I believe in gay marriage

[Quasievil]

Too dangerous physically with too much that could go wrong genetically.

Again youre discriminating against these people, if they love each other why cant they be married ?

[HenryDorsetCase]

I accept your knowledge of it. I am not sure why I thought it had ben reduced to two.



Its a common misconception, and I understand it traces back to a New Zealand Womens Weekly article in 1975 or 1976 discussing the introduction of the Matrimonial Property Act 1976 and the changes from teh Matrimonial Property Act 1963 (I think it was). If I remember what I read properly, the select committee had referred to a two year window, which was widely discussed at the time: but the legislation as passed had the three year timescale. But the NZWW published two, and it took root, and its still a very commonly held misconception. I think the paper I read on it was in a Lor journal or one of the books on it (which we lost in the EQ so I cant even give a proper reference)




Meaning of relationship of short duration (s2E Property (Relationships) Act 1976)

(1) In this Act, relationship of short duration means,—

(a) in relation to a marriage, a marriage in which the husband and wife have lived together as husband and wife—

(i) for a period of less than 3 years; or

(ii) for a period of 3 years or longer, if the court, having regard to all the circumstances of the marriage, considers it just to treat the marriage as a relationship of short duration:

(ab) in relation to a civil union, a civil union in which the civil union partners have lived together as civil union partners—

(i) for a period of less than 3 years; or

(ii) for a period of 3 years or longer, if the court, having regard to all the circumstances of the civil union, considers it just to treat the civil union as a relationship of short duration:

(b) in relation to a de facto relationship, a de facto relationship in which the de facto partners have lived together as de facto partners—

(i) for a period of less than 3 years; or

(ii) for a period of 3 years or longer, if the court, having regard to all the circumstances of the de facto relationship, considers it just to treat the de facto relationship as a relationship of short duration.

(2) For the purposes of paragraphs (a)(i), (ab)(i), and (b)(i) of subsection (1), in computing the period for which the parties have lived together as husband and wife, civil union partners, or as de facto partners, the court may exclude a period of resumed cohabitation that has the motive of reconciliation and is no longer than 3 months.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Again youre discriminating against these people, if they love each other why cant they be married ?

see, we agree.

[Quasievil]

So I take it from your lack of answers that you have no response, other than a discriminatory one. Its clear to me in that case that the concept of Gays being permitted to Marry is ok purely for the reason that it is currently fashionable to allow it, rather than accepting the fact that its simply not required.

I hereby declare that the "Nos" have it and have won this argument. Gays should not get the right to marry, they have all they need already.

Long live decent family values !!

[Edbear]

Again youre discriminating against these people, if they love each other why cant they be married ?

Ah, I think I see your point, is that a worry...?:pinch:


Its a common misconception, and I understand it traces back to a New Zealand Womens Weekly article in 1975 or 1976 discussing the introduction of the Matrimonial Property Act 1976 and the changes from teh Matrimonial Property Act 1963 (I think it was). If I remember what I read properly, the select committee had referred to a two year window, which was widely discussed at the time: but the legislation as passed had the three year timescale. But the NZWW published two, and it took root, and its still a very commonly held misconception. I think the paper I read on it was in a Lor journal or one of the books on it (which we lost in the EQ so I cant even give a proper reference)

Okay, quite probably. It was a long time ago and my recent memory is about as water tight as a seive.

[Quasievil]

see, we agree.

Interesting, so you declare that you agree that a Sister and a Brother should be able to get married, what about a Mother and Son ? by your rational thats ok also.

Clearly you have a perverted view on decency :lol:

[imdying]

So I take it from your lack of answers that you have no response, other than a discriminatory one.Not only is their attitude discriminatory, but it's also incorrect according to Alan Bittles of Murdoch University in Perth.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Interesting, so you declare that you agree that a Sister and a Brother should be able to get married, what about a Mother and Son ? by your rational thats ok also.

Clearly you have a perverted view on decency :lol:

sure thing.

they might have issues in getting the necessary licence to have children, but if they can convince the Eugenics board that there will be no negative consequences, I dont see an issue.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Not only is their attitude discriminatory, but it's also incorrect according to Alan Bittles of Murdoch University in Perth.

consider your source, Sir. there are a couple of red flags there: "Perth" and "University" for starters.

[imdying]

consider your source, Sir. there are a couple of red flags there: "Perth" and "University" for starters.He's not the only one, look for yourself :yes:

[Tigadee]

Of course gay marriage should be legal. It's immoral that it can't be.

Why? Does a gay relationship get any better/stronger/deeper with the word marriage attached to it? :scratch: 60% of marriages end in failure/divorce. Gays want that now too, do they? And when you say immoral, what then is moral?


Through-out civilisations and through-out nature it is occuring.

Just because something occurs doesn't mean it's OK. Rape occurs but that doesn't mean it's legal, moral or natural, is it? War occurs both among men and animals, does that mean it's OK?

Is that a strong logical argument?


They should be able to marry, adopt, and do the same daft stuff straight people can do.

And divorce and cheat and lie just as straight people do...

What is it about marriage appeals again so much to gays that they want it so much? Can't be the social and moral benefits... Legal? So that they can adopt? Can divorce "like regular people"?

Would gays live longer? Love deeper? Stay faithful easier if they had the words marriage or married attached to them? :scratch: I want to know...

[Quasievil]

sure thing.

they might have issues in getting the necessary licence to have children, but if they can convince the Eugenics board that there will be no negative consequences, I dont see an issue.

OMG and I suppose you vote in NZ also........................we are fucked !!

[HenryDorsetCase]

And when you say immoral, what then is moral?



Just because something occurs doesn't mean it's OK. Rape occurs but that doesn't mean it's legal, moral or natural, is it? War occurs both among men and animals, does that mean it's OK?

Is that a strong logical argument?




interesting technique for advancing your position: advancing something (rape) which is by definition morally repugnant no matter your values (except perhaps to psychopaths: used here in the medical context) then by implication equating that with the position you disagree with. Bad form. And does nothing to advance your argument.

When you day immoral, then what is moral? (to descend to the level of debate here, the obvious cheap shot which I am not above using is: "So, you obviously have no concept or set of morals no wonder you weakly wait to have them handed to you by beardy sky-man"

The deeper question is of course that that is the heart of all ethical debate pretty much. A few pages back I recommended some courses of study, and books to read. Have a look for that post, and do some educifying.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Is that a strong logical argument?



And divorce and cheat and lie just as straight people do...

What is it about marriage appeals again so much to gays that they want it so much? Can't be the social and moral benefits... Legal? So that they can adopt? Can divorce "like regular people"?

Would gays live longer? Love deeper? Stay faithful easier if they had the words marriage or married attached to them? :scratch: I want to know...

logical argument? On KB? Yeah, right.

[HenryDorsetCase]

OMG and I suppose you vote in NZ also........................we are fucked !!

I've given it up, it only encourages them.

When I rule you all (and I will) the Eugenics Board and licences to have children will be a real thing. And maybe something like the Hunger Games too.

Gotta keep the proles entertained, and under control.

[Quasievil]

On the Basis that the "NO'S" have one I vote this goes to pointless drivel :cool:

[Tigadee]

logical argument? On KB? Yeah, right.

:laugh: Fair point...


(to descend to the level of debate here, the obvious cheap shot which I am not above using is: "So, you obviously have no concept or set of morals no wonder you weakly wait to have them handed to you by beardy sky-man"

Well, I do have my own morals but I am open to hearing what others' defining morals are. Some have morals where killing an innocent is justifiable, some are abhorrent to any killing at all, even in defense of others.


interesting technique for advancing your position: advancing something (rape) which is by definition morally repugnant no matter your values (except perhaps to psychopaths: used here in the medical context) then by implication equating that with the position you disagree with. Bad form. And does nothing to advance your argument.

If you feel that way, let me switch lanes then: How about sodomy? Is sodomy morally repugnant too? I'm sure it is when performed by an adult on a child as part of the act of rape/abuse. But if by two consenting males, it is not?

[blue rider]

interesting technique for advancing your position: advancing something (rape) which is by definition morally repugnant no matter your values (except perhaps to psychopaths: used here in the medical context) then by implication equating that with the position you disagree with. Bad form. And does nothing to advance your argument.

When you day immoral, then what is moral? (to descend to the level of debate here, the obvious cheap shot which I am not above using is: "So, you obviously have no concept or set of morals no wonder you weakly wait to have them handed to you by beardy sky-man"

The deeper question is of course that that is the heart of all ethical debate pretty much. A few pages back I recommended some courses of study, and books to read. Have a look for that post, and do some educifying.

anal sex between heterosexuals = moral albeit kinky
anal sex between lesbians = moral, c'mon their lesbians...and hopefully pretty




anal sex between two men = inmoral, ack ack ack

[imdying]

Surely the logical action here is abolish marriage! (as a legal standing, then everyone is either defacto or not, and anyone who wants to get 'married' is welcome to find a church that'll do the deed good luck with that faggots)

[superman]

I love the people complaining that if you give homosexuals the right to get married it's altering the word 'marriage'... that's hilarious!

Let's not forget in past centuries homosexual marriages of a sort were conducted by churches... "Office of Same Sex Union" (10th and 11th century Greek) or the "Order for Uniting Two Men" (11th and 12th century)." These ceremonies had all the contemporary symbols of a marriage: a community gathered in church, a blessing of the couple before the altar, their right hands joined as at heterosexual marriages, the participation of a priest, the taking of the Eucharist, a wedding banquet afterwards. All of which are shown in contemporary drawings of the same sex union of Byzantine Emperor Basil I (867-886) and his companion John. Such homosexual unions also took place in Ireland in the late 12th/early 13th century, as the chronicler Gerald of Wales (Geraldus Cambrensis) has recorded.

It seems only after the 14th century and the introduction of evangelists and fundamentalist Christians began to spread their views on anti-homosexuality. And of course it still permeates into our society today, much as the Victorian model of 'female modesty' does.

Perhaps read The Marriage of Likeness: Same Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe by John Boswell, it may enlighten some people...

Let's not forget also that marriage for a lot longer than our current definition, was of selling a women to become the property and chattels of a man. Yet we royally fucked up that definition for the most part... We've also ruined the word rape, because 'rape' between a husband and wife was nonsensical over many centuries.

Ye old conservatives need to die already...

[Quasievil]

I love the people complaining that if you give homosexuals the right to get married it's altering the word 'marriage'... that's hilarious!

Let's not forget in past centuries homosexual marriages of a sort were conducted by churches... "Office of Same Sex Union" (10th and 11th century Greek) or the "Order for Uniting Two Men" (11th and 12th century)." These ceremonies had all the contemporary symbols of a marriage: a community gathered in church, a blessing of the couple before the altar, their right hands joined as at heterosexual marriages, the participation of a priest, the taking of the Eucharist, a wedding banquet afterwards. All of which are shown in contemporary drawings of the same sex union of Byzantine Emperor Basil I (867-886) and his companion John. Such homosexual unions also took place in Ireland in the late 12th/early 13th century, as the chronicler Gerald of Wales (Geraldus Cambrensis) has recorded.

It seems only after the 14th century and the introduction of evangelists and fundamentalist Christians began to spread their views on anti-homosexuality. And of course it still permeates into our society today, much as the Victorian model of 'female modesty' does.

Perhaps read The Marriage of Likeness: Same Sex Unions in Pre-Modern Europe by John Boswell, it may enlighten some people...

Let's not forget also that marriage for a lot longer than our current definition, was of selling a women to become the property and chattels of a man. Yet we royally fucked up that definition for the most part... We've also ruined the word rape, because 'rape' between a husband and wife was nonsensical over many centuries.


To late, we won

Unless you can give a reason as to Why a Mother and Son a Daughter and Father Daughter ,brother and sister cant get married without discriminating them (which you cant) then game over !!

[superman]

To late, we won

Unless you can give a reason as to Why a Mother and Son a Daughter and Father Daughter ,brother and sister cant get married without discriminating them (which you cant) then game over !!

When did I say consenting adults shouldn't be able to get married if they happen to be genetically related?

[HenryDorsetCase]

:laugh: Fair point...



If you feel that way, let me switch lanes then: How about sodomy? Is sodomy morally repugnant too? I'm sure it is when performed by an adult on a child as part of the act of rape/abuse. But if by two consenting males, it is not?

the key word there is "consenting": if it floats their boat, if its in private, if it isnt forced absolutely it is OK. Does it float MY boat? would I conent to it? probably not, unless it was George Clooney, who I'd totally turn gay for. Sadly, the question is unlikely to arise.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Unless you can give a reason as to Why a Mother and Son a Daughter and Father Daughter ,brother and sister cant get married without discriminating them (which you cant) then game over !!

really?

I would suggest to you that there are sane and sensible reasons, scientifically based on the likelihood of reproduction and birth defects that should preclude close relatives from interbreeding. Is that discriminatory? Maybe it is, but it is reasonable to most people, and scientifically justifiable. However, that reason does not apply when there is no possibility of those birth defects being present: i.e. your same sex couple, thus there is no reason to preclude that couple from a civil recognition of their relationship, IF THAT IS WHAT THEY WANT.

My solution is to ban marriage for everyone. It is pointless, it is likely to end in failure, and the only rational economic basis is stupid bitches that want to be a princess for a day.

Here is a thought experiment. Read your posts but substitute "Maori" for "Gay" or "homo". Now, is your position still reasonable in your eyes? If not, why not?

[Tigadee]

probably not, unless it was George Clooney, who I'd totally turn gay for. Sadly, the question is unlikely to arise.

Pfft! :rolleyes: Talk about easy way out! You'd as soon meet GC as I'd hit Lotto jackpot!

And ass if George would turn gay for YOU! :killingme

[HenryDorsetCase]

To late, we won

Unless you can give a reason as to Why a Mother and Son a Daughter and Father Daughter ,brother and sister cant get married without discriminating them (which you cant) then game over !!

As you know, there is a Drive By Truckers song for every occasion, and this is apposite, plus being the first song on one of their best records:

kvId33nqBG0

its about your favourite topic: incest.

Track is "The Deeper In" from DECORATION DAY

[BoristheBiter]

civil union is not equal to marriage from a legal perspective. trust me on this. its my job to know this shit.

I was going to say there is the CU but then you posted this.
I was under the impression that this was basically the same thing as marriage so TPTB didn't have the change the definition of the word marriage.

Can you please explain what legally is lacking from the CU?

[Tigadee]

Can you please explain what legally is lacking from the CU?

CU = Makes it harder to apply for benefits?:blink:

[blairnz]

Sure, why should a couple who choose to be married (a man and a woman) have there rights shared with a man and another man who choose to stick their penises up each others bums ? the sanctity of marriage will be tarnished with this, homos are weird, homos are not natural, why should they enjoy the benefit of Marriage what advantage would they get from it? merely to say that they are being discriminated against is not an argument and wont stop the discrimination as it will always continue, a Male sticking his penis up another mans bum will always be grounds for discrimination as its not natural!!!!!!

Can you please tell me why a Brother should not marry his Sister ??

Two consenting adults should be able to marry, whether they're related or not, whether they're the same sex or not. I'm glad you agree. ;)

[Quasievil]

Here is a thought experiment. Read your posts but substitute "Maori" for "Gay" or "homo". Now, is your position still reasonable in your eyes? If not, why not?

Whats Race got to do with it ?

Im concerned with this country as I think there are many like you who vote with this kind of warped view on matters of morality and social decency.
I bet you where disappointed to see Labours social engineering agendas cease with them losing the election

and just as a foot note, Im having a bit of fun here, Im enjoying the debate........:innocent:

[HenryDorsetCase]

I was going to say there is the CU but then you posted this.
I was under the impression that this was basically the same thing as marriage so TPTB didn't have the change the definition of the word marriage.

Can you please explain what legally is lacking from the CU?

adoption is the big one: same sex couples cannot adopt under the adoption act. I gather there may be some issues under some fo the social welfare legislation too: things like "Widows benefits", but that is by no means my area of expertise: I was talking to a lawyer about it at a function one night and had been drinking so its a bit blurry. The amendents to the Matrimonial Property Act took care of most of the issues around property, though as always there were unintended consequences. Some of the most intellectually challenging work I do is in scenarios of "his kids, her kids, our kids" or where one partner for whatever reason feels hard done by as a result of the dissolution of a prior relationship. Not sure the CU is exactly lacking, and to be honest if I were personally motivated to do it, that would be my choice rather than marriage.

[superman]

It's also interesting that so many anti-gay people have been found to actually be homosexual. I wonder if they've done a study on such a correlation between anti-gays and their tendency to be homosexual.

Top Ten Anti-Gay Activists Caught Being Gay (http://www.ranker.com/list/top-10-anti-gay-activists-caught-being-gay/joanne)

That and there's also the psychological effect that some men have against thinking about not being the dominant one in the bedroom. I'm trying to remember what the effect was called...

[HenryDorsetCase]

Whats Race got to do with it ?

Im concerned with this country as I think there are many like you who vote with this kind of warped view on matters of morality and social decency.
I bet you where disappointed to see Labours social engineering agendas cease with them losing the election

and just as a foot note, Im having a bit of fun here, Im enjoying the debate........:innocent:

thought experiment. It was a test as to whether you your proposal was in fact discriminatory or not. If you say "Those homos can't do that" and say that is not discriminatory, then surely saying "those Maori can't do that" must not be discriminatory either, yes?

How I vote is none of your business, but let me assure you that I hated the last gubblemunt with at least as much fervor as I abhor this one.

[HenryDorsetCase]

It's also interesting that so many anti-gay people have been found to actually be homosexual. I wonder if they've done a study on such a correlation between anti-gays and their tendency to be homosexual.

Top Ten Anti-Gay Activists Caught Being Gay (http://www.ranker.com/list/top-10-anti-gay-activists-caught-being-gay/joanne)

That and there's also the psychological effect that some men have against thinking about not being the dominant one in the bedroom. I'm trying to remember what the effect was called...

thats fabulous!

[Quasievil]

I actually didnt realise there where so many Gay activists on KB, this is interesting.............this used to be a bikers site, now its a Homo rights site

[HenryDorsetCase]

I actually didnt realise there where so many Gay activists on KB, this is interesting.............this used to be a bikers site, now its a Homo rights site

Perhaps its a cross section of society, most of whom agree that pointless discrimination is unacceptable in the 21st century?268311

[Ender EnZed]

It's a bit of a pointless discussion really, and not just because no one has ever changed their mind on KB.

We all know that gay marriage is going to be legalised in NZ sooner or later, and it's not going to be later. For all progressive first world nations it's fast becoming a question of when, not if. Plenty of the people who disagree with it in this thread will have children who don't share their views. The only people under 30 who oppose it are the abnormally religious and the wannabe skin heads.

[Quasievil]

Perhaps its a cross section of society, most of whom agree that pointless discrimination is unacceptable in the 21st century?268311

That Makes me crack up "pointless discrimination" FFS whats the fucking point ? like I indicated with the Life of Brian video earlier..............whats the fucking point !!

do the Homos want legal protection? Noooo they have the 3 year thing already
do they want their poo pushin relationships to be recognised ? well they already have Civil Union !!
Do they want Marriage ? for WHAT , and for WHY ? just to be equal ? really

bloody PC pop heads in this country !!

[BoristheBiter]

adoption is the big one: same sex couples cannot adopt under the adoption act. I gather there may be some issues under some fo the social welfare legislation too: things like "Widows benefits", but that is by no means my area of expertise: I was talking to a lawyer about it at a function one night and had been drinking so its a bit blurry. The amendents to the Matrimonial Property Act took care of most of the issues around property, though as always there were unintended consequences. Some of the most intellectually challenging work I do is in scenarios of "his kids, her kids, our kids" or where one partner for whatever reason feels hard done by as a result of the dissolution of a prior relationship. Not sure the CU is exactly lacking, and to be honest if I were personally motivated to do it, that would be my choice rather than marriage.

So wouldn't it be easier to change the CU than the change the legal definition of the word married?

[blairnz]

That Makes me crack up "pointless discrimination" FFS whats the fucking point ? like I indicated with the Life of Brian video earlier..............whats the fucking point !!

do the Homos want legal protection? Noooo they have the 3 year thing already
do they want their poo pushin relationships to be recognised ? well they already have Civil Union !!
Do they want Marriage ? for WHAT , and for WHY ? just to be equal ? really

bloody PC pop heads in this country !!

Equal rights - it's a fairly simple concept.

Perhaps you want Marriage to go back to the early biblical ways with incest, woman being subordinate, polygamy, concubines, etc?

http://a3.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/391420_10150984595596275_1734516686_n.jpg

[HenryDorsetCase]

So wouldn't it be easier to change the CU than the change the legal definition of the word married?

YES. but politically very difficult (which is the point, in the end).

My suggestion of outlawing marriage and if you want civil recognition of your relationship status the only option civil union didnt get much traction, its fair to say.

[Maha]

I actually didnt realise there where so many Gay activists on KB, this is interesting.............this used to be a bikers site, now its a Homo rights site

I personally know a few Gay bikers....lovely people, there were four at my recent 50th.... and no, nallac was not one of them :confused:

[Quasievil]

So wouldn't it be easier to change the CU than the change the legal definition of the word married?

I cant believe some people think that the Government should be even making calls on our Countries Moral issues and issues like this, at least this should be a referendum, or even better the Government should keep out of it, they where not elected to make calls like this anyway.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Equal rights - it's a fairly simple concept.


Polygamy. too hard. Its hard enough trying to keep one happy, imagine a tribe of them!

[BoristheBiter]

YES. but politically very difficult (which is the point, in the end).

My suggestion of outlawing marriage and if you want civil recognition of your relationship status the only option civil union didnt get much traction, its fair to say.

But why should it?
If a man and women get hitched its a marriage, if same sex get hitched it's a CU, I can't see what the problem is.
If the CU is't correct legally then change it.

Personally if you came up to me and said you and your partner had a CU then it would mean exactly the same the same if you said you had got married.
The commitment is what you make it, the legal definition is another matter.


I cant believe some people think that the Government should be even making calls on our Countries Moral issues and issues like this, at least this should be a referendum, or even better the Government should keep out of it, they where not elected to make calls like this anyway.

:facepalm: Is all i can say.

[short-circuit]

I was referring to a more physical approach and speaking generally. For example if one was in a bar and another man tried to kiss you or slip his hands down one's pants. Of course people will react differently as far as specifics go but I was making a point about the reality of how straight people feel which may contrast with their public views.

There goes Ed expressing his unconscious fantasies again


Speaking of which....


It's also interesting that so many anti-gay people have been found to actually be homosexual. I wonder if they've done a study on such a correlation between anti-gays and their tendency to be homosexual.

Top Ten Anti-Gay Activists Caught Being Gay (http://www.ranker.com/list/top-10-anti-gay-activists-caught-being-gay/joanne)



Introject Type: Internalised Homophobia

[blairnz]

Polygamy. too hard. Its hard enough trying to keep one happy, imagine a tribe of them!

Scary thought, indeed. But I don't see an issue with polygamy, as long as they're consenting adults let them be together.

[ducatilover]

It's also interesting that so many anti-gay people have been found to actually be homosexual. I wonder if they've done a study on such a correlation between anti-gays and their tendency to be homosexual.

Top Ten Anti-Gay Activists Caught Being Gay (http://www.ranker.com/list/top-10-anti-gay-activists-caught-being-gay/joanne)


Yup, but it's only blindingly obvious why they're like that. :innocent:

[Quasievil]

:facepalm: Is all i can say.


Really, you think the government should make calls like this? fair enough, Governments historically are Just so damn good at this sort of decision aint they !!!:facepalm:

[Drew]

I actually didnt realise there where so many Gay activists on KB, this is interesting.............this used to be a bikers site, now its a Homo rights site

Your dick in my bum makes you gay, my dick in your mouth makes you VERY gay.

[mashman]

Not really an answer, more of a side step :yawn:

It was an answer... but more fully, cousins get married, so I see no reason that parents and their children shouldn't marry should they really want to. They can certainly have relationships if they want so I see no reason why a piece of paper declaring them husband/wife and wife/husband would change the status of their relationship. Nothing stops these things from taking place.

[mashman]

YES. but politically very difficult (which is the point, in the end).

My suggestion of outlawing marriage and if you want civil recognition of your relationship status the only option civil union didnt get much traction, its fair to say.

Is it easy to change ones gender? i.e. a man feeling more like a woman and wanting to be seen as such? and obviously vice versa?

[hayd3n]

so this is where all the gay's hang out??

[Grubber]

I dont really understand all the opposition to gay marriage.

under current law if theyve been together 2 years or so, they are considered defacto and have basically the same rights as a married couple anyway.

besides, how does what someone else does in the privacy of their own bedroom actually affect or impact your life anyway? Most of the anti-gay brigade wouldnt turn down some hottie like jennifer lopez if she asked them to fuck her up the ass, nor would most of them turn down a threesome with a couple young, hot busty sluts, so, wheres the difference exactly?

Not really sure how two people who want to commit to each other and who also happen to be the same sex are a threat to the institution of marriage.

What I see as a threat to the institution of marriage are the following.

Anyone who has ever had a divorce. marriage is a commitment for life, you make that commitment and break it, you have damaged the institution of marriage, want to protect marriage? pass a law that say a person can only get married ONCE in their life time, - if they can't keep to the commitment, then they dont get a second chance to further destroy the sanctity of marriage with consecutive dovorces.

vegas style weddings. yep, you can get married after knowing someone two months, right, thats bound to work out right?

Pre-nuptial agreements. Marriage is about commitment, trust, love, and a bringing together of two people as one unit, to share and so on and so forth, so, with a pre-nup you are basically saying 'I love and trust and commit to you, but I dont trust you and if you leave you cant have anything, in fact you can get fucked and Ill bury you with lawyers you gold digging slut' - a Pre-nup itself is destructive to the overall ideal of marriage. If you need a pre-nup, then you shouldnt be getting married, as you clearly dont have any faith in the relationship, trust or longevity of the relationship anyway.

The way I see it is that there are a large number of things that are far more destructive to the institution and sanctity of marriage than two people who just want to be together.

A final thought for the anti gay brigade. If I burst into your room while your missus was sucking your cock and started demanding that she stop, and tried to make a decree that you can only fuck, in missionary, and have no other sexual contact, because god provided us with sexual organs specifically for the purpose of breeding, thereby making anal, oral, and all your other fetishes and fantasies irrelevant, and un-necessary, what would you do? Youd tell me to fuck right off. So what gives YOU the right to dictate what others should or shouldnt be able to do in their bedrooms behind closed doors?

Spend some more time on making your OWN life happy and wholesome, and leave others the fuck alone to do as they please. as long as it is consenting adults, they can do whatever the fuck they like.

Fuck i'm glad i read all that now! Fabulous stuff! Well done that man!:Punk:

[Grubber]

I don't agree or support homo's marrying.

These people are nothing but an anomaly that in nature would just pass away or be killed off by their own kind.

A good idea on both counts.

God help any of your kids turning up GAY. Actually, god help any of your kids fullstop!

[Grubber]

I'll pass that onto my daughter. I suppose it would save me buying a new suit to attend her civil union (or wedding if legal) in April.

I'm guessing you aint inviting Road Kill. That name really suits him!

[Grubber]

Being gay is a choice. If they don't want to be discriminated against, then they shouldn't be gay. No one is forcing them to engage in sexual activity with a member of the same sex. They CHOOSE to do so. They could easily choose not to do so, too.

Your kidding right. you been under a rock for the last 50 years mate. It isn't a choice!:yawn:

[SMOKEU]

Your kidding right. you been under a rock for the last 50 years mate. It isn't a choice!:yawn:

What are your thoughts then on incest? If gay marriage is allowed, the incest should be, too.

[Madness]

What are your thoughts then on incest? If gay marriage is allowed, the incest should be, too.

Incorrect. Incest is not accepted in this society at any level - it is illegal. Homosexuality is apparently acceptable in that it is not illegal and this thread revolves around the issue that our current laws do create a limit to our society's acceptance of homosexuality. We as a society either accept it or we do not. The proponents of gay marriage obviously feel that the law as it stands is half-arsed and lots of people seem to agree.

[SMOKEU]

Incorrect. Incest is not accepted in this society at any level - it is illegal. Homosexuality is apparently acceptable in that it is not illegal and this thread revolves around the issue that our current laws do create a limit to our society's acceptance of homosexuality. We as a society either accept it or we do not. The proponents of gay marriage obviously feel that the law as it stands is half-arsed and lots of people seem to agree.

It wasn't that long ago that homosexuality was illegal, too. So how come the majority of people support gay marriage, but not incest? I don't support either, but I just want to know why people think that same sex marriage is OK when family members engaging in sexual relations with one another is not. If both parties consent, and are both at or above the legal age of consent, then what's the difference?

[Madness]

It wasn't that long ago that homosexuality was illegal, too. So how come the majority of people support gay marriage, but not incest? I don't support either, but I just want to know why people think that same sex marriage is OK when family members engaging in sexual relations with one another is not. If both parties consent, and are both at or above the legal age of consent, then what's the difference?

This has been adressed in earlier posts. You're either trolling or are seriously interested in furthering your relationship with your Mum, in which case - stop it, it's illegal.

[Quasievil]

GAY ACTIVISTS UNITE ON KB

just a good headline I thought


things creep in the world of social acceptance and morality subjects and once something is accepted in law the "next" thing doesnt seem so far away, then the next thing ..........then the next thing............one day Incest will be ok im sure and the DUMFUCKS on this page will say it should be legal as to do otherwise is discriminatory.

Gay Marriage offers nothing to Gays or society, I say again, whats the point !!

and again for your viewing pleasure

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/vAc5JqcBPK8" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[mashman]

This has been adressed in earlier posts. You're either trolling or are seriously interested in furthering your relationship with your Mum, in which case - stop it, it's illegal.

Probably just trying to clear the way for the day he has black children.

[mashman]

Gay Marriage offers nothing to Gays or society, I say again, whats the point !!

If that's the case, why not just ban marriage? After all, they feel exactly the same way about marriage as you do.

[Madness]

GAY ACTIVISTS UNITE ON KB

just a good headline I thought



So you're with Edbear & Smokeu then? :bleh:

[SMOKEU]

GAY ACTIVISTS UNITE ON KB

just a good headline I thought


things creep in the world of social acceptance and morality subjects and once something is accepted in law the "next" thing doesnt seem so far away, then the next thing ..........then the next thing............one day Incest will be ok im sure and the DUMFUCKS on this page will say it should be legal as to do otherwise is discriminatory.

Gay Marriage offers nothing to Gays or society, I say again, whats the point !!

and again for your viewing pleasure


Well said.


Probably just trying to clear the way for the day he has black children.

That's NEVER going to happen.


So you're with Edbear & Smokeu then? :bleh:

Looks like we're slowly gathering support. Sieg heil!

[Madness]

Looks like we're slowly gathering support. Sieg heil!

The racist, the bible basher & the loose unit. Talk about the A-Team!

You guys should start a political party :laugh:

[short-circuit]

The racist, the bible basher & the loose unit. Talk about the A-Team!

You guys should start a political party :laugh:

Strange bedfellows...oops, that's a bit ghey

[mashman]

That's NEVER going to happen.

Damn I hope there's a rogue gene flowing around in your bollocks somewhere. If there is a lord, please hear my prayer

[Quasievil]

The racist, the bible basher & the loose unit. Talk about the A-Team!

And what pedestal do you stand on ?

1/ Pointless Gay rights

2/ Degradator of decent society and the cutter of Moral Fabric

Your path is a modern PC and a blind one, your kind remove things held precious by normal society and offer it to the minority who scream for equality when in this case its simply not needed.

Im good where I am standing.

here is question for you Gay rights activists.....
Do you think Children should be adopted by flamboyant and openly GAY couples, should say drag queen couples have the right also to adopt children ? and what sort of children, children from "normal" families previously..............is this ok by you all also, do you think its ok to "infect" the innocent minds of children towards homosexual relationships and educate them that its normal ? Would you allow your child (if the situation enabled it) to be adopted by Gays like this.
If you say yes I will accuse you of being a liar !!

Gay Rights has its limits...........end of story

[Madness]

Homophobic rant

If two queers who are in a stable relationship want to get married it's not going to affect me, or you, or society. If two flamboyant queers want to adopt a child and can meet the requirements I'd be happier for them to do so than the child be raised in a heterosexual family of the likes of those who beat, maim & kill their children.

You seem to have very strong feelings on this subject, having trouble suppressing something maybe?

[mashman]

here is question for you Gay rights activists.....
Do you think Children should be adopted by flamboyant and openly GAY couples, should say drag queen couples have the right also to adopt children ? and what sort of children, children from "normal" families previously..............is this ok by you all also, do you think its ok to "infect" the innocent minds of children towards homosexual relationships and educate them that its normal ? Would you allow your child (if the situation enabled it) to be adopted by Gays like this.
If you say yes I will accuse you of being a liar !!

Gay Rights has its limits...........end of story

News flash for ya. Gay parents raise their own children. I was thinking you brainless, now I'm leaning towards amoeba.

[SMOKEU]

The racist, the bible basher & the loose unit. Talk about the A-Team!

You guys should start a political party :laugh:

Great idea! Quasievil can be the party leader. I wonder if Road Kill will be keen to join.


Damn I hope there's a rogue gene flowing around in your bollocks somewhere. If there is a lord, please hear my prayer

I don't engage in beastiality and my genes are European so you won't get your way.

[Madness]

I wonder if Road Kill will be keen to join.

Good idea, you'll need a token to get the Maori vote.

[mashman]

I don't engage in beastiality and my genes are European so you won't get your way.

:facepalm: and my ex's mum and dad were transparent scots but even after 3 generations there was still enough spanish in the blood to produce their dusky daughter :yes:. C'mon karma, where the feck are ya.

[SMOKEU]

Good idea, you'll need a token to get the Maori vote.

Some of them are alright, especially Winston Peters.


:facepalm: and my ex's mum and dad were transparent scots but even after 3 generations there was still enough spanish in the blood to produce their dusky daughter :yes:. C'mon karma, where the feck are ya.

How old is the daughter?

[Drew]

GAY ACTIVISTS UNITE ON KB

just a good headline I thought


things creep in the world of social acceptance and morality subjects and once something is accepted in law the "next" thing doesnt seem so far away, then the next thing ..........then the next thing............one day Incest will be ok im sure and the DUMFUCKS on this page will say it should be legal as to do otherwise is discriminatory.

Gay Marriage offers nothing to Gays or society, I say again, whats the point !!

and again for your viewing pleasure

listen you small-minded bigoted prick. Two people signing the rest of their life with each other hardly contributes to the downturn of society!

I agree that as certain things become normal, it allows more extreme things get a foot in the door, but bestiality and inbreeding are about the only things that spring to mind as the next step from poof weddings, and that shit WILL NEVER be tolerated by society.

[swtfa]

I want to marry Alison Mau and her girlfriend


I realised last year that I am gay - Specifically, I'm a lesbian trapped in a man's body.

Not only that but I have AIDS too - Acute Income Deficiency Syndrome.

It started off well... a bit of humour.
Come on people - where's the love? :bash:

:love:

[HenryDorsetCase]

The racist, the bible basher & the loose unit. Talk about the A-Team!

You guys should start a political party :laugh:

http://www.conservativeparty.org.nz/

yeah, already taken sorry.

http://www.conservativeparty.org.nz

Mad staring eyes on that motherfucker.

This is how I have felt most of the afternoon (luckily a slow day at the office)

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png

[SMOKEU]

I agree that as certain things become normal, it allows more extreme things get a foot in the door, but bestiality and inbreeding are about the only things that spring to mind as the next step from poof weddings, and that shit WILL NEVER be tolerated by society.

How do you know that? Like I said before, homosexuality was once illegal, then it became legal, then gay civil unions came about, and now gay marriage. It's a natural progression. How do you know that incest and beastiality won't be legal one day?

[Madness]

How do you know that incest and beastiality won't be legal one day?

All you & your mum can do is live in hope.

[TINA RAY]

I want to marry Alison Mau and her girlfriend


I've had the girlfriend.....she was good...

..but I think I want mau.:yes:

[HenryDorsetCase]

Do you think Children should be adopted by flamboyant and openly GAY couples, should say drag queen couples have the right also to adopt children ?<snip>
Gay Rights has its limits...........end of story

Absolutely. Kids are kids, they'd get used to it.

I have been fascinated by the characterisation of people who support basic fairness for all (a traditionally Kiwi value) as gay rights activists. For one, if that cap fits, I'll proudly wear it.

[Madness]

I've had the girlfriend.....she was good...

..but I think I want mau.:yes:

Congratulations. Your first sensible post on KB. Keep it up, please.

[Road kill]

Great idea! Quasievil can be the party leader. I wonder if Road Kill will be keen to join.



I don't engage in beastiality and my genes are European so you won't get your way.


Probably agree on more than some would imagine huh.
After all KB is just a web site,not an open book.

[HenryDorsetCase]

I agree that as certain things become normal, it allows more extreme things get a foot in the door, but bestiality and inbreeding are about the only things that spring to mind as the next step from poof weddings, and that shit WILL NEVER be tolerated by society.

and for good reason. If you take as your basis the idea that two consenting adults can do whatever they want to and with each other in the privacy of their own home, you will see that it follows that informed consent is the key: beasts cannot give that consent, and neither can children.

Adult children: well, you'd have to wonder about pre age of consent issues, but in the absence of evidence of grooming, and provided there are no children, then informed adult consent: it follows that is OK, with those caveats.

[HenryDorsetCase]

I've had the girlfriend.....she was good...



Pix pls thx bye

[TINA RAY]

268317268317268317268317268317
pix pls thx bye

ok ...........

[Swoop]

Surely the logical action here is abolish marriage! (as a legal standing, then everyone is either defacto or not, and anyone who wants to get 'married' is welcome to find a church that'll do the deed good luck with that faggots)
Marriage is only a con to generate more income for the church.
VISA and Mastercard also accepted.

[tigertim20]

I consider your response to this minor mistake as nothing more than an attempt at distraction.

You still haven't put forward any valid argument though as to why Team homo should be allowed to change the meaning of the word and institution of marriage to suit their agenda, fully knowing that it has a historical and clear meaning of a union between a man and woman and changing it will offend others. Your version of equality seems to be that it's ok for Team homo to offend team Heter but team Heter is not allowed to offend team homo.
*sigh*. I have put forward a number of argument, several of them have been ignored, presumably because they were read by people who were unable to form a legitimate counter-point. If you were to re-read my posts in this thread youll see I have provided a multitude of reasons, Im not going to span the board by reposting them
If it's just an unimportant word to you, then move on and create your own word and institution.
who said it was an unimportant word? the word stands for love, commitment, sacrifice and a promise to another person for life, the underlying meaning is obviously very important, hence why gay couples want the right to it.
I've had my say and tired of debating with people that refuse to accept that the other side deserves respect and has rights too. I'd say most heterosexuals, including myself, have been extending respect and supporting the rights of homosexuals for decades now. Shame the kindness doesn't get returned.
the kindness doesnt get returned? exactly what rights are gays preventing you from?


I was referring to a more physical approach and speaking generally. For example if one was in a bar and another man tried to kiss you or slip his hands down one's pants. Of course people will react differently as far as specifics go but I was making a point about the reality of how straight people feel which may contrast with their public views.
I have been hit on several times by gay people. Doesnt bother me, I simply inform them that I am in a relationship. Prior to being married I never even bothered to point out my sexuality, I simply said, sorry, Im in a relationship. never had a problem, never been violence or intent to violence. On several occasions the conversation has ended up dragging on for some time and a few drinks and all have had a good time.

Not at all, the point was that members here who are straight seem to be very vocal about how homosexuality is ok, which may well be and often is, in contrast to how they personally feel about it. Nothing more.

.
you talked earlier about how, in YOUR opinion, people support the theory, but would become violent if they found themselves in a situation where they were hit on by a person of the same sex. I have two responses, firstly, for me, that simply isnt true, and secondly, what evidence do you have to support such a preposterous, and clearly fictitious claim?

So I take it from your lack of answers that you have no response, other than a discriminatory one. Its clear to me in that case that the concept of Gays being permitted to Marry is ok purely for the reason that it is currently fashionable to allow it, rather than accepting the fact that its simply not required.


Long live decent family values !!
decent values differ though dont they. You might not think twice about sitting on a table, but to Maorri, to do so is very very insulting and rude, your values argument is a tedious one, there is no clear set of values in life.
Im not sure if you have read the whole thread or joined for some entertainment, but if it is your intention to contribute honestkly to the debate, I strongly recommend having a read through from the first page. There has been some excellent discussion, and some thought provoking points from both sides. While I have not (and likely never will) changed my opinion, I have been brought to the realisation that some of my previous examples may not have a great deal of relevance. Perhaps you will enjoy the same benefit as i have?

So wouldn't it be easier to change the CU than the change the legal definition of the word married?
No, because you are still classifying them as different. You are creating a different term, which highlights a difference betyween them and other human beings. Do you point out that you are going to an interracial wedding? or do you simply say you are going to a wedding?

I cant believe some people think that the Government should be even making calls on our Countries Moral issues and issues like this, at least this should be a referendum, or even better the Government should keep out of it, they where not elected to make calls like this anyway.
Actually, I half agree with this point, I do not think that these types of decisions should be decided in a manner that affords someone political mileage, but the vote on this bill will not be a party by party vote, it is a conscience vote, which by my limited understanding means that each individual in govt places a vote which is secret, unless they choose to tell you how they voted, thus meanign that party lines and policies do not come into it.
These are the people that, like it or not, we elected into govt. If you voted, well you have contributed to the vote, for those that didnt vote, well theyve no right to complain!

so this is where all the gay's hang out??
welcome Honda rider!

It wasn't that long ago that homosexuality was illegal, too. So how come the majority of people support gay marriage, but not incest? I don't support either, but I just want to know why people think that same sex marriage is OK when family members engaging in sexual relations with one another is not. If both parties consent, and are both at or above the legal age of consent, then what's the difference?
incest is a whole extra argument, which has been touched on already as to how it differs, and you are right, being gay was illegal up untill 1986 in New Zealand. But have a look at the decisions of your home country surrounding rights and laws in recent history, then look me in the eye and tell me that law makes the most important distinction between right and wrong.

listen you small-minded bigoted prick. Two people signing the rest of their life with each other hardly contributes to the downturn of society!

I agree that as certain things become normal, it allows more extreme things get a foot in the door, but bestiality and inbreeding are about the only things that spring to mind as the next step from poof weddings, and that shit WILL NEVER be tolerated by society.

Ok, Ill bite!!
a few facts for you.

several states in america actually do allow beastiality, a few states go as for as to allow human-animal sexual relations to occur, ONLY if the animal is of a defined sex. furthermore, there have been several cases of people being legally wed to an animal (cats and dogs mostly, although I recall a sheep being wed to a person once too I think)

[HenryDorsetCase]

268317268317268317268317268317

ok ...........


OP delivers!!!!

awesome!

jealous. any videos you'd like to share? For, um, science?

[Virago]

Funny thing is to note that most here and certainly the most vocal are not practising homosexuals. They will also, no doubt, deny how they personally feel about having sex with someone of their own gender.

These ones would be thus;

"Homosexuality if fine, there is nothing wrong with it!" but of course if another man tried it on with them there would be a swift and violent reaction...

Sez who? Speak for yourself.

If you're suggesting that you would react violently to an unwanted same-sex amorous advance, you may suddenly have an inkling about how others may feel about unwanted religious advances? Worth thinking about...


I was referring to a more physical approach and speaking generally. For example if one was in a bar and another man tried to kiss you or slip his hands down one's pants. Of course people will react differently as far as specifics go but I was making a point about the reality of how straight people feel which may contrast with their public views.

That's got nothing to do with homosexuality. It's sexual assault, and is likely to provoke a strong reaction - regardless of the gender or sexual orientation of the parties.. What exactly is your point?


Why? Does a gay relationship get any better/stronger/deeper with the word marriage attached to it? :scratch: 60% of marriages end in failure/divorce. Gays want that now too, do they? And when you say immoral, what then is moral?

Just because something occurs doesn't mean it's OK. Rape occurs but that doesn't mean it's legal, moral or natural, is it? War occurs both among men and animals, does that mean it's OK?

Is that a strong logical argument?

And divorce and cheat and lie just as straight people do...

What is it about marriage appeals again so much to gays that they want it so much? Can't be the social and moral benefits... Legal? So that they can adopt? Can divorce "like regular people"?

Would gays live longer? Love deeper? Stay faithful easier if they had the words marriage or married attached to them? :scratch: I want to know...

I'm struggling to understand your point. You're suggesting that same-sex couples need to be protected from the horrors of marriage? While that is rather noble and community-minded of you, I'm sure that they would prefer the option of making that decision for themselves, despite your superior knowledge.

[Edbear]

Sez who? Speak for yourself.

If you're suggesting that you would react violently to an unwanted same-sex amorous advance, you may suddenly have an inkling about how others may feel about unwanted religious advances? Worth thinking about...



That's got nothing to do with homosexuality. It's sexual assault, and is likely to provoke a strong reaction - regardless of the gender or sexual orientation of the parties.. What exactly is your point?



I'm struggling to understand your point. You're suggesting that same-sex couples need to be protected from the horrors of marriage? While that is rather noble and community-minded of you, I'm sure that they would prefer the option of making that decision for themselves, despite your superior knowledge.

I specifically stated my point in the second post you quoted which makes your post somewhat flawed. Do I really have to spell it out?

[Virago]

I specifically stated my point in the second post you quoted which makes your post somewhat flawed. Do I really have to spell it out?

Ed - try to concentrate, and do some research. Your second post suggests that a man might react adversely to a man sticking their hand down their pants? Is that somehow different to sticking their hand down a woman's pants? It's assault - of course there will likely be a strong reaction. What exactly is the connection to homosexuality?

[Madness]

Do I really have to spell it out?

Apparently.

[Tigadee]

Marriage is only a con to generate more income for the church.
VISA and Mastercard also accepted.

You're kidding, right? If that were true, why the hell are the gays lining up and demanding for it? They're pretty smart people a lot of them, I thought...

For your information, there are less church weddings nowadays, and less non-Christians who want a church wedding. And the number of churches facing financial difficulty is also increasing.

Despite this, churches continue to fund literacy programmes, food banks, financial planning advice as well as the traditional child care, social activities for the elderly, etc.

I think "Marriage is only a con to generate income for the Government, wedding planners, wedding magazines, wedding fashion designers, jewellery stores, etc., etc." is more factual...

[Edbear]

Apparently.

Ok for those who lack reading comprehension. I said my point is that what some say does not reflect how they personally feel. Or another way- people who are vocal about how normal and good homosexuality is, do not feel that way in their hearts.

Or again... Despite the loud and persistent public noise about it the actual fact is that by far the majority of people are in fact still repulsed by it.

People are too scared to say what they honestly think and feel due to the vociferous and vitriolic, and at times violent, response from pro homosexuals.

You cannot work in the public media unless you are vocally pro homosexuals and if discussing the topic you must be publicly supportive regardless how you may personally feel. On this the small minority rules the majority.

[Madness]

I've gotta get up early tomorrow unfortunately. This is going to be good. :corn:

[tigertim20]

Ok for those who lack reading comprehension. I said my point is that what some say does not reflect how they personally feel. Or another way- people who are vocal about how normal and good homosexuality is, do not feel that way in their hearts.

Or again... Despite the loud and persistent public noise about it the actual fact is that by far the majority of people are in fact still repulsed by it.

People are too scared to say what they honestly think and feel due to the vociferous and vitriolic, and at times violent, response from pro homosexuals.

You cannot work in the public media unless you are vocally pro homosexuals and if discussing the topic you must be publicly supportive regardless how you may personally feel. On this the small minority rules the majority.

I asked you this question earlier, and you didnt answer, so I will ask you again.
what proof do you have of the truth and validity of these beliefs?

can you provide an example of a person who fought for the rights of gays, and then reacted violently to gay person coming onto them? (assumung the gay person did it by flirtatious behaviour, and not behaviour that would be deemed sexual assault)

this board, this thread, and the whole debate has made it clear that people are quite willing to state their opinions, regardless of which side of the fence they stand.
further, look at the letters written in to your local rag, you will see further evidence of this.

I dont believe there are many at all who say the support it when they dont, the far more likely scenario is that people who dont support it, would avoid discussing it at all costs, thereby not having to lie and be caught out, and avoid vocally supporting something they dislike. they would also avoid having to listen to counter arguments by doing this.

I fail to see any truth in, or evidence supporting your claim here, further - even IF (and its a BIG 'if') what you were saying was true, and people werent being honest about their opinions on the subject, what does a persons honesty have to do with whether or not gay people are entitled to be married? Nothing!

[Virago]

Ok for those who lack reading comprehension. I said my point is that what some say does not reflect how they personally feel. Or another way- people who are vocal about how normal and good homosexuality is, do not feel that way in their hearts.

Or again... Despite the loud and persistent public noise about it the actual fact is that by far the majority of people are in fact still repulsed by it...

Ed, let me put it another way. I'm repulsed by the thought of personally indulging in homosexual activity. In much the same way that I am repulsed by religious nonsense.

But in both cases, I firmly defend the right of others to indulge in either activity, in the privacy of their own lives - as free and equal citizens.

[Tigadee]

And now for an intermission...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39YUXIKrOFk

[Edbear]

Ed, let me put it another way. I'm repulsed by the thought of personally indulging in homosexual activity. In much the same way that I am repulsed by religious nonsense.

But in both cases, I firmly defend the right of others to indulge in either activity, in the privacy of their own lives - as free and equal citizens.

Thank you for finally getting the point and posting honestly. I think that about sums it up.

As for the rights or otherwise of marriage I agree that is a seperate topic. This thread has wandered around very interestingly but I am happy to bow out and let it go wherever it goes.

[Drew]

How do you know that? Like I said before, homosexuality was once illegal, then it became legal, then gay civil unions came about, and now gay marriage. It's a natural progression. How do you know that incest and beastiality won't be legal one day?Ya know what, on further thaught I will not even get too uptight about adult consenting incestual relationships, and if ya wanna fuck animals, go for gold.

I only really draw the line at kiddy fiddling. Should that ever even get considered to be legal, you all have my word, I will blow up parliament.


Ok for those who lack reading comprehension. I said my point is that what some say does not reflect how they personally feel. Or another way- people who are vocal about how normal and good homosexuality is, do not feel that way in their hearts..
How the fuck do you know what is in our hearts? Clairvoyance is well outside your church beliefs ya fuckin witch!


Or again... Despite the loud and persistent public noise about it the actual fact is that by far the majority of people are in fact still repulsed by it.

People are too scared to say what they honestly think and feel due to the vociferous and vitriolic, and at times violent, response from pro homosexuals.

You cannot work in the public media unless you are vocally pro homosexuals and if discussing the topic you must be publicly supportive regardless how you may personally feel. On this the small minority rules the majority.Start a fuckin movement then. Go against the PC media and present the "comon mans" opinion. See how big a following you get.

[Virago]

Ya know what, on further thaught I will not even get too uptight about adult consenting incestual relationships, and if ya wanna fuck animals, go for gold.

I only really draw the line at kiddy fiddling...

Just out of interest, would the animals have an age of consent...? :blink:

[Madness]

I am happy to bow out admit defeat and let it go wherever it goes.

You probably also couldn't get a job in public media without being publicly supportive of religion, regardless of how you actually feel about it.

[superman]

You cannot work in the public media unless you are vocally pro homosexuals and if discussing the topic you must be publicly supportive regardless how you may personally feel. On this the small minority rules the majority.

If this were true anonymous polling would pick it up...

In 2004 NZ was found to have 40% in favour of gay marriage
In 2011 60% in favour (79% in favour amongst 18-39 year olds)
May 2012 63% in favour.

The % is just going to keep climbing, especially as the old conservatives start to die off.

CASH IN ON THE WEDDINGS DAMMIT!

[Berries]

How do you know that beastiality won't be legal one day?
What? One day?

Ah fuck........................

[Virago]

What? One day?

Ah fuck........................

That explains your avatar picture. It's alright, mate - it's not bestiality after it's cooked...

[avgas]

Gay Marriage offers nothing to Gays or society, I say again, whats the point !!
So they can feel the same bullshit pressure as the rest of us married folk.

I am personally amazed by the people who still think marriage is amazing. To me it was the biggest crock. I either loved my (now) wife or I didn't. Either way tying us together is a legal (some say spiritual.....but they are full of shit) bound is not really going to change how much I love her.

We have more serious issues. Like HOW we are going to spend the rest of our lives together. Not what the church thinks of us.
If the homo's wan't to go through with it, so be it - but they can't complain to us when it turns to shit. (like 50% of hetero marriages).

[gsxr]

What is marriage.??? What is civil union ??? What is living in sin as it was called ?? What is 2 people in love living together ????.
How does a cheap or fucking expensive ceremony and piss up afterwards enhance the life of the happy couple. It doesnt. A bit of paper means nothing at the end of the day.

HOW does a piece of paper Whether it be a marriage certificate or a civil union signing mean more than any couple being in love without it and expressing their love to each other daily.
Anyone that seems to NEEDS the sanctity of marriage in my mind in this day and age is insecure.

However I will admit I am getting married next year to the only woman I have ever truely loved .

Not for the sanctity of marriage or insecurity .Merely to proclaim to any fucker that cares how much I care about my one true love.

[Berries]

To me marriage was so that my children had parents with the same name. Call me old fashioned. As children are not a possibility for a gay couple then all I see is one group trying to gain rights they don't have just to be considered equal. They're welcome to it.

[Maha]

To me marriage was so that my children had parents with the same name. Call me old fashioned. As children are not a possibility for a gay couple then all I see is one group trying to gain rights they don't have just to be considered equal. They're welcome to it.

I know gay men who have children from being married before jumping the fence.
Adoption is an option...Call me old fashioned but, even an adopted child has the right to be raised with a family name?

[Quasievil]

News flash for ya. Gay parents raise their own children. I was thinking you brainless, now I'm leaning towards amoeba.

Ya What ? you calling me brainless with a comment like that QUOTE;Gay parents raise their own children...........how to they fucking procreate ? unless they use an outside source i.e sperm donor for lesbos and or a surrogate for homos then WTF ? in which case it aint their kid
Gays cant procreate sheeeeeh :motu:

[mashman]

Ya What ? you calling me brainless with a comment like that QUOTE;Gay parents raise their own children...........how to they fucking procreate ? unless they use an outside source i.e sperm donor for lesbos and or a surrogate for homos then WTF ? in which case it aint their kid
Gays cant procreate sheeeeeh :motu:

See Maha's response above and then read your own response... all of the answers are there, but unfortunately you need a brain to join the dots. The sperm/eggs can be theirs and therefore they have their own child ya dim fucko. Ignore brainless, you should go with amoeba.

[Tigadee]

You probably also couldn't get a job in public media without being publicly supportive of religion, regardless of how you actually feel about it.

I doubt it that's true at all. Paul Henry doesn't seem to be particularly respectful of religions (or anything for that matter) publicly but he still got jobs...:blink:

In fact, being irreverent of religions is more fashionable these days.

[HenryDorsetCase]

I doubt it that's true at all. Paul Henry doesn't seem to be particularly respectful of religions (or anything for that matter) publicly but he still got jobs...:blink:

In fact, being irreverent of religions is more fashionable these days.

uas4VJmdDa4

"Religion should be treated with ridicule, hatred and contempt. And I claim that right" - C Hitchens, RIP

[Tigadee]

"Religion should be treated with ridicule, hatred and contempt. And I claim that right" - C Hitchens, RIP

Thanks for proving my point... Very fashionable, isn't it?

Take comedians for example, there was no mockery of religion (in public stand-up anyway) till the 80s starting with George Carlin and Dennis Leary and chaps like that. Now it's just fashionable, a trend and good material - and continues with Ricky Gervais and Dylan Moran, et company... Just an observation.

Well, it's how the pendulum swings, isn't it? One day, civilisation is all puritanical and holy-holy, and the next, the rejection of all that came before, of the establishment, of 'The Man'.

[HenryDorsetCase]

Thanks for proving my point... Very fashionable, isn't it?

Take comedians for example, there was no mockery of religion (in public stand-up anyway) till the 80s starting with George Carlin and Dennis Leary and chaps like that. Now it's just fashionable, a trend and good material - and continues with Ricky Gervais and Dylan Moran, et company... Just an observation.

Well, it's how the pendulum swings, isn't it? One day, civilisation is all puritanical and holy-holy, and the next, the rejection of all that came before, of the establishment, of 'The Man'.

Don't try and belittle beliefs I have had since I was 12 years old as fashionable.

Don't try and dismiss criticism of hate fuelled institutions as "good material"

Don't try and belittle Hitchens (my intellectual superior and yours) by comparing him with bloody stand up comedians.


I'll say it again: religion should be treated with ridicule, with hatred, and with contempt. I claim, and am exercising, that right.

You might be some fundy fuckwit that believes the earth was created 4500 years ago, you might be a reasonably sane and sensible person, just not in full grip of their faculties, and oppressed by the blinkers of religion, whatever. But to claim your set of beliefs (which is implicitly what you are doing) are superior to mine, or to anyone else's JUST BECAUSE they are based on religion? No.

[Tigadee]

Don't try and belittle beliefs I have had since I was 12 years old as fashionable.

Don't try and dismiss criticism of hate fuelled institutions as "good material"

Don't try and belittle Hitchens (my intellectual superior and yours) by comparing him with bloody stand up comedians.

I'll say it again: religion should be treated with ridicule, with hatred, and with contempt. I claim, and am exercising, that right.

You might be some fundy fuckwit that believes the earth was created 4500 years ago, you might be a reasonably sane and sensible person, just not in full grip of their faculties, and oppressed by the blinkers of religion, whatever. But to claim your set of beliefs (which is implicitly what you are doing) are superior to mine, or to anyone else's JUST BECAUSE they are based on religion? No.

Observation is not to be confused with belittlement or dismissing your rights. Contempt and hatred is not a compulsory reaction to observations of trends, changing values, mores and practices. If I said music today shows a powerful swing towards overt sexualisation as compared to the 70s, am I dismissing or belittling current music?

Nowhere too did I ever claim superiority to your beliefs, and I don't think I ever tried to push mine on you either. I observed and I stated my observations. Thank you for allowing me to state my opinions without an over-reaction... :innocent:

[HenryDorsetCase]

I know gay men who have children from being married before jumping the fence.
Adoption is an option...Call me old fashioned but, even an adopted child has the right to be raised with a family name?

I have done work for a lot of couples with blended families: i.e. the names are all different. Still families, for better or worse. How successful they are is down to hard work, will to succeed, and some luck.

[Quasievil]

See Maha's response above and then read your own response... all of the answers are there, but unfortunately you need a brain to join the dots. The sperm/eggs can be theirs and therefore they have their own child ya dim fucko. Ignore brainless, you should go with amoeba.

Thanks for the insults.
Issue is your comment was a generalization, which in context is incorrect, you should have written "On occasion Gay parents maybe raising there own children", or, "its possible in some situations Gay parents raise there own children" a generalization as you chose it, wasnt clear for your argument.

The Fact you cant write to get a point across so people understand it correctly isnt me being thick is it.

I will refrain from insulting you, my day has been bad enough already thanks

[mashman]

Thanks for the insults.
Issue is your comment was a generalization, which in context is incorrect, you should have written "On occasion Gay parents maybe raising there own children", or, "its possible in some situations Gay parents raise there own children" a generalization as you chose it, wasnt clear for your argument.

The Fact you cant write to get a point across so people understand it correctly isnt me being thick is it.

I will refrain from insulting you, my day has been bad enough already thanks

:crybaby: he called me names...

You obviously understood my meaning as you have provided alternatives. I guess it didn't suit your mood at the time... but dats ok, don't take it personally as it's a familiar pattern on KB... on the plus side you did seek clarification even though you answered your own question.

Don't be a silly brain addled amoeba... lay it on me big boy, it may help your day brighten somewhat :niceone:

[HenryDorsetCase]

Thanks for the insults.


best post in this thread

oh the ironing

[Quasievil]

:crybaby: he called me names...

You obviously understood my meaning as you have provided alternatives. I guess it didn't suit your mood at the time... but dats ok, don't take it personally as it's a familiar pattern on KB... on the plus side you did seek clarification even though you answered your own question.

Don't be a silly brain addled amoeba... lay it on me big boy, it may help your day brighten somewhat :niceone:

Dont Over react to it, Im well tuned to insults on this site.

have fun Im outta this thread, its like arguing with greenies about climate change, they are so far gone they have no chance of return.

As a final comment in respects to gay marriage

FUCK I HATE HOMOS AND ALWAYS WILL

[mashman]

Dont Over react to it, Im well tuned to insults on this site.

have fun Im outta this thread, its like arguing with greenies about climate change, they are so far gone they have no chance of return.

As a final comment in respects to gay marriage

FUCK I HATE HOMOS AND ALWAYS WILL

One bigot down, 39.9% to go. As an ACC protestor might say, Who's Next?

[short-circuit]

FUCK I HATE HOMOS AND ALWAYS WILL

cause you're a fag?
http://www.rainbow-project.org/mh/internalised-homophobia

[mashman]

cause you're a fag?
http://www.rainbow-project.org/mh/internalised-homophobia

Hmmmm, if that was the case he would have said: "I WILL ALWAYS FUCK HOMOS AND HATE"

[Littleman]

Ok for those who lack reading comprehension. I said my point is that what some say does not reflect how they personally feel. Or another way- people who are vocal about how normal and good homosexuality is, do not feel that way in their hearts.

Or again... Despite the loud and persistent public noise about it the actual fact is that by far the majority of people are in fact still repulsed by it.

People are too scared to say what they honestly think and feel due to the vociferous and vitriolic, and at times violent, response from pro homosexuals.

You cannot work in the public media unless you are vocally pro homosexuals and if discussing the topic you must be publicly supportive regardless how you may personally feel. On this the small minority rules the majority.

What a great snap shot this is of your mindset Ed. Your complete lack empathy and tolerance to anything you don't like is the foundation of your ignorance and prejudice/s. There are plenty of things I don't like, but that doesn't make what I don't like wrong, just different. Justifying your self righteousness because you just don't like something is a bit scary. The longer you spend on here the better, just means your not anywhere of influence where you can do any real harm.

[Edbear]

What a great snap shot this is of your mindset Ed. Your complete lack empathy and tolerance to anything you don't like is the foundation of your ignorance and prejudice/s. There are plenty of things I don't like, but that doesn't make what I don't like wrong, just different. Justifying your self righteousness because you just don't like something is a bit scary. The longer you spend on here the better, just means your not anywhere of influence where you can do any real harm.

A typical response from one completely lacking in the ability to comprehend what he reads. There was nothing at all in those two related posts that gave my own personal opinion. Of course it wouldn't be KB without incomprehension and prejudice among some members...


For some, it is even a waste of space to spell things out to them.

[Madness]

Of course it wouldn't be KB without incomprehension and prejudice among some members...


For some, it is even a waste of space to spell things out to them.

I honestly wonder why you bother to frequent this forum. After all, it's not like you ride or even own a motorcycle and you clearly feel that you're better than the majority of the members here.

[Edbear]

I honestly wonder why you bother to frequent this forum. After all, it's not like you ride or even own a motorcycle and you clearly feel that you're better than the majority of the members here.

Firstly it's fun, though does feel at times like shooting fish in a barrel such is the appalling lack of comprehension and blind prejudice on here.

Secondly I am physically prevented from riding which is nothing like giving up because one doesn't want to anymore. Isn't it so that "once a biker, always a biker?"

[blue rider]

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lz339gvzwp1qzx3jto1_500.jpg

i think this sums it up nicely

[Madness]

Firstly it's fun, though does feel at times like shooting fish in a barrel such is the appalling lack of comprehension and blind prejudice on here.

Secondly I am physically prevented from riding which is nothing like giving up because one doesn't want to anymore. Isn't it so that "once a biker, always a biker?"

I disagree about the lack of comprehension. I think Littleman summed it up quite nicely.

Maybe you should take up lawn bowls?

[Edbear]

I disagree about the lack of comprehension. I think Littleman summed it up quite nicely.

Maybe you should take up lawn bowls?

Oh come on, surely you can read?

[Madness]

Oh come on, surely you can read?

Exactly. Someone disagrees with you & you instantly fall back on the same old chestnut. It became boring a long time ago, Ed.

[SMOKEU]

Secondly I am physically prevented from riding which is nothing like giving up because one doesn't want to anymore. Isn't it so that "once a biker, always a biker?"

Sorry to hear it dude. What happened?

[short-circuit]

Exactly. Someone disagrees with you & you instantly fall back on the same old chestnut. It became boring a long time ago, Ed.

...you forgot to mention prejudice....the irony

[short-circuit]

Sorry to hear it dude. What happened?

an act of god

[Edbear]

Exactly. Someone disagrees with you & you instantly fall back on the same old chestnut. It became boring a long time ago, Ed.

That's the point. If you could understand what you read you would not disagree with the actual point I was making.


Sorry to hear it dude. What happened?


an act of god

LoL! Or maybe a patch of oil on a wet road resulting in a back held together by a ladder work of Titanium. Sucks that it happened in a van at about 45km/h though.

[Madness]

If you could understand what you read you would not disagree with the actual point I was making.

:facepalm:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_UUC7oX9Y3jk/TDTUOhBODdI/AAAAAAAAA-Y/Uz-NDPg6EnA/s1600/sanctimony.jpg

[short-circuit]

LoL! Or maybe a patch of oil on a wet road resulting in a back held together by a ladder work of Titanium. Sucks that it happened in a van at about 45km/h though.

All part of the master plan though eh Ed?

[Edbear]

All part of the master plan though eh Ed?

No master plan. It's called life and crap happens, doesn't matter who you are.

On the upside, I am alive and walking which is a lot more than some have to say.

[mashman]

All part of the master plan though eh Ed?

Split a piece of wood, and I am there. Lift a stone, and you will find me there. Slide on an oil patch, it was an accident.

[tigertim20]

What is marriage.??? What is civil union ??? What is living in sin as it was called ?? What is 2 people in love living together ????.
How does a cheap or fucking expensive ceremony and piss up afterwards enhance the life of the happy couple. It doesnt. A bit of paper means nothing at the end of the day.

HOW does a piece of paper Whether it be a marriage certificate or a civil union signing mean more than any couple being in love without it and expressing their love to each other daily.
Anyone that seems to NEEDS the sanctity of marriage in my mind in this day and age is insecure.

However I will admit I am getting married next year to the only woman I have ever truely loved .

Not for the sanctity of marriage or insecurity .Merely to proclaim to any fucker that cares how much I care about my one true love.
uhm, I think you just answered your own question. marriage means something to everyone, it just doesnt necessarily mean the same thing to everyone.

I doubt it that's true at all. Paul Henry doesn't seem to be particularly respectful of religions (or anything for that matter) publicly but he still got jobs...:blink:

.
paul henry is a shock jock. he got a job because he is a brainless lout who opens his mouth, and says offensive things, which gets attention, and as a result, ratings.


Isn't it so that "once a biker, always a biker?"
No it isnt. you dont have a bike. you dont ride a bike. you arent a biker.

Split a piece of wood, and I am there. Lift a stone, and you will find me there. Slide on an oil patch, it was an accident.
:killingme:killingme:killingme:killingme

[blue rider]

http://assets0.ordienetworks.com/images/user_photos/1247487/b72a9f7a1d1bc4b151f24cd461b7055a_width_600x.jpg

people want to marry.....really how can anyone consider this wrong? wait till they discover divorce....!

[Madness]

people want to marry.....really how can anyone consider this wrong? wait till they discover divorce....!

There's every chance that if gay marriage becomes legal in this country it will be followed by a 20+ year wait for gay divorce to become legal also.

[Road kill]

Ok for those who lack reading comprehension. I said my point is that what some say does not reflect how they personally feel. Or another way- people who are vocal about how normal and good homosexuality is, do not feel that way in their hearts.

Or again... Despite the loud and persistent public noise about it the actual fact is that by far the majority of people are in fact still repulsed by it.

People are too scared to say what they honestly think and feel due to the vociferous and vitriolic, and at times violent, response from pro homosexuals.

You cannot work in the public media unless you are vocally pro homosexuals and if discussing the topic you must be publicly supportive regardless how you may personally feel. On this the small minority rules the majority.

Well said.
The silent majority might just get off their collective arses for this one,,or at lest I hope so.
You see to me it's not about hating homo's,,on this particular subject it's about what for me and a lot of other people is protecting a sacred institution from any form of perversion.
Don't like that word,,tough it's the only way I can describe the under mining of something I do consider sacred.
Somebody asked what's the point of marriage.
I had this discussion with my own girl a long time ago and this was my answer,which after 33 years of marriage I still stand by.
Marriage to me is the expression of total commitment.
Her reply was that her "boy friend" claimed to be totally commited to her but he didn't believed in marriage.
My reply ,,So he claims to be totally commited,,,,but he's not commited quite enough to marry you,,so tell me,,,how's that total ?
Turned out he was so commited he fucked off as soon as the fucking got cut off,,,total commitment on his part,,,yeah right.:tugger:
Yeah 38% of marriages end in divorce,,so 62% last for life,pretty good odds to anybody with any faith in themselves.
Somebody else claimed that pretty much anything is just a result of what we're taught by our parents at home,,,well bad news fella,,I was bought up without parents and had no concept of homos until I was around 13 years old and living in a welfare boys home where I met a pre'op Transexual,,,my very first reaction was,,,,Fucking what,,eeeewwwww mate.
That wasn't taught,it was a natural reaction to something unnatural.
So all you Homo lovers get used to it,,I don't hate homos,I simply find them repulsive and I don't want them sullying something I consider sacred.
Other than this one thing,they can carry on rooting each other up the bum til the cows come home,,not my arse so I don't care.

[Road kill]

Just out of interest, would the animals have an age of consent...? :blink:

Two tooths up,,,,Far canel:pinch:

[scumdog]

paul henry is a shock jock. he got a job because he is a brainless lout who opens his mouth, and says offensive things, which gets attention, and as a result, ratings.

Sums up my act completely - only I don't get paid for it - or ratings.:devil2:

[scumdog]

people want to marry.....really how can anyone consider this wrong? wait till they discover divorce....!

'The first step to divorce is getting engaged'

Seen in Las Vegas 2012.

[Tigadee]

wait till they discover divorce....!

LOL! True... Then they'll say "Ff it! You can have it back!"


There's every chance that if gay marriage becomes legal in this country it will be followed by a 20+ year wait for gay divorce to become legal also.

Let them have it too, I say! They deserve the right to be equally miserable and to divorce as straight people!


Sums up my act completely - only I don't get paid for it - or ratings.:devil2:

*Gasp* That's just shocking!

[Ender EnZed]

A typical response from one completely lacking in the ability to comprehend what he reads.


Ed, you seem to be a reasonably intelligent human being, why are you so opposed to a small minority of the population living a lifestyle different from your own? It doesn't directly affect you in any way whatsoever, if you closed your eyes you wouldn't even be aware of it.

Just to be clear, I'm directing these questions at you because you seem more capable of answering them them than many others. I understand that your religion is important to you, and I have many good friends who consider themselves to be good Christians. They don't feel the need to tell others how to live though.

I genuinely struggle to understand how you feel that you have any right to tell other people how they ought to live their life from your own position. You are not God, nor are you God's messenger, it's hard to see how you have any religious justification beyond your own interpretation of the bible. Which is surely a deeply personal matter. Why are you trying to influence how people respond to what is a totally personal matter?

[Madness]

Ed, why are you so opposed to a small minority of the population living a lifestyle different from your own? It doesn't directly affect you in any way whatsoever, if you closed your eyes you wouldn't even be aware of it.

From where I stand it appears that Ed is opposed to the vast majority of the population living a lifestyle different from his own.


You are not God, nor are you God's messenger...

Fuck, talk about giving the old bastard a heart-attack.

:corn:

[short-circuit]

Ed, you seem to be a reasonably intelligent human being...

That's not consistent with my reading of the situation

[Maha]

Gays cant procreate sheeeeeh :motu:

You managed to...:shifty:

[Tigadee]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-4-gLlF0uw

[Edbear]

Ed, you seem to be a reasonably intelligent human being, why are you so opposed to a small minority of the population living a lifestyle different from your own? It doesn't directly affect you in any way whatsoever, if you closed your eyes you wouldn't even be aware of it.

Just to be clear, I'm directing these questions at you because you seem more capable of answering them them than many others. I understand that your religion is important to you, and I have many good friends who consider themselves to be good Christians. They don't feel the need to tell others how to live though.

I genuinely struggle to understand how you feel that you have any right to tell other people how they ought to live their life from your own position. You are not God, nor are you God's messenger, it's hard to see how you have any religious justification beyond your own interpretation of the bible. Which is surely a deeply personal matter. Why are you trying to influence how people respond to what is a totally personal matter?

Okay, I'll spell it out as plain as I can even though I twice clearly stated my point and a few others here got it...

I was commenting on the hypocrisy of those who are publicly supportive of homosexuality yet personally are repulsed by it. This includes a cross-section of society and some members on here.

I was stating simple facts and if you think otherwise, as I always do, I ask you to quote specifically where I gave my own personal opinion or have told anyone what to do.

I am sorry but I just cannot be plainer than this and if you are still of the same opinion the fault is entirely with you.

[tigertim20]

Okay, I'll spell it out as plain as I can even though I twice clearly stated my point and a few others here got it...

I was commenting on the hypocrisy of those who are publicly supportive of homosexuality yet personally are repulsed by it. This includes a cross-section of society and some members on here.

I was stating simple facts and if you think otherwise, as I always do, I ask you to quote specifically where I gave my own personal opinion or have told anyone what to do.

I am sorry but I just cannot be plainer than this and if you are still of the same opinion the fault is entirely with you.

and I will ask you for a third time to show ANY shred of evidence thet people are secretly opposed to homosexual behaviour occuring.
three time now you have said that people, even the ones who SAY theyre ok with it, are actually secretly against it, and three times I have asked you to justify that with some form of evidence, and all three times you have failed to do so.
perhaps because no evidence exists, beyond your opinion.

[short-circuit]

and I will ask you for a third time to show ANY shred of evidence thet people are secretly opposed to homosexual behaviour occuring.
three time now you have said that people, even the ones who SAY theyre ok with it, are actually secretly against it, and three times I have asked you to justify that with some form of evidence, and all three times you have failed to do so.
perhaps because no evidence exists, beyond your opinion.

You dumb fuck. Do I have to spell it out for you? - God read our minds and then told Ed.

[Pussy]

But it's alright for Ed to "climb in to bed" with known fraudsters and thieves to sell his batteries??
Double standards, much??

[Edbear]

But it's alright for Ed to "climb in to bed" with known fraudsters and thieves to sell his batteries??
Double standards, much??

Do tell...

[Edbear]

and I will ask you for a third time to show ANY shred of evidence thet people are secretly opposed to homosexual behaviour occuring.
three time now you have said that people, even the ones who SAY theyre ok with it, are actually secretly against it, and three times I have asked you to justify that with some form of evidence, and all three times you have failed to do so.
perhaps because no evidence exists, beyond your opinion.

You don't get to talk to many people about much do you? Mind you do you actually listen to people?

I guess some are more observant than others..

[blue rider]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-AnXBSTeLb1Y/T1Dm7JnZWHI/AAAAAAAAEbo/7dpsosbYJ3Q/s1600/tWa05UHzPgi588jtC0Fn4ePdo1_500.jpg

[short-circuit]

You don't get to talk to many people about much do you? Mind you do you actually listen to people?

I guess some are more observant than others..

Oh yep. Ancedotal eh? Very scientific....the opinions of other churchies.

[tigertim20]

You don't get to talk to many people about much do you? Mind you do you actually listen to people?

I guess some are more observant than others..

so your answer is that you are talking rubbish with no evidence at all.
thought so. thanks for clearing that up.

[Edbear]

Oh yep. Ancedotal eh? Very scientific....the opinions of other churchies.


so your answer is that you are talking rubbish with no evidence at all.
thought so. thanks for clearing that up.

You're funny in a really pathetic way... Carry on though, your egos demand it.

[Kickaha]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-AnXBSTeLb1Y/T1Dm7JnZWHI/AAAAAAAAEbo/7dpsosbYJ3Q/s1600/tWa05UHzPgi588jtC0Fn4ePdo1_500.jpg

So not all that serious then?

[FJRider]

and I will ask you for a third time to show ANY shred of evidence thet people are secretly opposed to homosexual behaviour occuring.


You could look at the overwhelming 100% vote by the Politicians, that allowed it to become legal in the first place.

Oh wait ...

[Edbear]

You're funny in a really pathetic way... Carry on though, your egos demand it.

Funny only three reds on this thread from tigertim20, madness and the usual from imdying. You haven't outweighed the green, again... I guess the other suspects are a bit more secure in their egos now...

[Madness]

Funny only three reds on this thread from tigertim20, madness and the usual from imdying. You haven't outweighed the green, again... I guess the other suspects are a bit more secure in their egos now...

Do you honestly think we give a flying fuck about your rep status? You've become one very sad individual, Ed.

[short-circuit]

Funny only three reds on this thread from tigertim20, madness and the usual from imdying. You haven't outweighed the green, again... I guess the other suspects are a bit more secure in their egos now...

I choose to humiliate you publicly. Although I can't do it better than you.

[Edbear]

Do you honestly think we give a flying fuck about your rep status? You've become one very sad individual, Ed.

So why bother with red-repping? I find it amusing and now with this comment, pathetically hypocritical.


I choose to humiliate you publicly. Although I can't do it better than you.

Yet you keep humiliating yourself instead. As usual you guys make fools of yourselves by posting crap that has nothing to do with what I have actually said, fail every time to back up your silly accusations with fact and resort to personal attack derailing the thread topic with disrespect to the OP.

Some here have words to describe you but I don't use those words. Suffice to say others are getting a little peeved at your childishness.

[Madness]

So why bother with red-repping? I find it amusing and now with this comment, pathetically hypocritical.


I very seldom give red rep to be honest but when I do it's because I disagree with a post. It's quite simple really but you're obviously having trouble with comprehending this concept. Despite not giving a rat's arse and purely in the interests of balance, tell us who has awarded green rep for your posts in this thread?

[scumdog]

Yet you keep humiliating yourself instead. As usual you guys make fools of yourselves by posting crap that has nothing to do with what I have actually said, fail every time to back up your silly accusations with fact and resort to personal attack derailing the thread topic with disrespect to the OP..

Par for the course here on KB...:shifty:

[short-circuit]

Yet you keep humiliating yourself instead. As usual you guys make fools of yourselves by posting crap that has nothing to do with what I have actually said, fail every time to back up your silly accusations with fact and resort to personal attack derailing the thread topic with disrespect to the OP.

Some here have words to describe you but I don't use those words. Suffice to say others are getting a little peeved at your childishness.

Your argument was smashed 10 pages back, then you get all poor me about it? WAAAAAAAAAAH

[Madness]

disrespect to the OP.


I want to marry Alison Mau and her girlfriend

Who's talking crap again, Ed? Some of us are getting peeved at your retardness.

[Edbear]

I very seldom give red rep to be honest but when I do it's because I disagree with a post. It's quite simple really but you're obviously having trouble with comprehending this concept. Despite not giving a rat's arse and purely in the interests of balance, tell us who has awarded green rep for your posts in this thread?

Well if you can stick to what I have actually said and quote me with your criticism that is fine. I do not expect everyone to agree with me. When you obviously misread and misinterpret and resort to personal attack you disqualify yourself from serious consideration and make yourself look a fool.

I do not reveal those who rep me either red or green unless they are being silly. I have said before, I have received red rep from about two members to which I have responded and apologised as I felt their comments were warranted.

I do prefer public communication but everyone has their own ways and that's fine by me.


Par for the course here on KB...:shifty:

Yeah, but it makes the site rank highly if nothing else. :sunny:

[Edbear]

Who's talking crap again, Ed? Some of us are getting peeved at your retardness.

He was being funny. Humour and comedy. Maybe you should switch your humour on for a change, less stressful that way...

[FJRider]

Getting back on topic ...

As per the original post ... the intention stated by the OP is ... sadly ... still illegal.


I want to marry Alison Mau and her girlfriend

[Madness]

He was being funny. Humour and comedy. Maybe you should switch your humour on for a change, less stressful that way...

So the resulting 29 pages of "discussion" is disrespectful because it's not all a big joke? Who's stressed? I've had the best day I've had in ages and had some great news but still disagree with what you're posting as it's a load of absolute fucking bollocks.

Off out for a celebratory dinner now, try not to get too stressed while I'm gone.

[Madness]

Getting back on topic ...

As per the original post ... the intention stated by the OP is ... sadly ... still illegal.

You raise a valid point. The OP was clearly referencing bigamy, what were we thinking?

[mashman]

You raise a valid point. The OP was clearly referencing bigamy, what were we thinking?

No no no no no. The OP wants to preside over the ceremony.

[husaberg]

<center>OK two chicks want to get married.
i can't see the harm in it?
But.... isn't that What civil Union was for?
Is that not enough?
Buggered if i know.
Gee i am sitting on the fence a bit opinion wise.
so should i really care anyway?
Buggered if i know about that either

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-bXWL6m_72DI/T1Hr6Sax-pI/AAAAAAAACWs/77gUdKdp5C4/s1600/alison_mau_with_karleen_edmonds_nzherald.jpg
one things for sure.
They both have really nice teeth:D<center>

[Tigadee]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-AnXBSTeLb1Y/T1Dm7JnZWHI/AAAAAAAAEbo/7dpsosbYJ3Q/s1600/tWa05UHzPgi588jtC0Fn4ePdo1_500.jpg

Reminds me of this scene:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S4cldkdCjE&feature=player_detailpage#t=139s

[Fatt Max]

Actually that's a good point. I know four women, initially straight who became gay when they discovered a nurturing relationship with a woman that they were unable to get from their male partners / husband. I reckon there are a lot of women who are with a woman because they have been let down by the men they got into long term relationships with.

...and they also like drinking from the furry cup......

[oldrider]

...and they also like drinking from the furry cup......

Well!! ... Whats wrong with that ... followed by a tasty pie and coffee! :shifty:

[scumdog]

...and they also like drinking from the furry cup......

Well colour me pink and call me a lesbian too!:devil2:

[superman]

My parents were trying to get me to sign a petition the other day... Though I see people have signed it with porno names and all sorts!

at www.protectmarriage.org.nz (http://www.protectmarriage.org.nz) to 'protect the definition of marriage in NZ'.

My mother was none to pleased when I instantly retorted 'The definition was ruined when the women stopped being the chattels!'

[Swoop]

You're kidding, right?
What other species on the planet has a bit of paper, some gold bands and imaginary friends to worship, instead of simply mating (pairing up) for life?

I wonder what Mr Tamaki's "certificates" look like and does he provide the wedding rings with an image of him engraved into them?

[blairnz]

Well said.
The silent majority might just get off their collective arses for this one,,or at lest I hope so.
You see to me it's not about hating homo's,,on this particular subject it's about what for me and a lot of other people is protecting a sacred institution from any form of perversion.
Don't like that word,,tough it's the only way I can describe the under mining of something I do consider sacred.
Somebody asked what's the point of marriage.
I had this discussion with my own girl a long time ago and this was my answer,which after 33 years of marriage I still stand by.
Marriage to me is the expression of total commitment.
Her reply was that her "boy friend" claimed to be totally commited to her but he didn't believed in marriage.
My reply ,,So he claims to be totally commited,,,,but he's not commited quite enough to marry you,,so tell me,,,how's that total ?
Turned out he was so commited he fucked off as soon as the fucking got cut off,,,total commitment on his part,,,yeah right.:tugger:
Yeah 38% of marriages end in divorce,,so 62% last for life,pretty good odds to anybody with any faith in themselves.
Somebody else claimed that pretty much anything is just a result of what we're taught by our parents at home,,,well bad news fella,,I was bought up without parents and had no concept of homos until I was around 13 years old and living in a welfare boys home where I met a pre'op Transexual,,,my very first reaction was,,,,Fucking what,,eeeewwwww mate.
That wasn't taught,it was a natural reaction to something unnatural.
So all you Homo lovers get used to it,,I don't hate homos,I simply find them repulsive and I don't want them sullying something I consider sacred.
Other than this one thing,they can carry on rooting each other up the bum til the cows come home,,not my arse so I don't care.

It's nice to hear your opinions but you should be aware that:
a) Transexuality isn't homosexuality. With the likes of Fa'afafine is considered a normal natural third gender in some pacific island cultures.

b) Generally the first time people see obese, anorexically thin, handicap, or ugly people they often think 'ewww' - infact as kids when we see hetero adults 'make out' we think 'eww'. Should that mean they shouldn't be involved with marriage?

c) Marriage has been evolving from its original form over time. A man used to be able to have many wives, have concubines, and the women had to be subservient to the man. People from different cultures/religions/races couldn't marry. Since it has evolved so much, is it 'still sacred' and how can opening it up to two consenting adults that love each other break that sacredness?

d) How sacred is marriage? Divorce destroys its sacredness. Was Kim Kardashian's 72 day marriage that made her how many million dollars sacred? What about Britney Spears 55 hour marriage sacred? Does Larry King's 8 divorces mean that his 9th marriage was a sacred as his first?

e) Homosexuality isn't unnatural. I learnt that while I travelled through Africa and saw it with my own eyes in the animal kingdom in the wild. That helped me get over my own homophobia. It exists throughout history and throughout all of nature.


My opinion that any consenting adults whom wish to commit to each other for life should be able to do so. I applaud anyone that can find partners that they believe they can do that with. It is their commitment and fidelity that makes it sacred.

Thank you.

[Tigadee]

I wonder what Mr Tamaki's "certificates" look like and does he provide the wedding rings with an image of him engraved into them?

Oh, don't get started on that nutjob! :facepalm: That's a thread all by itself!

[oneofsix]

It's nice to hear your opinions but you should be aware that:
a) Transexuality isn't homosexuality. With the likes of Fa'afafine is considered a normal natural third gender in some pacific island cultures.

b) Generally the first time people see obese, anorexically thin, handicap, or ugly people they often think 'ewww' - infact as kids when we see hetero adults 'make out' we think 'eww'. Should that mean they shouldn't be involved with marriage?

c) Marriage has been evolving from its original form over time. A man used to be able to have many wives, have concubines, and the women had to be subservient to the man. People from different cultures/religions/races couldn't marry. Since it has evolved so much, is it 'still sacred' and how can opening it up to two consenting adults that love each other break that sacredness?

d) How sacred is marriage? Divorce destroys its sacredness. Was Kim Kardashian's 72 day marriage that made her how many million dollars sacred? What about Britney Spears 55 hour marriage sacred? Does Larry King's 8 divorces mean that his 9th marriage was a sacred as his first?

e) Homosexuality isn't unnatural. I learnt that while I travelled through Africa and saw it with my own eyes in the animal kingdom in the wild. That helped me get over my own homophobia. It exists throughout history and throughout all of nature.


My opinion that any consenting adults whom wish to commit to each other for life should be able to do so. I applaud anyone that can find partners that they believe they can do that with. It is their commitment and fidelity that makes it sacred.

Thank you.

a) true
b) we chose to think that hetro making out is eeeew. Must have been 'normal' back in the day when all lived in a single room.
c) marriage is man and woman, one or more. As to equality that attitude is more Roman or middle eastern, other europian cultures such as the celts saw equality between the sexes and this is one of the reasons the romans called them barbiarians. The Romans were also the culture that insisted on the single wife. The Greeks also only wanted a single, totally dominated wife, as they saw it as "woman for business, boys for pleasure"
d) Kim is still legally married as the divorce isn't settled. Hollywood has always used marriage for ratings. As far as scared goes it was only since the protestant revolution that line has been pushed, before that it was a concept without a big church input.
e) true and they should be allowed the same rights under the civil union, marriage should remain a hetrosexual word.

[avgas]

He was being funny. Humour and comedy. Maybe you should switch your humour on for a change, less stressful that way...
Which couple is faster to the church during the wedding?
a) A hetro couple
b) A gay couple
c) A lesbo couple

Well you know that any relationship with women is going to be late. But the real reason why the Gays get there first is because they have their shit packed.

[Edbear]

But it's alright for Ed to "climb in to bed" with known fraudsters and thieves to sell his batteries??
Double standards, much??


Do tell...

Dead silence as usual...

Why can't certain people on here see how ridiculous they look when challenged to back up their sillioness with facts they invariably fail?

As I said to Madness, quote me and criticise what I actually said, prove you understand what I have written. Again, even when I explained that I was criticising "those who publicly support homsexuality yet personally find it repulsive," a member or two seemed to think I was saying "Everyone hates homosexuality." even though I said "including some members here."

Nope, certain people much prefer to make fools of themselves in a vain attempt to personally ridicule...

I have even stated my own personal view, but of course that wasn't good enough either, it was studiously, (!), ignored.

Still it makes for amusement and if it strokes their desperate egos it must be doing some good...

[Edbear]

Which couple is faster to the church during the wedding?
a) A hetro couple
b) A gay couple
c) A lesbo couple

Well you know that any relationship with women is going to be late. But the real reason why the Gays get there first is because they have their shit packed.

Ewwww!!!! :crazy:

[Drew]

Dead silence as usual...

Why can't certain people on here see how ridiculous they look when challenged to back up their sillioness with facts they invariably fail?

As I said to Madness, quote me and criticise what I actually said, prove you understand what I have written. Again, even when I explained that I was criticising "those who publicly support homsexuality yet personally find it repulsive," a member or two seemed to think I was saying "Everyone hates homosexuality." even though I said "including some members here."

Nope, certain people much prefer to make fools of themselves in a vain attempt to personally ridicule...

I have even stated my own personal view, but of course that wasn't good enough either, it was studiously, (!), ignored.

Still it makes for amusement and if it strokes their desperate egos it must be doing some good...

You're right Ed. You imply a lot, and say fuck all. Then when anyone picks on you, ya just say you weren't talking to them.

It's all bullshit, you're just the one of a few that can't fuckin smell it.

[Edbear]

You're right Ed. You imply a lot, and say fuck all. Then when anyone picks on you, ya just say you weren't talking to them.

It's all bullshit, you're just the one of a few that can't fuckin smell it.

Au contraire my dear chap. I say what I mean and no-one cares to actually address what I say, they prefer to insinuate what I might be meaning and of course if they were forced to quote me and rationally address the actual quote, they would fail miserably. They know this.

It is human to read more into a statement than is there, but those who do, often shoot themselves in the foot by backing themselves into a corner where they either have to put up or shut up. Unfortunately certain people on here can't do either.

[HenryDorsetCase]

What other species on the planet has a bit of paper, some gold bands and imaginary friends to worship, instead of simply mating (pairing up) for life?

I wonder what Mr Tamaki's "certificates" look like and does he provide the wedding rings with an image of him engraved into them?

He's all about the droit du seigneur I reckon

[Swoop]

He's all about the droit du seigneur I reckon
I wouldn't put it past him, especially with the new "community" proposed in south Auckland. "Behind closed doors" and all that.

[HenryDorsetCase]

I wouldn't put it past him, especially with the new "community" proposed in south Auckland. "Behind closed doors" and all that.

breeding a race of brown superhumans to take over the world with Jeeeeebl and Pope Tamaki. Its the new crusades.

The best thing I read about that fucker lately was he has been losing "market share" to the other two churches that he competes with. I can't remember the names but maybe City and something something. But they all just prey on stupid fuckers. I feel sorry for the children brainwashed into any cult, including this one.

[Tigadee]

I feel sorry for the children brainwashed into any cult, including this one.

On that we agree! I think Hotel California was written about cults...

[Madness]

Ed. Go fuck yourself.

That is all.

[Pussy]

Dead silence as usual...

Why can't certain people on here see how ridiculous they look when challenged to back up their sillioness with facts they invariably fail?

As I said to Madness, quote me and criticise what I actually said, prove you understand what I have written. Again, even when I explained that I was criticising "those who publicly support homsexuality yet personally find it repulsive," a member or two seemed to think I was saying "Everyone hates homosexuality." even though I said "including some members here."

Nope, certain people much prefer to make fools of themselves in a vain attempt to personally ridicule...

I have even stated my own personal view, but of course that wasn't good enough either, it was studiously, (!), ignored.

Still it makes for amusement and if it strokes their desperate egos it must be doing some good...

Unlike you, wanker, I don't spend all day on here. I am also a motorcyclist... again, unlike you. Do some "research" on some of your "mates". I do find amusing your hand wringing and narcissistic rants... good entertainment value!

[Edbear]

Unlike you, wanker, I don't spend all day on here. I am also a motorcyclist... again, unlike you. Do some "research" on some of your "mates". I do find amusing your hand wringing and narcissistic rants... good entertainment value!

So that's a fail then, again, as expected... :yes:

I wonder about those who claim I shouldn't be on KB because I am "not a biker" if they would apply the same standards to themselves if they were to suffer an injury that prevented them from riding...

Silly me, of course they would leave the site immediately, they aren't in the slightest hypocritical are they..?

[Madness]

More hypothetical drivel.

[Edbear]

More hypothetical drivel.

Well naturally, such a fine upstanding citizen as yourself would be the first to go should it happen to you.

Maybe I'll start a thread and run a poll...

[Drew]

Silly me, of course they would leave the site immediately, they aren't in the slightest hypocritical are they..?There are heaps of chicks on here that don't have a bike at all. Nobody has a problem with them for the most part. They go away pretty quick once the cool chicks start picking on them though.

I feel so dirty. I'm off to rock in a corner somewhere.

[Madness]

Well naturally, such a fine upstanding citizen as yourself would be the first to go should it happen to you.

Maybe I'll start a thread and run a poll...

Time for lesbians? Yay!!

Some of us aren't softcocks, Ed.

You would probably find the questioning of your presence here would disappear if you spent a little more time discussing motorcycling & less time being a dick and acting the way that you do. That's my opinion, I haven't researched it and it may well be incorrect.

http://cdn.obrag.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/shooting-fish-in-a-barrel.jpg

[SMOKEU]

Can we just play nicely for once without the use of personal attacks?

[Drew]

That's my opinion, I haven't researched it and it may well be incorrect.

You have just singled yourself out, as someone who has no place on kiwibiker!

[Madness]

Can we just play nicely for once without the use of personal attacks?

We could have a gay old time... :grouphug:

[Edbear]

Time for lesbians? Yay!!

Some of us aren't softcocks, Ed.

You would probably find the questioning of your presence here would disappear if you spent a little more time discussing motorcycling & less time being a dick and acting the way that you do. That's my opinion, I haven't researched it and it may well be incorrect.

Sorry didn't realise I came across as soft. It is so obvious I am greatly intimidated by the half-wits on here it is a true wonder I dare say anything at all for fear of ridicule... :blink:

And of course I start all the threads unrelated to biking otherwise your comment is critical of all those members who actually start and participate in them. :shutup:

[SMOKEU]

We could have a gay old time... :grouphug:

I'll show you mine if you show me yours.

[Edbear]

Can we just play nicely for once without the use of personal attacks?

Hey now there's an idea...

[Madness]

You have just singled yourself out, as someone who has no place on kiwibiker!

But I got banned from the last site (http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/)I was a member of...

[Edbear]

But I got banned from the last site (http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/)I was a member of...

That looks a very dodgy site. Nothing to do with actual JW's of course it would appeal to some here though.

Anyway aren't we far enough off topic that a mod should post about keeping on topic..?

[Madness]

Anyway aren't we far enough off topic that a mod should post about keeping on topic..?

Once again, Ed. The OP was a joke, therefore the posts on the last couple of pages alone prove that we are on topic. We could discuss abortion. Oh wait, we've been there & done that.

[Edbear]

Once again, Ed. The OP was a joke, therefore the posts on the last couple of pages alone prove that we are on topic. We could discuss abortion. Oh wait, we've been there & done that.

Or maybe we could discuss Avatars of the sad and lonely...

[Madness]

Or maybe we could discuss Avatars of the sad and lonely...

I dunno, I kind of like your black pussy.

[blue rider]

http://icanhascheezburger.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/funny-pictures-basement-cat-vs-ceiling-cat.jpg

[Drew]

But I got banned from the last site (http://www.jehovahs-witness.net/)I was a member of...I only got as far as hovering over the link to get a name.


That looks a very dodgy site. Nothing to do with actual JW's of course it would appeal to some here though.

Anyway aren't we far enough off topic that a mod should post about keeping on topic..?Shit no, we can go further, faster, and better!


Once again, Ed. The OP was a joke, therefore the posts on the last couple of pages alone prove that we are on topic. We could discuss abortion. Oh wait, we've been there & done that.I know I'm a joke!


Or maybe we could discuss Avatars of the sad and lonely...I have spent hours admiring his avatar, shuddup arsehole!


I dunno, I kind of like your black pussy.Sounds pretty fuggin gay to me.

[scracha]

I was commenting on the hypocrisy of those who are publicly supportive of homosexuality yet personally are repulsed by it. This includes a cross-section of society and some members on here.

I'm publicly supportive of Harleys but am personally repulsed by them. Live and let live mate. Or to put it less politely, fuck off and mind your own business.


It wasn't that long ago that homosexuality was illegal, too. So how come the majority of people support gay marriage, but not incest? I don't support either, but I just want to know why people think that same sex marriage is OK when family members engaging in sexual relations with one another is not. If both parties consent, and are both at or above the legal age of consent, then what's the difference?

Surely you jest. I thought it was legal in the south island?

And what have you got against bufties? It means more women for us straight fullahs.

[Kickaha]

Surely you jest. I thought it was legal in the south island?.

Only from Dunedin down

[ducatilover]

Inbreeding passes on genetic mutations and general failure
Gay breeding doesn't happen

Make inbreeding legal with same sex, that'll fuck 'em

[Tigadee]

Inbreeding passes on genetic mutations and general failure

Make inbreeding legal with same sex, that'll fuck 'em

Does that mean that if a gay couple produce an offspring that felt attracted to the opposite sex, it'd be a mutation? :scratch:

I've wondered, how does a gay couple feel if their child told them they were straight? "Mom and Mom, (or Dad and Dad...) I'm attracted to the opposite sex..."

[oldrider]

Does that mean that if a gay couple produce an offspring that felt attracted to the opposite sex, it'd be a mutation? :scratch:

I've wondered, how does a gay couple feel if their child told them they were straight? "Mom and Mom, (or Dad and Dad...) I'm attracted to the opposite sex..."

The child would be treated exactly the same way that homosexuals claim and protest that they have been treated by "us" all these years! :yes:

The pendulum swings ... them ... us ... them ... us ... them ... tick ... tock ... tick ... tock ... etc ... etc ... etc ... whoever ... whatever!

Control and power corrupts; Absolute power and control corrupts, absolutely! ... Fact of life historically proven! :facepalm: (Humans are such sick fucks!) :sick:

[Drew]

The child would be treated exactly the same way that homosexuals claim and protest that they have been treated by "us" all these years! :yes:

The pendulum swings ... them ... us ... them ... us ... them ... tick ... tock ... tick ... tock ... etc ... etc ... etc ... whoever ... whatever!

Control and power corrupts; Absolute power and control corrupts, absolutely! ... Fact of life historically proven! :facepalm: (Humans are such sick fucks!) :sick:

A small precentage might raise a bigoted child, but they'd soon be up shitters ditch (see what I did there?), as soon as the kid went anywhere mainstreem, and witnessed majority heterosexualality.

[short-circuit]

Control and power corrupts; Absolute power and control corrupts, absolutely! ... Fact of life historically proven! :facepalm: (Humans are such sick fucks!) :sick:

Speak for yourself on all counts. Determinist thinking in philosophy and psychology died off in the 1950s.

[98tls]

Mute point but where did gay come from?A dick in my arse would make me feel many things but gays not one that springs to mind.

[mashman]

Mute point but where did gay come from?A dick in my arse would make me feel many things but gays not one that springs to mind.

Have you tried it?

[scumdog]

Only from Dunedin down

Piss off, it's banned here too - don't try and fob your filthy Canterbury ideal off on us matey!

[Madness]

Have you tried it?

You raise a valid point. Ed's always claiming he never forms an opinion without first researching the subject extensively.

:sick:

[HenryDorsetCase]

Mute point but where did gay come from?A dick in my arse would make me feel many things but gays not one that springs to mind.fulfilled? :-)

[mashman]

You raise a valid point. Ed's always claiming he never forms an opinion without first researching the subject extensively.

:sick:

:shit: but not for the purpose of breaking 98's bum cherry... Mate, you're turning into an Ed case... let it gooooooooooooooooo

[Edbear]

fulfilled? :-)

It was simply stolen from the English language as queer, homo and fag had negative connotations. It directly resulted in the name Gay and Gaye becoming out of favour with parents naming their children and awkward moments when introducing someone...

[mashman]

It was simply stolen from the English language as queer, homo and fag had negative connotations. It directly resulted in the name Gay and Gaye becoming out of favour with parents naming their children and awkward moments when introducing someone...

It's also the name of a traditional Scottish Reel... as one found out when one was shifted to Scotland.

[Virago]

It was simply stolen from the English language as queer, homo and fag had negative connotations. It directly resulted in the name Gay and Gaye becoming out of favour with parents naming their children and awkward moments when introducing someone...

In that case I won't introduce you to my mate Roger...

[Edbear]

In that case I won't introduce you to my mate Roger...

I dare not say it as people think I'm innocent and pure and I'd hate to disallusion anyone... :shutup:

[Madness]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/7518904/Marriage-equality-stories-Hannah-and-Toni

http://images.tvnz.co.nz/tvnz_images/news2011/2020/hannah_ockelford_2.jpg

She looks like she's out to destroy the moral fabric of society. :facepalm:

[Berries]

....as soon as the kid went anywhere mainstreem, and witnessed majority heterosexualality.
Now that will be from Dunedin south. It is not something you will see in the North Island unless you go to an RSA.

Having a Ponsonby?
A bit of a Russell?
Mount Chev?

All perverted sexual acts between hairy men named after the places where they started. Can someone tell me if Rimming is a suburb of Auckland or is it in the Hutt Valley?

[98tls]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/7518904/Marriage-equality-stories-Hannah-and-Toni

http://images.tvnz.co.nz/tvnz_images/news2011/2020/hannah_ockelford_2.jpg

She looks like she's out to destroy the moral fabric of society. :facepalm:

Thats lovely dear but theres no mention of sticking ones dick in another mans arse,instead of a polite run to the toilet to avoid a wet patch its a sprint to avoid the stench.All for live and let live but :facepalm:whilst kicking back in the aftermath surely "somethings not quite right here".

[husaberg]

All perverted sexual acts between hairy men named after the places where they started. Can someone tell me if Rimming is a suburb of Auckland or is it in the Hutt Valley?

It a small suburb around the outskirts of Oamaru isn't it. Never been there though.
I know its north of Gore but is Oamaru where the Rrrrrrrrrrr rolling starts?

[Katman]

http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/7518904/Marriage-equality-stories-Hannah-and-Toni



Toni Horne.

Oh the irony.

[avgas]

It was simply stolen from the English language as queer, homo and fag had negative connotations. It directly resulted in the name Gay and Gaye becoming out of favour with parents naming their children and awkward moments when introducing someone...
Just be thankful that you were born well before the twilight series. Everyone might think you sparkle.

[avgas]

Mute point but where did gay come from?A dick in my arse would make me feel many things but gays not one that springs to mind.
HOLY FUCK!!! was taken already

[Virago]

I'm struggling to understand the fixation on anal sex. Are some of you making assumptions about gay sex, or speaking from experience?

[Berries]

I'm struggling to understand the fixation on anal sex.
Try it dearie.

[blue rider]

http://www.westseattlefunblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/anal-sex-chart.jpg

[98tls]

It a small suburb around the outskirts of Oamaru isn't it. Never been there though.
I know its north of Gore but is Oamaru where the Rrrrrrrrrrr rolling starts?

Could be but having spent a portion of my early years in Westport i used to listen to the old blokes who said it started down the coast a bit,grey area i guess.

[98tls]

I'm struggling to understand the fixation on anal sex. Are some of you making assumptions about gay sex, or speaking from experience?

Coming from Dunedin i am struggling to understand why your struggling,just bend the fuck over mate,be over in a flash.