Ironically, the lifestyle section of the SMH is reporting that a number of same-sex couples in Canberra have applied to have their partnership legally recognised after new laws came into effect in the ACT.
ACT Attorney-General Simon Corbell said civil partnership registrations were now possible following the official commencement of the territory government’s Civil Partnerships Act.
The civil partnership laws passed the Legislative Assembly in the early hours of May 9.
Maelinar @49 – I guess that’s just where you and I differ. In the case where the American Football players wanted to name their nifty new pass using a “church” word and the church got snippy; I think I’d be more inclined to tell the god-botherers to just dry the hell up.
‘sides – there’s already the Hail Mary pass…
@Vy – ’bout fricken time you got round to that.
VY – thank god for that. Now we can all go home. I’ve only been checking this thread to see how long it took!
Sometimes you just need to keep people on the edge for a bit…
I was on edge.
tap: are you saying that homosexuals are all consigned to that fate? I know lots of people that are now heterosexual but have at some time or another dabbled with the homosexuality.
I think that some people would choose to have a same sex relationship. Others might just be naturally wired that way. I’d say that some gay people willingly made that choice, knowing the consequences. And they shouldn’t be ashamed to say it was a personal choice.
I also don’t think it really matters if it is a choice or not, as far as rights are concerned.
CaptainWhoreBags: No the people you are refering to are bisexuals, not homosexuals.
I’ve never heard a homosexual man say that they really prefer women, and always have, but just go with other men anyway. Have you? Has anyone? Same for lesbians.
I don’t often talk to homosexuals about their sexuality because it’s none of my damn business.
Is it a regular conversation topic for you?
#59 – But that’s not the comment I was seeking.
Come on vg, engaged in wit battles with tap…
I”M ON THE EDGE OF MY SEAT (at least #65 is too
Just thinking about the equality issue. Will same sex couples want the right to go and have a formal marriage ceremony in a church and / or conducted by a minister ? Will an organisation be allowed to say no for any reason ? Is it OK for people to claim equal rights to everything ? So many thoughts… any answers ?
Why label people anyway. Who really cares?
CaptainWhoreBags: Im going somewhere with this, dont pounce quite yet.
I say that its not a choice because there is no reason a heterosexual person would choose homosexuality, or if there is, the cons still very much outwiegh the pros.
This is important because most of the nay sayers when it comes to gay marriage and gay rights in general are usually of the opinion that as it is a choice, they should just choose to be un gay then we don’t need to worry about anything else.
As choice doesn’t seem to be a real factor in why someone is gay, the argument that they can unchoose, is defunct. Once there is no choice left in the matter, we must take the issue more seriously. As seriously as racism or sexism.
Whatsup: Some same sex couples may want to, some may not, just the same as hetero couples. The right should be there for homosexuals to marry if they desire that.
I often talk to my friends about their relationships; sometimes that involves discussing sexuality. I think that’s a regular topic of conversation for most people.
I can guess that it might be a choice for some people, only because I can’t speak for everyone. But it surprises me a bit because I don’t consider my heterosexuality a choice. I shared a house for a year once with four gay women, and it never made we wonder whether I ought to give it a go (slightly to the chagrin of my then BF).
So for those who believe it is a choice, I am asking out of genuine curiosity, is that because you yourself are attracted to people of the same sex but have deliberately opted not to act on that attraction? I tend to feel that it isn’t a choice, because I am aware of never having felt anything but straight, but perhaps that just means that I’m at the far end of a continuum. But so many people seem to be adamant that it *is* a choice, that presumably that is because they have made that choice themselves.
tap: But should an organisation be legally required to marry a same sex couple even if they have a belief system that does not agree ? Do they have any rights ? Is it like trying to force a Muslim lady to remove their scarf in public ?
A civil celebrant type ceremony could be an option that does not carry the same issues.
Whatsup: I guess if their belief system is discriminitive, it should be forced to. One would hope that the homosexuals in question wouldn’t want to marry into a religion that hates them, but it is an interesting point you raise.
needlenose: I’m not adamant that it is a choice. I just entertain the possibility that for some that it might be.
I am bemused that tap seems convinced that it isn’t a choice and can’t be a choice for any gay person to be that way. Believing something is true because it helps the case for equal rights (a noble cause in itself) doesn’t mean that it is true.
The concept of a “rational actor” is far more applicable to economic theory than lifestyle. I don’t see that it’s rational to be a smoker, yet people still continue to choose that option. And this despite the cons of smoking far outweighing any pros.
I guess we’ll be picking tap’s body up from a gutter somewhere after he starts ripping scarves off muslims then.
Darwin’s law always favours the stupid.
CaptainWhoreBags: Read what I said again, I don’t believe its a choice because why would any heterosexual person be with people of the same sex? The fact that it furthers the case for equal rights is a consequence to it not being a choice, not the cause. How about you stop attacking me here, im not having a go at you. Feel free (anybody) to prove me wrong and give me some reasons why a heterosexual person would be with a person of the same sex. I understand why a homosexual person would pretend to be heterosexual, but not the other way around.
Homosexuality as a choice just doesn’t make any sense.
I suggest you look up the definition of “ad hominem” before accusing me of attacking you personally.
If you think that someone is either A:HOMOSEXUAL or B:HETEROSEXUAL (or even C:BISEXUAL) and that they can’t change from one to the other at some point(s) of their life, then you and I have a difference of opinion.
If you’re arguing that relationships and attraction is based on rational decision, then I think you’re very much mistaken. My own experience, and that of every one of my friends (yes, more than two) says differently.
Either way, it’s not important as long as they have equal access to a relationship recognised by the law.
tap: Who has the right to ‘force’ someone to do something against their belief system ?
The same sex couples may be offered a choice to get married using a civil celebrant, that doesn’t impose on anyone elses rights.
CaptainWhoreBags: If it does change then the person was never heterosexual or homosexual, but bisexual. I’ve already said this.
arguing that relationships and attraction is based on rational decision is exactly what im not doing. If it were, why would a person rationally choose homosexuality? What do they have to gain from it? That all im asking here Cap, why? Where are the reasons that a hetero person would be with a person of the same sex.
And yes thats true.
Whatsup: Happens all the time, look at the polygamy cult in Utah the other month.
But if even if it is a choice for some, isn’t that pretty much irrelevant if there’s still a substantive section of the community for whom it is not a choice? We would not, for example, say that just because there are some people around who “choose” to identify as black, when they are actually mixed race and could arguably “choose” to identify as some other race, that it’s therefore OK to discriminate against black people generally?
I don’t believe a church should be forced to accept gay marriages. They should have the right to do what they want.
needlenose: yes, I agree. it’s not relevant.
I do find offensive the notion that gay people are supposedly stuck in a situation that a rational person would never choose.
tap: Perhaps some people don’t choose a sexual orientation, they choose a person. I think sexuality is a fluid (hur!) thing, not enforced through genetics and hard coded for life. Why would someone make this choice? For similar reasons that anyone chooses a partner – physical attraction, common interests or beliefs, financial reasons, perceived status, compatible personality, desire to raise a family, anything really.
I’m not arguing that it is definitely by choice. I’m just open to the possibility that this may be the case.
CaptainWhoreBags: How do you find that offensive? Why would a rational person choose to be hated by a sizeable chunk of the community, to not be able to marry, to not be able to have children, to be financially worse off compared to hetero couples etc. A homosexuals life will most probably be made more difficult because of their homosexuality. (some of the reasons you gave why a person would choose homosexuality are reasons why a person would choose heterosexuality: desire to raise a family, financial reasons and percieved status are not things that would be heightened by choosing homosexuality over heterosexuality).
What I find offensive is that there are very legitimate reasons why a rational person would not choose homosexuality. Especially (given the above reasons) considering homosexuality is not a choice (maybe one or two homosexuals are closested heterosexuals but you don’t often hear of it.). What our society needs to work towards is a time where a rational person can honestly say that the only difference between the lives of a heterosexual and a homosexual is the genitals of the sex partner. When/if that happens then my argument will be invalid, and perhaps people really will start choosing homosexuality.
Im not sure why you find what im saying offensive, and while i know this is going to cause me plenty of grief, I think it might be because you have misunderstood what im saying.
I hope I’ve misunderstood you, because what you appear to be saying is that homosexuality is a horror from which there is no escape. Something that no rational person would choose.
Not being homosexual, I wouldn’t know if this is the case, but I do know homosexual people who seem to be very well adjusted, happy people. Gay pride and all that.
Again, this argument comes down to definitions. I don’t define homosexuality as a lifelong label that can’t change and is somehow intrinsic to a person. Let’s let people come up with their own definitions – if someone identifies themselves as being homosexual, then let’s not deny them that because at some point in their life they’ve had a heterosexual relationship.
CaptainWhoreBags: You are either deliberately misinterpeting what im saying, or you are incapable of following a simple thread of logic. Either way attempting to explain again will will not help considering you have entirely failed to grasp what im saying above.
You’re still cute tap. For a chick.
Are you in favour of Light Rail for Canberra?