join into the farce, let them! haha

 

[Realist90]

Anyways keeping religion out of this as some can't.
What is wrong with a lady coming on and giving an anti liberal opinion? If this continues it will lead to people being jailed for stating opinions that aren't liberal. Freedom of speech should be protected unless it's a speech at a rally with fanatics calling to kill people right there and then.

 

[Realist90]

Marriage is a joke anyway. Most people take their vows and still lie, cheat and divorce.

There are 50,000 divorces generally per year and then these very people talk about Marriage as if it's some sacred shit.

If Homo-sexuals want to also join into the farce, let them! haha

They can it's called butt buddies, same thing as marriage just a different title.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

but how far do you go with that? do you stop at same sex? I think i saw on facebook a woman marrying a train station(or claiming to), should that be legal?

Basically it stops at human/animal/train station rights.

Marriage is between two consenting adults. That's why a man shouldn't be able to marry a child, or a dog, or a building for the same reason that a person shouldn't be forced to marry someone that they don't want to. It's removing the rights.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Is holding onto the definition of marriage, precluding the gay community from anything? If so.... what?

(good discussion by the way, I think everyone is being respectful to each other whilst debating the issue)

The gay community currently have the civil union, but the civil union doesn't hold the same rights as marriage. It could one day but it requires a lot of legal work to get to that stage. Many in the gay community have been asking for equal standing within the civil union but they've been told that it'd be easier to just allow gay marriage.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Anyways keeping religion out of this as some can't.
What is wrong with a lady coming on and giving an anti liberal opinion? If this continues it will lead to people being jailed for stating opinions that aren't liberal. Freedom of speech should be protected unless it's a speech at a rally with fanatics calling to kill people right there and then.

That's the real issue here and there's two sides of the problem but both sides lead to the same answer. Free speech.

A) a woman should be free to voice her opinion no matter what it is. That's free speech. But..

B) free speech does not protect you from criticism. As bad as it sounds, if she goes on the show and voices her opinion then gets attacked by the hosts, that's not stopping free speech in any way. It's just allowing the hosts free speech.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Project is a shambles. Get Wally, Carrie and co to watch a speech by Ahmadinejad and put it on goggle box. Watch the left wing lunatics squirm. Gay marriage is not for Australia end of.

Sick of the gay agenda it's such a non issue. Bigger problems going on such as ridiculous wars in the middle east and terrorism.

If it's such a non-issue then why not allow it?

If it would stop the discussion and the "gay agenda" by just allowing it. Why not allow it?

 

[Realist90]

That's the real issue here and there's two sides of the problem but both sides lead to the same answer. Free speech.

A) a woman should be free to voice her opinion no matter what it is. That's free speech. But..

B) free speech does not protect you from criticism. As bad as it sounds, if she goes on the show and voices her opinion then gets attacked by the hosts, that's not stopping free speech in any way. It's just allowing the hosts free speech.

Exactly, I don't care if she's ridiculed for her opinion, but I don't like the hypocrisy from the left that's what my main issue is and always has been. They're just as free to criticise a righty as a righty is able to criticise a lefty and both can say whatever the fuk they want. But the left continuously always plays the victim and preaches feminism yet belittles females who has a different opinion. I mean work the fuck out what you'd stand for before contradicting yourselves

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Again, you have absolutely no idea about Christianity.

There is not one scripture in the Bible that says you are to use a ring. The Ring was an introduced tradition into the church to symbolise the union between two people.

The ring does come from paganism AND is not a fundamental Christian teaching.

GOD established Marriage at the beginning of Creation.

BEFORE your ancient Egyptians existed.

This is where subjectivism comes in. For the religious everything was created by God so he has final say. For the non-religious there is much that pre-dates God.

Who is right? No one knows. Each side will tell you definitively that they're right but in the end it's all opinion and it's a strong opinion that leads to conflict and destroys any chance of having a normal conversation. Both sides are at fault in causing that conflict.

That is why religious threads are not allowed here, and that's why as Realist pointed out, we need to keep religion out of the discussion.

 

[Alan79]

I'm of the opinion that from a religious perspective people shouldn't be trying to act as the gate keepers for gods consent. It's also a religious tenet that humans aren't meant to judge. From that perspective should the church oppose same sex marriage.

The religious marriage vows state that by his law marriage is a contract in the eyes of god not to be broken except by death. So going from that point of view do we then kill people seeking the annulment of marriage? If you stand against same sex marriage because of one definition, you also have to stand for the execution of married people who want to end a contract they made in the eyes of god.

What it comes down to is that a portion of humanity find it uncomfortable to accept same sex marriage and they're claiming to represent god in denying people the right to seek his blessing.

I like the ideas of morality that religion represents, but the sad fact is that many religious people quickly use their faith in god to raise their own opinion of their innate goodness and that leads to them being judgemental.

As far as it goes I think Margaret court has some strength of character to publicly come out and vilify Qantas publicly for supporting same sex marriage. But its vanity on her part too. Her opinion is no more important than the opinions of same sex couples. I haven't watched the project since its first season, but if her vanity was ruffled by appearing on the show I can give zero shits.

 

[GoTheDoggies]

If it's such a non-issue then why not allow it?

If it would stop the discussion and the "gay agenda" by just allowing it. Why not allow it?

It promotes degeneracy that is why. Same reason why Russia and Iran don't allow it, their countries traditions are greater than pandering to left wing nut jobs.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

It promotes degeneracy that is why. Same reason why Russia and Iran don't allow it, their countries traditions are greater than pandering to left wing nut jobs.

"degeneracy" is a vague way of saying "it shouldn't exist because it makes me uncomfortable"

 

[Alan79]

It promotes degeneracy that is why. Same reason why Russia and Iran don't allow it, their countries traditions are greater than pandering to left wing nut jobs.

If we're sticking to strict definitions in this thread. Let me ask you some questions.

Have you ever had sex for pleasure?

Have you ever had sex outside of marriage?

Have you ever watched porn?

Have you ever perved when you knew you had no intention of marrying the person you perved on?

You don't have to answer. Your right to privacy is respected. But if you answered yes to either of those questions you also promote degeneracy.

 

[Wolfmother]

If we're sticking to strict definitions in this thread. Let me ask you some questions.

Have you ever had sex for pleasure?

Have you ever had sex outside of marriage?

Have you ever watched porn?

Have you ever perved when you knew you had no intention of marrying the person you perved on?

You don't have to answer. Your right to privacy is respected. But if you answered yes to either of those questions you also promote degeneracy.

I'm out

 

[Realist90]

If we're sticking to strict definitions in this thread. Let me ask you some questions.

Have you ever had sex for pleasure?

Have you ever had sex outside of marriage?

Have you ever watched porn?

Have you ever perved when you knew you had no intention of marrying the person you perved on?

You don't have to answer. Your right to privacy is respected. But if you answered yes to either of those questions you also promote degeneracy.

Mate if we're talking strictly about sin there's a difference between sinning and making sin legalised or not a sin. But yes obviously religious folk such as myself can be hypocritical no more than you lefties are when it comes to your agenda. So let's not start making out one side is purer than the other.