It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

United nations laws VS Reliion=Australia and they gay marriage debate

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 10:14 PM
link   
A couple of points

1. To the OP try including paragraphs, its really hard to read, infact I could barely scan through it

2. I understand your point regarding UN Human Rights

3. The Women's Movement, Civil Rights Movement, Labour working laws/conditions all took time, over a number of years and its still not 100% even today

4. Under Rudd Government (before he was kicked out) Leglisations were rewritten so as to NOT exclude same sex couples and/or same sex couples with children.... They were to be recognised

This meant LEGALLY.
Another way to look at it, same sex couples and/or same sex couples with children were now recognised as a defacto couple... this was HUGE... this meant they could claim as a defacto couple with children family benefits and NOT be discriminated due to their sexual preference, they could claim as a childless defacto couple and not be discriminated against .... not to mention next of kin etc etc etc these steps were HUGE

All leglisation in Australia was ammended so that same sex couples and same sex couples with children would NOT be discriminated against.. anti discrimination race, ethnicity, age, gender and sexuality... not bad eh, 2007 promise and delievered long before Rudd was kicked out and its LAW now!!!!

In October the Labor Party will hold its usual National Labor Party Conference, Gay marriage among other topics will now be discussed on a public plateform with ALL labor politicans and not behind closed doors with a choisen few... again this is HUGE, at least Labor Party Members will get their say out loud and not be slapped down to be quiet

Just remember this current PM has made agreement behind closed doors with christian lobby groups that same sex marriage will not be law in Australia... The question is if she meant forever or just for a term or couple of terms

As womens movement, civil rights and labor laws all took time, years infact (still have a long way to go for the most part), it does seem that in Australia at least on the same sex marriage/union side of things, this too will take time to come into fruition
edit on 2-9-2011 by Ellen15 because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Expired
Gay marriage and parenting is ok I guess, but I can't help wondering if it may promote Homosexual and Lesbian numbers?
So what is wrong with this , the OP may ask...I say Iam not God ,its not up to me to Judge what other adults do in their bedrooms, but neither is it up to the UN to dictate morality and law?


Its not about what couples do or shouldnt do in their bedrooms and with whom.. why does the discussion always seem to go there?

Its about dignity, human rights and equality - not to be treated as a second class citizen/individual just because you have a different sexual perference, its about equality, same rights for every one regardless

That could be the point the OP was making when they brought the UN Human Rights Charter into it

Human Rights for ALL

Its just gonna take time federally in Australia for gay marriage/unions to be recognised in the format the OP desires...same sex couples and same sex couples with children are recognised as defacto couples under our laws now, given the same rights/access as heterosexual defacto couples with or without children

Maybe Australians could push States to recognised gay marriage/unions as the US is doing?
The US federally does not accept gay marriage/unions
edit on 2-9-2011 by Ellen15 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 2 2011 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ellen15

This meant LEGALLY.
Another way to look at it, same sex couples and/or same sex couples with children were now recognised as a defacto couple... this was HUGE... this meant they could claim as a defacto couple with children family benefits and NOT be discriminated due to their sexual preference, they could claim as a childless defacto couple and not be discriminated against .... not to mention next of kin etc etc etc these steps were HUGE



And here we come to the bare bone reality of it. Its all about claiming free money. No surprised here.



posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 04:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Ellen15
 


Ellen15 i have so much respect for you, and yes that is my point, its about human rights, dignity and equality, not treating people as second class citizens, so thank you woth all my love and harmoney, its not about expressing the fact we have sex with the dsame sex, gosh, if it where about that i would say "do you think as a lesbian woman i want to see adds which only have straight people 100% of the time? do you think i want to here about mens erection probeblems? do you think it hurts when anything in reguards to familys on tv shows or comercials are straight families?" well it does, it hurts, and where still acting like its the 1950's in that aspect, i dont want to here about straight peoples sex lives all over my TV, its ok for them to have smutty shows and promote cheating and flirting and talking about mens "big privates " and womens "big breast" im a dignified woman, i dont talk about my sex life, i enjoy a private family life, i enjoy raising a child with my female fiance',its just simple, we are as human as everyone else, and those who complained about my typing i appoligise but maybe its respectful not to point out my flaws? do you think maybe i have a personal problem behind it? something that upsets me? do you think lso i have a child to keep an eye on while my partner does dinner like everyone else? and ellen15 your rite about the deal with the christian lobbys, but it anoys the hell out of me that 9 of 10 australians say yes to gay marriage but yet the polliticians who we ellect to do the job we want them to do ignore what we put them there to do? its corrupt funding by christian lobbys who cause this sort of probelms, look at the Carbon tax, it wont stop pollution, there is no such thing to prevent it, just making more money, first it was tax the GST and now the carbon tax, the one way we can stop emissions is Free energy, it exist, its real but governments dont want to loose money. So: Equality is what this is about nothing else like grammer or any pitty things, i was after positive remarks, not negitive, maybe those who want to be negitive have a problem with reading when i say i dont want negitive post.
edit on 19/01/2011 by Tahnya86 because: edit



posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tahnya86
reply to post by Ellen15
 


So: Equality is what this is about nothing else like grammer or any pitty things, i was after positive remarks, not negitive, maybe those who want to be negitive have a problem with reading when i say i dont want negitive post.
edit on 19/01/2011 by Tahnya86 because: edit


Hi Op,

When you post something like this on a public forum you cannot dictate negative/positive posts only.

You are unlikely to get a whole lot of support for anything to do with the UN on a conspiracy website.

Although for a conspiracy website, there certainly are a lot of MSM supporters (which eludes me to why many of those people are here, at least they keep the rest of us somewhat honest).

The idea of marriage is a religious concept in origin, I'm sure every culture's religion has had a form of if, however when we talk about it here, the ceremony etc, its really a European religious ceremony which suggests Christianity, Roman Catholicism, Judaism, or Islam. None of which promote homosexuality.

If you want to have the ceremony, suggests you cant fully hate religion as you like to profess, and I suggest you learn more about it before you go ahead and mock it. Religion is something many people base their entire life around and just to make sweeping statements such as 'get rid of religion' will alienate many readers immediately.

If you just want the legal status so you can get benefits, well I'm with you to a degree as far as equality goes. Personally I don't believe in government controlled wealth distribution in the first place, but I do agree in Christian charity.



posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 10:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gravity215

Originally posted by Ellen15

This meant LEGALLY.
Another way to look at it, same sex couples and/or same sex couples with children were now recognised as a defacto couple... this was HUGE... this meant they could claim as a defacto couple with children family benefits and NOT be discriminated due to their sexual preference, they could claim as a childless defacto couple and not be discriminated against .... not to mention next of kin etc etc etc these steps were HUGE



And here we come to the bare bone reality of it. Its all about claiming free money. No surprised here.


lol free money?

Are you australian? Nothing comes free in this country

How is 'next of kin' associated with free money ?

How is finally recognising same sex couple and/or same sex couple with children DEFACTO finally being able to claim partner and/or children dependents on tax forms free money?

FYI most australian families claim one or both family benefits (A/B)
The cut off used to be if you earned over $300,000



posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 10:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Gravity215
 


Marriage is a legal contract



posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 11:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ellen15
reply to post by Gravity215
 


Marriage is a legal contract


Being excluded from signing a legal contract due to lack of qualification for participation in a legal contract is not a human rights abuse.



posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 11:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Gravity215
 


my post was in reference to your 'marriage and religion'

You may need to go back historically, religion came into it AFTERwards

A legal contract, nothing more, nothing less

The OP isnt arguing 'human right abuse', the OP is arguing for equality, same rights as other countries and/or states have determined ie Canada, couple of states within the US



posted on Sep, 3 2011 @ 11:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ellen15
reply to post by Gravity215
 


my post was in reference to your 'marriage and religion'

You may need to go back historically, religion came into it AFTERwards

A legal contract, nothing more, nothing less

The OP isnt arguing 'human right abuse', the OP is arguing for equality, same rights as other countries and/or states have determined ie Canada, couple of states within the US



Being privy to every legal contractual agreement is not about human rights or equality. The Government has every right to create a contract and exclude whomever they decide. The government creates special circumstances and offers benefits to minorities constantly.

I think your just being argumentative. These sorts of 'throwing around of weight' by minority groups in Australia (10% is not the majority) will only serve to create the very division the movement is trying to eliminate.

As you said yourself, gay people are already entitled to everything a married couple is, so what is the difference.

Regardless of your opinion about what marriage means, many Australians believe its a pact between themselves and god as a commitment of their relationship and the legal status that come's along with that is a side issue.



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 01:05 AM
link   

many Australians believe its a pact between themselves and god as a commitment of their relationship and the legal status that come's along with that is a side issue.



ABS Quote: Marriage is a legal contract but in religious terms it is also, and perhaps more importantly, a sacred rite.

See that, LEGAL CONTRACT FIRST, it is NOT alongside or a side issue, it IS First

How many Australians on ATS believe that marriage/s is a pact made between themselves and god?

Im Australia and I definitely dont believe that

What say Australians on ATS?

Interesting Latest Stats:

According to figures released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, in 2006 less than one third of the 25,000 marriages in Queensland were performed by a religious minister.

Instead, most couples in Queensland, and the rest of Australia, are turning to celebrants to conduct their ceremonies

www.couriermail.com.au...

ABS 2008 Stat:

The number or couples opting for the services of a wedding celebrant has increased in the past year with the figure rising to 65 per cent, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

www.ceremonieswithstyle.com.au...



posted on Sep, 6 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ellen15

According to figures released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics, in 2006 less than one third of the 25,000 marriages in Queensland were performed by a religious minister.

Instead, most couples in Queensland, and the rest of Australia, are turning to celebrants to conduct their ceremonies

www.couriermail.com.au...

ABS 2008 Stat:

The number or couples opting for the services of a wedding celebrant has increased in the past year with the figure rising to 65 per cent, according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

www.ceremonieswithstyle.com.au...


Well presented info Elen, much to be commended for on presenting your data. I was married at the Victorian State Registry by a Celebrant. The Victorian State Registry is a Chapel. The ceremony went something like this.

The Celebrant presents the couple to the people in the chapel. The Celebrant and both people in the wedding make an on Oath to one another before god in front of the people in the chapel. The people in the chapel clap. The Celebrant then tells everybody that the ceremony is over and now the married couple sign the paper work. Everybody stands around and watches the couple sign. People go outside and get photos taken on the steps of the grand old building (which again ill reiterate to you about the Victorian Government Weddings Office) is a chapel that looks exactly like a small church on the inside.

For us, we had our first child on the way and didnt have the funds for a big church wedding, it only costs $300 to have done there.

church (plural churches)

A house of worship; a building where religious services take place.
A religious organization, local or general
the Anglican Church, the Roman Catholic Church
The church across the street has a service at 10 am.
A time of public worship; a worship service
I'll be there after church.

chapel (plural chapels)

A place of worship, smaller than, or subordinate to a church.
A place of worship in a civil institution such as an airport, prison etc.
A funeral home, or a room in one for holding funeral services.

This is what the statistics include and therefor your statistics, although accurate, do not represent what you are trying to convey accurately.

You'll need to do better than this. Please find me statistics of people who think that a wedding is not about the ceremony and and the vows only about legal status.

As I said, I am not against it, I know several gay people who are intolerant with religion and freedom of speech. This is where i have my issue. Freedom of religion and freedom of speech are being eroded in this country because of movements such as this one being hiijacked by people with these agenda's.

What will result of this law change re discrimination IMHO is governments compelling religious organizations to do things against their religion.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join