Marriage is totally Gay

I really wonder about those who call themselves Anarchists and some are even Marxist Anarchists.

I am sure they do not know what anarchy actually is and would never read anything of Marx.

In strict principle I would call myself an anarchist, as I see no need for any government and a society where everyone works together sharing their talents to the common good as a place I would like to be. Sadly human nature doesn’t allow this to exist, so my next choice is a socialist society where a government owns all the means of production and again we all work together in joy and peace.

Reality of course is that the over-whelming need for humans to dominate, hold power over others and take what they want is ever present, so we are stuck with a highly regulated world with the rich get richer and poor watch.

5 Likes

Agree. And that is why the Greens are so dangerous.

Yes, I am no expert on Anarchists. I suppose the point I was alluding to is that in any movement that has an element of protest and challenging the social order will also attract the more confrontationalist protest groups, in the old days it was the International Socialists taking on the police at whatever demonstration, including the relatively mainstream anti nuclear rallies.

You continue to be an idiot . Why ?

1 Like

Back when Fraser was PM and there were many protests, our Labor group got involved with these hardcore International Socialists. They looked peaceful enough, but at the demonstrations, they were were prepared, obviously well trained and could inflict massive acts of violence on any opponents and police and just disappear. I was always cynical about foreign trained agitators, but it made me wonder.

These so-called anarchists are just violent terrorists; left wi g or rightwing, makes no difference, same type of crazy.

I don’t think he can help it.

1 Like

Good article. Sums A lot up really well.

1 Like

These older type International Socialist’s who have been and always been chardonnay sipping socialists,who can be seen at trendy spots in Southbank and the like.

1 Like

You know, there is a more reasonable explanation for what you saw.

Please consider:

  1. Who benefits the most from claiming “professional protestors”, rather than people with genuine beliefs, are behind these events?

  2. Why, despite massive and intimidating State and Federal police and undoubtedly ASIO presence at all these events were not the people you identified arrested?

Could it be that they were not foreign trained agitators but were locally trained and supported?

If so, they would be more likely to be sipping chardonnay on Southbank a la Yaco than under your model.

1 Like

More likely they drank rocket fuel. They were seriously good at violent protest., which was very scary.

You seen the way the Soggies go?

Interesting idea, as they were formed about that time. Maybe it was a training drill, as they sure gave it to the young Constables who were protecting Mal Fraser.

Children have been frequently brought into the debate around legalisation of same-sex marriage. Some individuals have asserted that same-sex couples should not marry or have children, because they believe a child has a fundamental right to both a mother and father. Others suggest that same-sex parenting leads to children who have poor outcomes, or who are abused. It has also been suggested that the social validation of one child’s family, by allowing their same-sex parents to marry, would cause harm to school friends through increased awareness that homosexuality exists, or becoming gender fluid themselves as a result.

Same-sex marriage survey: help us track dubious claims and misleading material
Read more
It behoves any good society to look after the welfare of its children and to ensure that potential harms to those children are researched, quantified and avoided. Paediatricians specialise in child welfare, and it is our responsibility to understand the relevant research data. On review of a large body of research, paediatricians and other experts repeatedly come to the same conclusion: children raised by same-sex parents are no different from those raised by heterosexual parents. Of 79 research studies on this topic, 95% support no difference between same sex or heterosexual parents. However, much attention has been drawn to the results of the outlier 5%, which suggest poorer outcomes in same-sex parented families. It is important to look at these outlier studies in detail.

Advertisement

While in academia anyone should be able to analyse and publish data, it’s unusual that recent papers reporting outlier outcomes have been led by non-expert authors, including an economist, a sociologist with particular interest in religious matters and an academic whose stated expertise is in faith and religion. One can already see the risk of bias in the interpretation of the data, and close analysis does find methodological flaws in the outlier studies.

The stories you need to read, in one handy email
Read more
We know that children who experience family breakdown or a single parent don’t tend to do as well as those with stable, married parents. The outlier studies looked at children from families with same-sex attracted parents in the presence of parental separation and compared these to children who have heterosexual, married parents. That is, unlike more robust studies, they incorrectly conflated the married/unmarried issue with same-sex parenting. In fact, as we know that stable, married parents are associated with good child welfare outcomes, it would be beneficial for children from same-sex families to have parents who are married. And we have already seen a positive outcome on children in results from countries where same-sex marriage exists.

In a concerning, frequently quoted outlier study, an author looked at a series of questions asked of children. The analysis was seriously skewed by the misclassification of questions. Questions which clearly do not describe child abuse were labelled as being associated with child abuse. This led to the false assertion that there are any difference in indicators of abuse between children with same-sex or heterosexual parents.

Advertisement

With regard to effects on the gender fluidity of children, there is no truth to the suggestion that same-sex parenting, or the knowledge that homosexuality exists, is associated with childhood gender variance. Children of same-sex parents consistently strongly identify with their biological sex. Although there exists a separate group of gender questioning children, who may share experiences of discrimination, their condition is not related to same-sex parenting.

It is harmful to suggest that legal validation of a same-sex family will cause damage to separate, heterosexually parented children. It is also harmful to tell gay children they are going to be poor parents when they grow up to have a family of their own. And it is frankly harmful to tell children of same-sex parents that they are being abused.

Play Video
Penny Wong’s emotional speech: same-sex marriage plebiscite ‘exposing our children to hatred’
The United Nations convention on the rights of the child is based on four general principles: the right to non-discrimination, the right to the best interest of the child, the right to survival and development, and the right to be heard. The data shows that same-sex parents can provide for these rights at least as well as heterosexual parents. As a paediatrician, I have experience working with children from all kinds of family structures. Young people from same-sex parented families have without fail been among the most wanted, loved, and well raised and cared for children I have seen.

It’s perfectly valid to have a mature discussion on differing opinions regarding the legalisation of same-sex marriage. However, it is imperative that the adults in the debate ensure children are not harmed by misleading or false assertions, and it’s not acceptable to suggest there is any harm caused by same-sex parenting. Many Australian children have same-sex parents. We cannot harm these children for no valid reason.

Dr Jacky Hewitt is a paediatric endocrinologist and a researcher in child health

I wasn’t going to comment in here again…but i can’t help myself.

Any of the idiots saying that SSM parents are going to cause issues raising kids should be slapped about the face and told to grow up. (and no I don’t mean literally)

They simply cannot be any worse than heterosexual parents that i read about in the papers most days.

Heck I am one of them who was abandoned by their biological parents because they couldn’t be stuffed raising me due to be selfish ■■■■■■ (and yes I do know why, I have met them, they tried to sugar coat it but it was rather obvious that they wanted to party not have kids, so they gave up their three kids to others to raise - it was the late 60’s).

This stupid crap about parenting has nothing to do with the issue and is just patently stupid. I wouldn’t even be surprised if they statistically do a better job of loving their kids, they aren’t just having them because they can or because they didn’t use contraceptives, they actually make a well thought out decision and go down a long path to get there.

22 Likes

Or Headbutted perhaps?? image

2 Likes

Every argument that I’ve heard against SSM comes back to homophobia at some level.
“I’m not homophobic, I’m just worried that if we legalise gay marriage that children will think homosexuality is okay.”
“I’m not homophobic, but clearly gays shouldn’t be allowed to have children.”
etc.
etc.

3 Likes

Simple argument is…Abbott and Bolt are against it, therefore I’m for it.

If a bloke can see Abbott in the street, and not be allowed to loaf him, then there’s something wrong with society.

Now a Liverpool kiss or a Glasgow handshake would be straight out unAustralian.

3 Likes

Then you probably need to get your hearing checked.

The main argument against SSM is that people are frankly appalled and worried about how the SSM activists have campaigned.

People do not like being bullied or lectured on how they must think. The natural human inclination when put into that situation is to push back and not want them to win.

I would suggest that activists need to learn about the art of respect but I figure they are either too immature or too filled with hate to change this late in the piece.

Cue accusations of homophobe, religious zealot and troll.

Which, of course, was the plan all along.

6 Likes

Absolutely. Or, “I’m not homophobic, I’m just appalled/offended by how the pro SSM activists have gone about their campaign”.

4 Likes